Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies First Volume - Freemasonry
Celledoor.com ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 11/04/2009 9:01:34 PM PST by GonzoII

Freemasonry



1104. Does not the Church absolutely forbid Catholics to become Freemasons?

Yes.

1105. You have never been a Mason. How can you know anything about it?

I seem to know so much about Masonry that I have been challenged over and over again with the charge that I am an ex-Mason of the Royal Arch Degree. However I have never been a Mason. But just as I can speak about New York even though I have never visited that city, so I have authentic information about the origin and aims of Masonry.

1106. Your Church takes the stand of an intolerant bidly in this matter.

She does not. If a man wishes to join a club and is presented with a book of rules, has he the right to say, "Here, you can't bully me like this. How dare you talk to me of obligations!" The officials would rightly reply, "Nonsense. You wish to be a member of this club, and these are our rules. We are not bullying you. You want to be a member of this club, and we cannot accept you unless you promise to conform to the regulations." So the Catholic Church has the right to legislate for those who choose to remain or to become Catholics. She simply says to Catholics, "If you join the Masons, you deprive yourself of the benefits of the Catholic faith." Where is the bullying in that? It is but an exercise of lawful authority. Christ said to His Church, "Whatever you bind on earth is bound also in heaven." St. Paul says "Obey your prelates and be subject to them, for they watch as having to render an account of your souls." Heb 13:17. The Church has a grave responsibility, and men can disobey only by the renunciation of their Christian privileges.

1107. Why do you hate Masons?

I do not. The Masonic system and the Catholic system are not reconcilable, and no Catholic may join the Lodge without thereby renouncing his Church. But there is no reason why Catholics and Masons, making allowance for each other's persuasions, should not be personally friendly in this country, observing always true charity towards individuals.

1108. If you do not hate Masons, you at least hate Catholics who become Masons.

I have no hatred of Catholics who have become Masons. I am very sorry for the Catholic who does so, and would move heaven and earth to reach him before he died, were such a Catholic to send for me on his death-bed, as indeed has happened.

1109. When did the Church first forbid Catholics to be Masons?

Pope Clement XII issued the first formal prohibition in 1738. As modern Freemasonry began in 1717, this was just twenty-one years after its origin.

1110. In ancient times Priests used to be good Masons.

Masonry did not exist in ancient times. But if, since the decree of Pope Clement, a renegade Priest did join Masonry, he at once ceased to be a practical member of the Catholic Church by the mere fact of doing so.

1111. Was not Pope Pius IX a Mason?

No. Those writers who have said that he was, have quoted only spurious documents, and have given such contradictory details that Pope Pius IX must have been initiated on half a dozen different occasions and in as many places. Dudley Wright, in his book, "Roman Catholicism and Freemasonry," says that Pope Pius IX was initiated as a Mason on August 15, 1839, at Palermo. Yet on the date given, Pius had been a Bishop for more than twelve years. The document upon which he relied has been proved a forgery over and over again.

1112. Why are Catholics forbidden to be Masons?

However tolerant individual Masons may be towards the Catholic Church, and with all due charity towards individual Masons, the Church forbids her own subjects to join the Masonic Lodge for many and good reasons. Masonry is a secret society of a character opposed to right moral principles; its oath is too sweeping and unjust; in the name of Masonic fraternity, much injustice has occurred in ordinary life, Masonry counting more than merit and capability; on the Continent of Europe Masonry aims at the destruction of the Catholic Church, and the Church could not but forbid Catholics to join her avowed enemy; nor could the Church distinguish between Masons of one country and of another — Masons claim worldwide solidarity, and all must fall under the ban; and, in any case, Masonry claims to be a religion derived from mythological sources, and as such is on a par with all other false religions as far as the Catholic Church is concerned.

1113. You say that Masonry is condemned as being a secret society.

Not merely as a secret society, but as one involving a particular kind of secrecy. A member takes a solemn oath to keep secret any matters heard within the Lodge with no previous idea of their nature and with no certainty of the extent to which he is committing himself. Many a man who has taken that oath has refused, because of it, to follow his conscience. Masonic friends of mine have admitted this to me. Secrecy is permissible only where legitimate buisness is concerned, and no man is morally free to bind himself blindly by an oath, when be is not even sure that injustice to others will not be involved. Albert Pike, an American Mason, tells us in his book, "The Inner Sanctuary," that it is the duty of a Royal Arch Mason to espouse the cause of a companion Royal Arch Mason, whether he be right or wrong. It is immoral to take any oath which is likely to involve such conduct.

