Posted on 09/10/2006 9:16:53 PM PDT by boromeo
COMMENT: New-Church Catholics who have fully embraced the ecumenical, Romasonic Catholic creed will be shocked to learn that the "naturalism" or "universalism" preached by Masonry was condemned for centuries by the real Roman Catholic Church. Since the Grand Lodge started claiming Popes as enrolled members, the condemnations have all but ceased. For Freepers wondering what the big deal is about Fez bedecked men driving in go-carts, you're driving in the wrong direction...
###
FORWARD TO THINGS CATHOLICS ARE ASKED ABOUT, by MARTIN J. SCOTT : Outside the Catholic Church there is at present very great interest in things Catholic. Sincere people of other denominations are dissatisfied with the vagueness and uncertainty of their creeds and the worldly character of their churches. Sensational preaching may make a preacher popular, but does not satisfy the yearning of the religious soul for the things of the spirit. Hence, many earnest people, thoroughly dissatisfied with religion as they find it, but who nevertheless realize the needs of the spiritual life, are turning to the Catholic Church with its certainty of creed and its sacramental solace and support.
THINGS CATHOLICS ARE ASKED ABOUT: CHAPTER XXXVII FREEMASONRY
It is well known that the Catholic Church is opposed to Freemasonry.
Indeed it is excommunication for a Catholic to be a Freemason. Freemasons know this. Parkinson, an illustrious Mason says: "The two systems of Romanism and Freemasonry are not only incompatible, but they are radically opposed to each other" (Freemason's Chronicle, 1884, II, I7). This is so well understood that we are not surprised to know that Masons as a body do not want Catholics in their ranks. "We won't make a man a Freemason until we know that he isn't a Catholic" (Freemason's Chronicle, 1890, II, 347).
Freemasonry is a very widespread organization, and it may well be that in certain localities and among certain groups these sentiments toward Catholicism and Catholics do not prevail. However, all that I shall say with regard to Freemasonry characterizes the order as it shows itself in its constitutions and as it has manifested itself in its activities.
I have met Freemasons who have assured me that there was nothing in their organization which was in any way opposed to the Catholic Church. These were sincere men, and doubtless spoke from personal knowledge. Some of these men were high up in the order and respected it greatly. These men were converts to the Catholic faith. They left Freemasonry because they understood that they could not be Catholics and Freemasons.
In considering Freemasonry, we must keep in mind the distinction between the order and the individual. One may be opposed to the Republican or Democratic party and yet esteem the individual members of the party. In considering Freemasonry we have in mind the order as an order, its essential and practical attitude toward the Catholic Church. In the first place it is necessary to say that very few of the rank and file of Freemasonry are acquainted with the real purpose of the order. This may sound strange, considering that Freemasons are for the most part men of superior intelligence. It seems so strange that I feel I must give authority for the statement. "Brethren high in rank and office, are often unacquainted with the elementary principles of the science of Freemasonry" (Oliver, Theocratic Philosophy, 355). "Masons may be fifty years masters of the Chair and yet not learn the secret of the Brotherhood" (Oliver, Hist. Landmarks, I, 11, 21). There is no higher authority on Freemasonry than Oliver, himself a Freemason.
The fact that the real purpose and aim of the order is so little known to the generality of Masons explains why it is that Masons themselves, in all sincerity, will declare that the purpose of the order is mainly fraternal and philanthropic. However, we shall see for ourselves, by the clearest evidence, what the real purpose of the order is. The Catholic Church is the greatest encourager on earth of fraternalism and philanthropy. She is also the best informed organization in the world. Unless, in fact, Freemasonry was opposed to what she fundamentally stands for, she never would be opposed to it as she is. In point of fact Catholic Freemasonry existed for centuries as a benevolent and fraternal organization before the birth of the present non-Catholic Masonry. Catholic Freemasonry took its origin from the guilds of the middle ages. Stonemasons had their guilds as well as other crafts. Each local group had its own guild. Certain skilled masons used to travel from place to place wherever there was a Gothic cathedral in course of erection. These masons in coming to a new place had to be acknowledged by the local guild before they could practice their craft. For this purpose they carried with them certificates that they were qualified masons and free to work in any place. Hence they were called freemasons, not being restricted to a local guild. These freemasons formed a guild of their own, with a code of signs and passwords. All talk about the antiquity of Freemasonry is myth, pure and simple. Freemasonry, as it exists to-day, began with the foundation of the Grand Lodge of England, June 24, 1717. In the beginning it was just a social organization. By degrees it developed into its present form and purpose. Modern Freemasonry is not a continuation of the Catholic freemason guilds which preceded it. The Catholic guilds were formed by craftsmen who, as said previously, went from one city or country to another, wherever a Gothic cathedral was being erected, in order to help in its construction. On the decline of Gothic architecture Catholic Freemasonry ceased to exist, or rather was absorbed by local guilds. Freemasonry as it now exists is absolutely a non-Catholic foundation of the beginning of the eighteenth century. It was introduced into the United States about the year 1730, and subsequently into France, Germany, Italy, and Europe generally.
