"Useless conversations are ordinary said to be only a venial sin of curiosity, as Sanchez, Cajetan, Suarez, Navarrus, Soto, and the Salmanticenses teach."

Overall, your article here seems to deal pretty decisively with the claim that Fr. R has engaged in divination.

However, I am curious as to what you think of the claim that he is engaging in these kinds of "useless conversations" that (while not mortal) would still constitute venial sin. The only example she specifically provides is Fr. R saying that the demons told him about the current complexion of the Church, but it is very, very easy to find examples of things online from him that stretch the idea of being "necessary" to ask during a given exorcism. I wouldn't be grilling a demon about what is going down in the Vatican while trying to help a poor soul.

My main critique (and getting more at Melody's claim of disobedience) is that it may be pastorally imprudent to make this knowledge public in connection with it coming from the mouths of demons (especially since, if frivolous, it would still be sin on the part of Fr. R), and he would be in disobedience to the accepted rubrics of what may be asked during such rites.

I am open to persuasion either way, and since you gave a very well researched and measured response so far, I would be interested to hear what you think!