1114. We Masons are bound to secrecy by our code just as you Priests by yours.

Our codes are totally different. I am bound only to safeguard the manifestations of conscience made to me by people in Confession, and to preserve such other natural and committed secrets as involve no injustice to others.

1115. Are Catholics forbidden to belong to all secret societies, or only to Masonry?

The Catholic Church does not condemn any society merely because it is secret in its own transactions of business. Every society may have its lawful secrets. A family is a society, and no family is obliged to call in strangers and exhibit all its affairs to the public gaze. But the Church does condemn those societies whose form of secrecy can be dangerous to religion, or to the state, or which can lead to the violation of conscience. Many Catholic societies which have their own legitimate secret business are permitted by the Church. But before giving her sanction, she makes sure that such secret business is limited to lawful matters, and that the constitutions of such societies are based upon Christian principles, containing nothing in any way opposed to the law of God.

1116. The Knights of Columbus form a secret society sanctioned by the Catholic Church. How do they differ from Masonry?

In all the points I have enumerated against Masonry. They do not constitute a secret society of the type condemned by the Church. They are prepared to submit all their affairs to ecclesiastical authority. Every member knows that he will never be asked to violate his conscience or injure other people's rights in virtue of his membership. Their society does not claim to be a new and universal religion, nor do any of its members profess their wish to destroy the Catholic Church.

1117. Masonry believes that one religion is as good as another. Is that detrimental to the Catholic Church?

Even did Masonry believe that, it would be detrimental to the Catholic Church. For if God reveals a definite religion, it is blasphemy to say that any other religion is as good as the one He has revealed.

1118. Do you think that Masons plot against the Catholic Church?

In some countries they do; in others they do not. However the spirit of Masonry the world over is anti-Christian and anti-Catholic, for it excludes all definite Christianity and yet claims to be a religion. "He that is not with me, is against me," said Christ.

1119. I deny that Masonry is opposed to the Catholic Church.

Senator Delpech, President of the Grand Orient in France, said on September 20th, 1902, "The triumph of the Galilean has lasted many centuries, but now He dies in His turn. He passes away to join the dust of the ages with the other divinities of India, Greece, and Rome, who saw so many deceived creatures prostrate before their altars. Brother Masons, we rejoice that we are not without our share in this overthrow of false prophets. The Romish Church began to decay from the day the Masonic association was established." The Swiss Lodge declared, "We have one irreconcilable enemy — the Pope and clericalism." Masonic documents seized by the Government of Italy declared that the ultimate idea of Masonry there was to destroy Catholicism and even the Christian idea altogether. Again in 1913 the Grand Orient of France said, "The aim of the Grand Orient is to crush Roman Catholicism in France first, and then elsewhere." Masonic journals in England replied to these quotations by saying that English Masonry did not sympathize with such extravagant utterances, and that it had no opinions, political or religious. But the American Pike replied, "It is idle to protest. We are Masons, and we recognize the French brotherhood as Freemasons in virtue of solidarity. Ours is a universal fraternity." The list of Grand Lodges published in 1907 shows that the United Grand Lodge of England recognizes practically all the Grand Lodges of the world. As the Ancient Scottish Rite for the installment of a Grand Master says, "There is a sacred bond uniting all the brethren of our Craft. However scattered over the earth, they all compose one body." Masonry as such is opposed to the Catholic Church. I know that there are many fine, broad, and tolerant men, who rather admire the Catholic Church, if anything. But the fact remains that no Catholic may become a Mason without renouncing his religion, and no Mason can become a Catholic without severing his connection with the Masonic Lodge.

1120. Masonry goes back to Solomon's temple, long before Catholicism began. How can you say that it began in 1717?

Masonry claims to go much farther back than Solomon's Temple. "The Freemason," an English Masonic periodical, August issue, 1926, says: "Freemasonry can stand and watch all religions as they pass in review." W. A. Waite, in his book, "Emblematic Masonry," 1925, p. 286, says: "Masons alone are truly ordained and have a succession more than Apostolic." A. Churchward, in the "Treasury of Masonic Thought," under the chapter on the Great Pyramid, says, "Masonry goes back 300,000 years before Christ to the Egyptian mysteries of Horns." There are many other such extravagant claims made by Masons. But while Masonry claims to be pagan in origin, and while it talks paganism, historically it is not so old. The best German Masonic historians, such as Begeman, laugh at the notion and admit that Masonry as it is today began with the Grand Lodge of England in 1717. Its organization was completed in 1722 with the new book of the constitutions and the three degrees of apprentice, fellow and master. The mentioning of Solomon's Temple in connection with Masonry is absurd. I might just as well found a society of Shintoists in 1933; include in my ritual the burning of a few joss-sticks; and then tell the world that really my society dated back to Confucius, adding as proof the allegation that he must have burned joss-sticks at any rate.