Why is the Catholic Church opposed to Freemasonry? The shortest and best answer is because Freemasonry is opposed to the Catholic Church. Even to some Freemasons this statement will come as a shock. But we must remember what was said previously by authoritative men of the order, that the rank and file of Masonry are ignorant of its real significance. Moreover, Masonry in this country and in England has not openly adopted the measures against the Catholic Church which have been employed by Freemasonry in France, Italy, and other Continental countries. In fact, English and American Freemasonry have endeavored to deny connection with the revolutionary and anti-religious Freemasonry of Continental Europe. But only they attempt to do this who are not initiated in the real inner purposes of the order. In proof of this let me say, that when the English public was shocked at the anarchistic and irreligious activities of Continental Freemasonry, and disclaimed fraternity with these societies, it called forth a protest from authoritative Masonic sources. In the Official Bulletin, 1885, VII, 29, we find the following reprimand of English Freemasonry for its denial of union with Continental, by no less a personage than Pike himself, who of all men should know the nature of the fraternity. "When the journal in London which speaks of the Freemasonry of the Grand Lodges of England, deprecatingly protested that the English Freemasonry was innocent of the charges preferred by the Papal Bull, and that it did not sympathize with the loose opinions and extravagant utterances of part of the Continental Freemasonry, it was very justly and very conclusively checkmated by the Romish organs, with the reply, 'It is idle for you to protest, you are Freemasons. You give them countenance, encouragement, and support, and you are jointly responsible with them and cannot shirk that responsibility.'" These are hard and plain words to be applied to the order by one who held highest position in it.
In further confirmation let me quote from the Cyclopedia of Fraternities, p. XV. "Few who are well informed on the subject will deny that the Masonic fraternity is directly or indirectly the parent organization of all modern secret societies, good, bad and indifferent." The activities of Continental Masonry became so revolutionary that they occasioned the following communication from the Registrator of the London Grand Lodge to the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. "We feel that we in England are better apart from such people. Indeed Freemasonry is in such bad odor on the Continent of Europe, by reason of its being exploited by Socialists and Anarchists that we may have to break off relations with more of the Grand Bodies who have forsaken our landmarks" (New Age, New York, 1909, I, 177).
Although apparently condemning the outrages of Continental Masonry, the real guiding spirits of English-speaking Freemasonry are working hand in hand with their Continental brethren. The Grand Commander of the Mother Supreme Council of the World, A. Pike, in a letter Dec. 28, 1886, to the Italian Grand Commander says: "The Papacy has been for a thousand years the torturer of humanity, the most shameless imposture in its presence to spiritual power of all ages . . . In presence of this spiritual cobra, this deadly, treacherous, murderous enemy, the most formidable power in the world, the unity of Italian Masonry is of absolute and supreme necessity . . . The Freemasonry of the world will rejoice to see accomplished and consummated the unity of the Italian Freemasonry" (Official Bulletin, Sept. 1887, 173).
In further proof that Masonry is unified the world over, let me quote a Past Grand Master, Clifford: "The absolute oneness of the craft is a glorious thought. Neither boundaries of States, nor vast oceans separate the Masonic fraternity. Everywhere it is one. There is no universal church, but there is a universal fraternity, Freemasonry" (Freemason's Chronicle, 1906, II, 132).
Individual Masons and local fraternities may be sincere in disclaiming association with the dreadful doings of the order in other lands, but it is because they do not know what is going on among those who control the activities of their order. Having demonstrated, from official and public sources, the brotherhood which exists among Freemasons the world over, let us see why the Catholic Church is opposed to the order, and excommunicates those of her subjects who join it. I shall make no charges of my own against Freemasonry, but shall let it speak for itself. Senator Delpech, President of the Grand Orient, in an address Sept. 20, 1902, said: "The triumph of the Galilean (Jesus Christ) has lasted twenty centuries. But now He dies in His turn. The mysterious voice, announcing the death of Pan (to Julian the Apostate), to-day announces the death of the impostor God. Brother Masons, we rejoice to state that we are not without our share in this overthrow of the false prophets. The Romish Church, founded on the Galilean myth, began to decay rapidly from the very day on which the Masonic association was established" (Compte-rendu Gr. Or. de France, 1902, 381). That is plain language and plain opposition to Christianity. Italian Masonry is even more radical than the French, and proclaims that it is supported by the Freemasonry of the world, and especially by the Masonic centers at Paris, Berlin, London, Madrid, Calcutta and Washington ("Riv." 1842-291; Gruber, "Mazzini" 215).
In our own country official Freemasonry's attitude toward Catholicism is seen in the following declaration: "Popery and priestcraft are so openly allied that they may be called the same. Nothing that can be named is more repugnant to Masonry, nothing to be more carefully guarded against, and this has always been well understood by all skillful masters" (Freemason's Chronicle, 1887, I. 35). In the countries where the Catholic Church has been persecuted it is well known that it was in great part the work of Masons. From the official documents of French Masonry it is manifest that all the anti-clerical measures passed in the French Parliament were decreed beforehand in the Masonic lodges, and executed under the direction of the Grand Orient. Masse, the official orator of the Assembly of 1898, declared that: "It is the supreme duty of Freemasonry to interfere each day more and more in political and profane struggles. Success (in the anticlerical combat) is in large measure due to Freemasonry. If the Bloc has been established, this is owing to Freemasonry and to the discipline learned in the lodges. For a long time Freemasonry has simply been the Republic in disguise. We are each year the funeral bell, announcing the death of a cabinet that has not done its duty, but has betrayed the Republic. We need vigilance and, above all, mutual confidence if we are to accomplish our work, as yet unfinished. This work, you know, the anti-clerical combat, is going on. The Republic must rid itself of the religious congregations, sweeping them off by a vigorous stroke; the system of half measures is everywhere dangerous, the adversary must be crushed with a single blow" (Compte-rendu Grand Orient, 1903; Nourisson, "Les Jacobins" 266-271). If that is not opposition to Christianity nothing is. The President of the 1902 Assembly said with regard to the French elections of that year, "We would have been defeated by our well organized opponents, if Freemasonry had not spread over the whole country" (Compte-rendu, 1902-153). From these declarations it is evident that Freemasonry is an active and irreconcilable opponent of Catholicism.
In some countries, our own, for instance, and England, where public opinion does not countenance irreligion, Freemasonry does not disclose its attitude toward Christianity. But in very truth, the essence of Freemasonry is opposition to revealed religion. If its main assaults are against Catholicism it is because the Catholic Church is the main bulwark of Christianity. Freemasonry employs the symbols and the terminology of religion in order the better to carry out its purpose. As said previously, American and English Masons among the rank and file are unacquainted with the real purpose of the order. They even praise Freemasonry as an upholder of religion, and quote their ritual to prove it. But the religion which Freemasonry upholds is the religion which ignores the revelation of Jesus Christ, and assails the doctrines which His divinely instituted Church proclaims. "The two systems of Romanism and Freemasonry are not only incompatible, but they are radically opposed to each other" (Freemason's Chronicle, 1884, II., 17). Hence Voltaire, who spent his life fighting Christianity, was welcomed into the ranks of Freemasonry by solemn initiation, Feb. 7, 1778, and received the Masonic garb from no less a personage than the famous Helvetius (Handbuch, 3rd ed., II. 517).
This was at a time when Voltaire was employing all his resources to destroy the Church of Christ. Continental Freemasonry is unquestionably anti-Christian. This is so evident that English and American Masons have endeavored to repudiate connection with the French and Italian fraternities. But those who are in the secret of Masonic activities and aims, know, and have declared that the aims of the order are the same the world over, expediency dictating that they be camouflaged in certain places and under certain conditions. As said before, the individual Mason may or may lot know the secret purpose of the order. Most of the members, even those in advanced degrees, look upon the order as simply Fraternal and philanthropic. In our characterization of the order we specify the order only, and its essential aims, not the individuals who compose it, most of whom would never join it if they knew its real nature.
In the United States, in many places, Freemasons and Catholics Fraternize in society, business, and sport. In certain localities Freemasonry has actually joined hands with Catholic organizations for social and other undertakings. In point of fact Freemasonry has officially praised one of the foremost organizations of the Catholic Church in the United States. The following statement concerning the Knights of Columbus speaks for itself: "The ceremonial of the order teaches a high and noble patriotism, instills a love of country, inculcates a reverence for law and order, urges the conscientious and unselfish performance of civic duty, and holds up the Constitution of our country as the richest and most precious possession of a Knight of the Order" (Committee of Masons, Report on the Knights of Columbus).
This tribute to a distinctively Catholic fraternity was doubtless given in good faith, and with good intention, on the part of those who issued the report. This is perfectly compatible with the real opposition of the order, as an order, to the Catholic Church. Let as recall the words of Oliver, a Freemason himself, and one of its highest authorities: "Masons may be fifty years Masters of the Chair and yet not learn the secret of the Brotherhood" (Oliver, Hist. Landmarks, I, 11, 21). Moreover, when English-speaking Masonry was appalled at the anarchistic and anti-religious activities of Continental Masonry, and protested against it, Pike, a Mason in highest office in the United States, declared officially that English-speaking Masonry could not repudiate or disown the European aims and activities of the order, since the aims of Freemasonry were the same the world over.
In time of war the soldiers in the ranks, and often commissioned officers, know little or nothing of the plans and purposes of their superior officers. They have no personal hostility to the soldiers of the enemy army, often fraternizing with them when occasion offers. Notwithstanding this, the two armies are opposed to each other, and the men in the ranks, without knowing the mind of the commanding general, are executing his commands and carrying out his purposes. It is against the enemy, as an organized opposition, and not against individual soldiers, that war is declared and fought. A government would condemn a subject as guilty of treason if he went over to the enemy ranks. This is what the Catholic Church does if one of her subjects joins the Freemasons. She knows, not from hearsay, but from official documents, and from actual hostilities, that Freemasonry, as an institution, is unequivocally and essentially opposed to her. She stands for revealed religion. Freemasonry ignores revelation, and in European countries openly employs all its resources to crush the one Church which upholds in its entirety the religion of Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church would be a coward, and a traitor to her trust if she did not oppose Freemasonry, and excommunicate any of her subjects who joined its ranks. In the words of a high Masonic authority quoted previously, "The two systems of Romanism and Freemasonry are not only incompatible, but they are radically opposed to each other" (Parkinson, Freemason's Chronicle, 1884, II, 17).
Recently two facts have made it evident that Masonry in the United States is subtly engaged in warfare on the Catholic Church. It is known that the Oregon School law was directed against parochial schools. This law was instigated by the Scottish Rite Masons of the Southern Jurisdiction, and sponsored by P. S. Malcolm, sovereign grand inspector general in Oregon for the Scottish Rite Masons.
Very recently a society calling itself the "American Prohibition Protestant Patriotic Protective Alliance" which has for its real object warfare on Catholicism, gave out the following statement:
"Regularly, beginning with the fall, when the active work of laying the foundation will start, the plans, policies, purposes and special utterances of the 'American Prohibition Protestant Patriotic Protective Alliance' will find expression through The Fellowship Forum, published in Washington.
This publication, which has grown 'from an idea to a million in four years,' is already the world's greatest Protestant interfraternal newspaper, and probably has more circulation than any dozen to fifteen of the leading journals of as many of the largest Protestant denominations. It prints the news of all the leading Protestant fraternal orders, but is not owned or officially controlled by any of them. Its control is vested in individuals all of whom are thirty-third degree Masons" (New York Times, June 25, 1925)."
Notwithstanding this open declaration, there are some frivolous Catholics who see no harm in Freemasonry, and criticize the Church for condemning her subjects for joining it. As well say there is no harm in a soldier joining the enemy ranks in time of war. Freemasonry is at war with Catholicism. If these same persons assumed such an attitude toward the enemy of their country they would be set down as traitors. Our government knows who and what her enemies are. So does the Catholic Church know her opponents. In Italy and France she beholds spiritual devastation from Freemasonry more destructive and deplorable than the material damage wrought by the World War in these countries. And official Masonry proclaims unity of aim of Freemasonry throughout the world. In some countries it has subordinated the public welfare to its own aims. It has been active in bringing about legislation not only hostile to religion but to the State also. In Italy, Freemasonry was gradually supplanting the government. As proof I quote the following from her greatest statesman and staunchest patriot. "It is an outrage that the highest functionaries of state should frequent the lodges, inform the lodges, take orders from the lodges. It is inadmissible; it must end" (Mussolini, in Italian Parliament). If the Catholic Church were not opposed to Freemasonry, the most surprised organization in the world would be Freemasonry itself.
Imagine what a disloyal organization the Catholic Church would be if she were not opposed to a society whose spokesmen thus characterized her founder: "The triumph of the Galilean (Jesus Christ) has lasted twenty centuries. But now He dies in His turn. The Roman Church, founded on the Galilean myth, began to decay rapidly from the very day on which the Masonic association was established" (Compte-rendu Gr. Or. de France, 1902, 381).
Is it surprising, in view of this declaration, that American Masonry has officially stated, "We won't make a man a Freemason until we know that he isn't a Catholic" (Freemason's Chronicle, 1890, II, 347). A Catholic should consider himself bereft of self-respect to join an organization essentially opposed to his religion, and which, furthermore, proclaims that it does not want him unless he is a renegade to his faith. Let us, as Catholics' trust our Church as much as citizens trust their government. Let us be at least as loyal to our Church as we are to our country. No self-respecting citizen would turn his back on his country and go over to the ranks of his country's professed enemy. Freemasonry, let it be repeated, is the professed enemy of Catholicism. No Catholic with any sense of loyalty or a spark of faith will join the ranks of Freemasonry. Freemasonry offers many social and business inducements to its members. That explains how it recruits an army of followers whom it uses in its own way, often unknown to the many, to carry out its purpose, just as a skilled military board uses an immense army to do its will. No Catholic at heart can even think of giving support to the Church's sworn enemy. The most authentic documents proclaim Masonry to be the uncompromising foe of Catholicism. The Catholic who becomes a Mason has ceased to be a Catholic. Benedict Arnold received many emoluments and high distinction for going over to the enemy. But Benedict Arnold was despised even by those who used him.
Masonry has the trappings of religion, but of a religion which is its own, not Christ's. In order to gain the support of Christian men against Christianity, it employs symbols and a ritual which impress the observer. It needs a great army in order to carry out its purpose. It is closely united throughout the world in its aims. It has shown its hand where it could do so, with the result that it is in open war on religion in most Continental countries, and also in some South American countries.
It seeks to destroy revealed religion, and to establish in its stead a religion of naturalism. Hence its aim is to destroy Catholicism, the one religion in the world which effectually maintains the religion of Jesus Christ. The rank and file of Masonry are for the most part, and especially in this country, ignorant of the real purpose of the organization. The Catholic Church is opposed to Freemasonry as an organization sworn to her destruction. Toward Freemasons, personally, the Church has the kindest regard. Christ, who condemned sin, loved the sinner and gave His life for his salvation. The Church condemns Freemasonry, but would make every sacrifice for the spiritual welfare of the individual Mason. If the Catholic Church were not opposed to Masonry she would be false to Christ. The Catholic who joins Freemasonry is as much a traitor to Christ as was Benedict Arnold to his country. This is plain speech, but true, and no one knows it better than the guiding spirits of Masonry. The religion of Masonry is naturalism. The religion of Christ is supernaturalism. They are as incompatible as darkness and light. Christ is the Light of the world. This Light will shine to the end of the world. Many have tried to extinguish it, but today it is brighter than ever. Masonry will pass away, as so many of its predecessors have done. But Christ's Church will endure to the end. He who is God has said it.
THINGS CATHOLICS ARE ASKED ABOUT, by MARTIN J. SCOTT, S.J.
Imprimi Potest: Laurence J. Kelly, S.J. Prapositus Prov. Marylandia Neo-Eboracensis
Nihil Obstat: Arthur J. Scanlan, S.T.D. Censor Librorum
Imprimatur: + Patrick Cardinal Hayes Archbishop New York
New York, March 17, 1927
Dedicated To James A. Flaherty, Supreme Knight, Knights of Columbus, Whose Life and Character are an Incentive to Loyalty to God and Country, this Volume is Dedicated with the Esteem of the Author
Copyright © 1927 P.J. Kenedy & Sons
Okay, if "tolerance" is actually hypocrisy, then perhaps many of the early American colonists had it correct. The Mass. Bay colony wouldn't allow anyone to live in Mass. who wasn't a Puritan. Heck, they killed Quakers and R.I. was settled by escapees from Mass.! And they weren't the only ones who acted this way.
After the colonies became a nation, the separation between church and state came about. This, no matter what the ill educated an do LIBERALS tell you, was meant to prevent this country from having a state religion....NOT to keep; religion out of this nation.
Yet you come onto this thread and post all kinds of what you claim to be the Catholic church's positions, which look like bigotry to the rest of us. And if this stuff is true, then it would really be best for you to have kept it to yourself; especially since it makes the Catholic church look terrible.
American is NOT a theocracy, but if it was one, YOU would be the one getting the dirty end of the stick; not Protestants, since the vast majority of those involved with founding this nation were Protestants, whom you think are all consigned to hell.
The funniest thing, though, is that with every reply you make, you refute the article that heads this thread. It is NOT that there is an anti-Catholic nature to Freemasonry ( though if there was, it would be well deserved ! ); rather, there is an anti-everyone but Catholics, in the Catholic church and by some Catholics, such as yourself.
If you ever want to change your nic, I suggest that you use Savonarola.
Previous to YS, they BOTH participated -as celebrants- in an ELCA service. Said they didn't realize it was a service until after they got there.
reductio: Hence, it would be the self praise that stinks for reductio to adopt the honored name of Savanarola just as the Society of St. Pius X dishonors St. Pius X by misappropriating his name for their nefarious purposes of impersonating Catholics.
It also seems unlikely that reductio had Jesuit teachers. The Jesuits who taught me so long ago that Jesuits were still Catholic would have made short work of him. Later Jesuits were possessed of the more leftist types of error such as were condemned as "modernism" (read secular humanism) than reductio who flirts with SSPXism and Feeneyism (most particularly).
Unfortunately, there are those who regard themselves as Catholic who are all too familiar with partial readings of ancient texts and not at all familiar with more contemporary materials and ignore the context of both. Hurling anathemas from on high (or wherever) at the specks in others' eyes helps them to ignore the motes and beams in their own eyes.
Lutheran Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer struggled against Hitler on behalf of the persecuted Jews, came to America, was welcomed as a hero by many sympathetic Americans who raised funds to fuel his efforts but he went back to Germany to personally confront the evils of nazism and was hanged by Hitler as a last minute effort before Hitler blew his own brains out in the bunker with Eva Braun. BUT, despite such noble works (apologies to reformation views of works) and the burning faith in and love for God which was exhibited by his works, he just must be in hell because he was not Catholic at death. Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Moral hero and good and faithful servant or denizen of hell simply for not being Catholic??? Apparently the latter or so we are expected to believe by reductio. I don't believe that.
Ditto the Protestant ten Booms. Ditto Dismas, the good thief, crucified with Jesus Christ and who was never baptized Catholic or otherwise. Just because Jesus Christ said that Dismas would join Him in paradise that day doesn't mean that Jesus Christ had any business contradicting the Council of Florence not to be held for 1400+ years in the future, right, reductio????
When I attended a Jesuit prep school of the illustrious actually Catholic sort (in olden days), we never wondered about the eternal destination of the Bonhoeffers or of the ten Booms or of Dismas (Christ's own words were good enough for us before Marcel Lefebvre and Leonard Feeney's acolytes discovered their supposedly superior wisdom). We went immediately to the outer shores, the worst we could imagine and asked our Jesuits whether Hitler or Stalin could possibly have been admitted to heaven. Now, no one regarded those outcomes as likely but the Jesuits admonished us that no one can possibly know whether either had enjoyed a grace of final perfect repentance in those last moments of consciousness and therefore, we could not be certain that either was in hell.
Reductio is not an authority on Catholicism (based on his posted opinions) nor is he authorized by the Church to be one. He is far closer to the Feeneyite heresy condemned by actual Church authority in the 1950s (Fr. Feeney repented and returned to the Catholic Church before he died) or the SSPX schism condemned as such by John Paul the Great in his Ecclesia Dei in 1988 in which he excommunicated SSPX leaders and adherents. Marcel Lefebvre, the founding schismatic of the SSPX, never repented publicly before he died, but, like Hitler and Stalin, we can never be sure that he did not respond to a grace of final perfect repentance.
It ill behooves Catholics in the United States to harangue against Protestants or Masons since we have generally enjoyed the hospitality of both and have flourished here. We are not required to deny objective truth nor should we. There have been brief periods of anti-Catholic activity in various places here. If we want to complain, we will have to confess anti-Protestant and anti-Masonic behavior of our own.
When Connecticut was a formally Congregationalist state (until 1818), the Roman Catholic Mass was not allowed to be said there. Is it not reasonable to suggest that the Congregationalists were acting on a far older Catholic model of Christendom which merged church and state to a substantial degree??? The Baptist congregation at Danbury, Connecticut, complained to retired President Thomas Jefferson of Congregationalist hegemony in Connecticut in 1911. IIRC, the Baptist faith originated with Roger Williams' expulsion from Massachusetts by Congregationalists there across the border to Connecticut's next door neighbor Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.
Ironically, free will as a gift from God is a central tenet of Catholicism. How you exercise it will determine whether or not you are in a state of grace at death. If you are not in a state of grace you are not going to heaven, no matter what religion you profess. At least that is what we Catholics believe.
If I am fortunate enough to enjoy through eternity the Beatific Vision, I promise not to complain if my mother's best friend Hilda is there though Methodist, Dietrich Bonhoeffer though Lutheran, the ten Booms though reformed Christians, the good pagan centurion who (at the cost of his own execution) slew St. Peter by a sword rather than allow his sufferings in upside-down crucifixion to continue, post-Crucifixion Jews who lived good and righteous lives ("I come not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it.") or the thoroughly moral member of a Fifth Century American Indian tribe who (despite never hearing of the Bible and never being baptized much less being Catholic and never having the slightest opportunity for either) obeyed the law written in his or her heart by God (why was it written there?), worshiped the Great Spirit as a sole Supreme Being and lived an extraordinary life of what we might call genuine piety (under such circumstances) and minimal sinfulness. As to the last, did God create such people with the specific intent that they go to hell or even limbo through no fault of their own???
May God bless you and yours.
First let me explain my position. I'm in an indult FSSP, blessed by the Vatican, so you can't accuse me of being SSPX or a Feenyite when I say this to you.
I find it bothersome the analogy you have used here. I think it can be said with certainty that Hitler and Stalin are roasting in Hell. It's pretty obviouse they didn't repent before their death and they certainly can't be compared to the Good Thief on the Cross who did no more than steal something. Hitler and Stalin were responsible for millions of deaths. Sacred Scripture says there are no murderers in Heaven.
Another thing, I have to agree with Reductio on the infallible dogma that "Outside the Church There is No Salvation." Now you tell us, was this dogma, defined and taught by the Church for hundreds of years declared infallible teaching or not? If you answer honestly, without trying to placate Protestant sensitivity here, you would have to answer YES! To answer otherwise would be misrepresenting Catholic teaching and declaring that the previous Popes who taught this were "just out of touch with reality." If you want to claim that, then you might as well say that infallibility is a bunch of bunk.
According to Father John A. Hardon, S.J.(Jesuit) in the Catholic Pocket Dictionary:
Infallibility: The condition of infallibility is that the Pope speaks ex cathedra. For this is required: 1. he have the intention of declaring something unchangeably true; Pg. 195
Unchangeably true. Hmm... wouldn't that make Outside the Church There is No Salvation UNCHANGEABLY true?
The only thing that would save someone "outside of the Church" would be invincible ignorance.
As author Kevin Knight states from an article in Catholic News Agency:
Extra ecclesiam
Outside the Church there is no salvation.
It's a stark sentence. Some Catholics even love its shock value, waving the doctrine like a flag in the face of their enemies. Other Catholics flatly refuse to believe it, and claim that this teaching was repudiated by the Second Vatican Council. Both groups are wrong.
Despite what some may think, this dogma is infallible, and all Catholics are required to believe it. This was repeated clearly at Vatican II, which said: "Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation."
Certainly we can't go into the exclusionary error of Father Feeney, but neither should we fall into the error of relativism.It ill behooves Catholics in the United States to harangue against Protestants or Masons since we have generally enjoyed the hospitality of both and have flourished here. We are not required to deny objective truth nor should we. There have been brief periods of anti-Catholic activity in various places here. If we want to complain, we will have to confess anti-Protestant and anti-Masonic behavior of our own.
I think it ill behooves a Catholic to be so accomodating to that which the Church has declared as a threat to the faith and has warned repeatedly not to enter into membership with them. If the Masons want to take that as "anti-Masonic" behavior, so be it. You also forget Catholic contributions to this country as if we are somehow not responsible for anything good within this country. You only seem to want to give credit to the Protestants and Masons.
Did you know the oldest settled city in the United States, St. Augustine, was settled by Catholics?
Hospitality? Hmph! We had to fight tooth and nail with the Protestants for what we have here. It's revisionist history to say otherwise or you don't know your Catholic American History. Ever read about the Know Nothing Movement? Ever heard of the attacks on Catholics by the Ku Klux Klan?
It's not as rosy a picture as you paint.
And may God bless you.
I strongly object to Catholic beliefs being called mere bigotry.
I am not sure why you pinged me to this. I never said any such thing, nor have I ever bashed your religion. I merely object to you saying that I will not go to Heaven unless I am in your Church. What would you call that?
No, actually.
"Okay, if "tolerance" is actually hypocrisy, then perhaps many of the early American colonists had it correct. The Mass. Bay colony wouldn't allow anyone to live in Mass. who wasn't a Puritan. Heck, they killed Quakers and R.I. was settled by escapees from Mass.! And they weren't the only ones who acted this way."
While yet being incorrect, it would seem that, yes, they might have carried themselves a bit less hypocritically, in that according to your account they at least didn't contradict themselves by on the one hand claiming to know the truth and on the other, underminkng the credibility of that truth as the pluralists do by pretending that contradictory religions can claim equality of status as truth. You see, if someone really, really believes what they claim they believe, it makes no sense whatsoever to pretend that everyone else who says something different must also possess the truth, or to believe that others must be left to wallow in error. This would the truly weak and essentially liberal position to take. All it really tells anyone is "hey, I not really even sure of my own beliefs". And what good is that?
"After the colonies became a nation, the separation between church and state came about. This, no matter what the ill educated an do LIBERALS tell you, was meant to prevent this country from having a state religion....NOT to keep; religion out of this nation."
Well check it out... you know what I'd say to that? I say that the separation of Church and state is ITSELF a liberal idea, and in fact, that all which calls itself "Christianity" but is apart from the Catholic Church qualifies as Liberalism.
"Yet you come onto this thread and post all kinds of what you claim to be the Catholic church's positions, which look like bigotry to the rest of us."
What I posted were the clear, unambiguous, unmistakeable teachings of the Catholic Church, which irrefutably state exactly the point I've made, which is that absolutely and without a doubt, the Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation outside of it, and that Church and state are not to be separated according to Catholic dogma. And I am 100% correct that this is the exact and permanent teaching of the Catholic Church.
"And if this stuff is true, then it would really be best for you to have kept it to yourself; especially since it makes the Catholic church look terrible."
In all honesty I can tell you that I do not in the least care how the truth looks to people when it is told to them. The reason for this is simple: very few people like hearing the truth, and the problem is generally on their end of the equation. It is, in fact, why Christ Himself was put on a cross and killed: because few people wanted His truth, and they would not tolerate Him any longer. So no, I do not believe that the truth ought to be suppressed because the others will themselves to take offense at it.
American is NOT a theocracy, but if it was one, YOU would be the one getting the dirty end of the stick; not Protestants, since the vast majority of those involved with founding this nation were Protestants..."
The Catholic Church believes that the aims of the state are to be aligned with the aims of the Church. When you come across a genunine Catholic, that's what that Catholic will tell you. And then you'll understand very quickly that the principles of Americanism are incompatible with the principles of the Catholic Church. It's just a fact.
"The funniest thing, though, is that with every reply you make, you refute the article that heads this thread. It is NOT that there is an anti-Catholic nature to Freemasonry ( though if there was, it would be well deserved ! ); rather, there is an anti-everyone but Catholics, in the Catholic church and by some Catholics, such as yourself."
That's because the Catholic Church is the one true Church. Freemasonry's two principle aims are exactly what I stated above, and their aim is, at the root, primarily against the Catholic Church.
I pinged you because the rules, as I understood them, required me to ping you when your name was involved. And so I did.
You stated an opinion opposite the to the dogma of the Church. No volume of fancy words will cover this up.
I see. I guess I just don't know still how my name was involved in your statement. But it alright, I will just accept it and carry on! Thanks.
God bless.
And I strongly object to Catholic beliefs that ARE bigoted, as well as those who post them and then can't handle reaction from others who don't share your beliefs!
You have stated that not just the pope, but the Catholic church is infallible. How can that be so, when popes and priests, with the blessing of the church, sold indulgences? Jesus NEVER talked about that, nor did he sell a "get out of hell free" pass. You can't find anything in the OT nor the NT, or even any of the preceding centuries, when the Catholic church's existed, about this one.
I have no desire to turn this thread into a flame war, where each of us trash the other ( though that IS what you have done! ) and our respective religions. And since you have now completely hijacked this thread, I suggest that you now cease and desist.
LOL! I didn't know that was a rule on this part of FR, so I suppose I should have been in trouble myself! I do apologize to you, because I didn't know about it! Guess I will have to sit in the corner! :-)
You live in a PLURALISTIC town, I bet. Your state and the nation you live in, is NOT a Catholic theocracy. When are you going to move to a country that is solely Catholic?
You are on a website that is NOT for only Catholics. Are you here just to proselytize to the "heathen"/"heretics" and/or pound your chest and tell the rest of us that we are all going to burn in hell, then? If that is the case, then I suggest that none of that is the purpose for FR.
Everyone who is NOT a Catholic is a "LIBERAL"?
Liberals to extreme lefties can easily be found, who profess to be Catholics. Never heard of the Kennedy family, have you? How about John Kerry, Bernadette Dorn, Moynahan, the Berrigan brothers, and on and on and on? And before you tell me that they aren't REALLY Catholics, that tactic isn't going to work.
Frankly, I don't give a damn what the Catholic church says. I have done my very best to not take on that church and stated all of the absolutely vile, hypocritical, and corrupt things that it has done and said for 2 millennia; however, if you want, I can post, endlessly, about it; though I would much prefer to not waste my time and energy doing so.
Oh gee.....Christ was crucified because people wouldn't listen to HIS words? Ummmmmmmmmm....you mean that HE wasn't crucified, to redeem our sins?
Since you clearly state that Catholics owe all of their allegiance to the church, first, then NO Catholic should EVER hold elected office, in this nation, nor and post of authority in anything. Thanks for completely blowing out of the water, everything other Catholics, have fought, tirelessly, to make the rest of us not believe.
Truth? You would know the TRUTH, if it bit you on the nose and nothing you did, could ever dislodge it!
Freemasonry is NOT a religious organization; it is a FRATERNAL and CHARITABLE organization. It is an organization which has ALWAYS tolerated the social interaction and community of ALL men of good character, who believe in GOD. So, of course you would see it as menacing, frightening, and something to avoid at all cost.
Your post clearly lays out why, for many centuries, Catholics weren't trusted, in America.
Well what on earth kind of ridiculous religion is going to state that all other religions can get people to Heaven? Come on. That'd be an absolute waste of time. Let's be reasonable here.
"And I strongly object to Catholic beliefs that ARE bigoted, as well as those who post them and then can't handle reaction from others who don't share your beliefs!"
And from this it can be clearly demonstrated that pluralism can't work. It is an impossibility to have five different religions claiming to be the truth and yet coexist peacefully under a common banner that is not itself a banner of religion, all without lapsing into violation of it's own silly maxims. In other words, where is your tolerance for genuinue Catholicism in your pluralist society? It is impossible. The actual aim of pluralism is no religion, not "religious tolerance". "Religous tolerance" is just a placating kind of non-idea excuse for what is actually happening, which is that religion is being given the heave-ho from all society, that's all.
"You have stated that not just the pope, but the Catholic church is infallible. How can that be so, when popes and priests, with the blessing of the church, sold indulgences? Jesus NEVER talked about that, nor did he sell a "get out of hell free" pass. You can't find anything in the OT nor the NT, or even any of the preceding centuries, when the Catholic church's existed, about this one."
To answer this, one needs to first make all parties clear as to what infallibility means, who exercises it, when, and concerning what.
"I have no desire to turn this thread into a flame war, where each of us trash the other ( though that IS what you have done! ) and our respective religions. And since you have now completely hijacked this thread, I suggest that you now cease and desist."
Where's the tolerance? What about this freedom of expression? See there... a Catholic can't just repeat what the Church actually teaches in a pluralist society without unlocking the contents of the whitewashed crypt-O-doublestandard, can he?
I'm not going to. And ya'll have to let me stay on, or else you contradict your own creed.
Everyone who is NOT a Catholic is a "LIBERAL"?
The truly liberal ideas are the ones which are at odds with the teachings of the Catholic Church.
One way of describing the relgious views of the Masons, is "a return to Egypt."
with its nonjudemental, tolerant gods, so called. Hence the infactuation with things Egyptian. Never mind the history truth of its cruel gods, the Hebrew notion of Egypt as the land of slavery.
Well, yeah. There was this middle-of-the-night kind of illicit trial where they falsely accused Christ, whipped up the crowds against Him, rejected and mocked His teachings, in their duplicity made him out to be a threat to the stability of a state which they themselves hated, a little garment-rending ensued here and there, they lied, and they off and crucified Him. So yeah.
Ummmmmmmmmm....you mean that HE wasn't crucified, to redeem our sins?
No, I didn't mean that. He was crucified for our sins. I don't see how stating the first thing precludes the belief in the second thing.
Since you clearly state that Catholics owe all of their allegiance to the church, first, then NO Catholic should EVER hold elected office, in this nation, nor and post of authority in anything. Thanks for completely blowing out of the water, everything other Catholics, have fought, tirelessly, to make the rest of us not believe.
You're welcome, because they were wrong to have misled you. After all, were they ever helping you to come closer to the Church by not telling the truth?
Truth? You would know the TRUTH, if it bit you on the nose and nothing you did, could ever dislodge it!
You meant "wouldn't". But what is written above is the truth.
"Freemasonry is NOT a religious organization; it is a FRATERNAL and CHARITABLE organization. It is an organization which has ALWAYS tolerated the social interaction and community of ALL men of good character, who believe in GOD. So, of course you would see it as menacing, frightening, and something to avoid at all cost."
I know exactly what they really are, and what their intentions are, and by what principles they operate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.