1121. Were there not mediaeval guilds or lodges of stone-masons before 1717?

There were older societies of stone-workers before that date, but having no connection with Masonry, and making no absurd pretentions to a fantastic heredity. The old guilds had ceased to exist, and the spirit of the new Masonry was a contradiction of that which prevailed in the earlier and non-connected Catholic guilds. Masonry was not even a revival of an older system. It was a completely new and quite independent organization.

1122. We Masons believe in God.

Not all do. I remember reading in a French Masonic Review these words, "Masonry teaches that there is only one religion — the worship of humanity. God is an erroneous concept of humanity." However, many Masons believe in a Supreme Architect, just as the pagan Aristotle did.

1123. Our Great Architect is the same God as yours.

God himself would scarcely recognize tne portrait as authentic. God is not merely the author of all things, He is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in whose Name we have been baptized. The mere admission of a Great Architect suggests no intimate relations with Him, no knowledge of His intimate and personal life, no recognition of Jesus Christ His Son, no acceptance of God's revelation, and no obedience to His commands. I admit that some individual Masons subscribe to Christian teachings to some extent, but they do not do so as Masons.

1124. We Masons meet in order to worship the true God.

If so, how can you deny that Masonry is a non-Catholic form of religion? And even granting that your ritual is a worship of God, it is a worship opposed to the way in which He Himself wants you to worship Him. And what of the Masonic claim that the very rites are derived from ancient pagan mysteries?

1125. That claim is not true. Every part of the Masonic ritual is based upon Biblical teaching.

J. S. M. Ward, founder and secretary of the Masonic Study Society, writes in his book, "Freemasonry and the Ancient Gods," p. 330, that the Hindu conception of the diety is the "same as that taught in our Lodges, with the same attributes, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva." Wilmshurst, Grand Registrar of West Yorkshire, wrote at the request of his fellow Masons a book called "The Masonic Initiation." On p. 105 he writes: "To the Jewish brother Masonry points to the Father of the faithful; to the Hindu brother it points to Krishna; to the Muslim, it points to Muhammad." The Royal Arch Ritual gives the letters J.B.O. as denominating the Great Architect; the Hebrew Jehovah; the Syrian Baal; and the Egyptian Osiris.

1126. I maintain that the Masonic Craft is Christian.

It is not. Bro. T. J. Lawrence, in his book, "Freemasonry," 1925, p. 58, says: "Masonry does not even require a profession of Christianity. It freely admits Jews, Mulsims, and others who reject Christian doctrine." Dr. Fort Newton, in "Brothers and Builders," says that, like everything else in Masonry, the Bible is a symbol of God's perpetual revelation, which God is still making through the Old Testament, the Koran, the Vedas, etc." That is the end of the Bible in the Christian sense. In the same book he writes that Masonry is not a religion, but the religion, and that Masons pursue the universal religion. That is the end of Christianty as the universal religion. It is because of its un-Christian character that the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, in 1927, made abstention from the Lodge a condition of its own membership. In the same year the Wesleyan Conference in England declared that the Christian message "is wholly incompatible with the claims of Freemasons." Even General Booth, shortly before he died, addressed a letter to every Officer of the Salvation Army saying: "No language of mine could be too strong in condemning any Officer's affiliation with any society which shuts Him outside its Temples; and which in its religious ceremonies gives neither Him nor His name any place. The place where Jesus Christ is not allowed is no place for any Salvation Army Officer."

1127. But Masonry is not a religion.

Mackey's Lexicon of Freemasonry will tell you that "all the ceremonies of our Order begin and terminate with prayer, for Masonry is a religious institution."

1128. Masons have many charitable institutions.

We do not condemn any good they are able to accomplish. Meantime the Catholic Church has charitable works on a much vaster scale. And she condemns the Masonic system, without casting reflection upon the sincerity of individual Masons or the good works of the Craft.

1129. I know of hundreds of Catholics who have joined the Masons, despite the prohibition of the Church.

You may know of many. Those who have done so have preferred the benefits of Masonry to the principles of their religion, selling their birthright, as did Esau, for a bowl of temporal porridge. They have cut themselves off from their Church, and deprived themselves of the right to the Sacraments. Law is law. If they want to be Catholics, they must submit to the laws of the Catholic Church. No one will compel them to do so, but if they will not, you cannot blame the Church for her refusal to regard them as practical members.

1130. Anyway they seem quite content to be Masons.

Who knows? Those who have completely lost their faith may be so. But there are many who have not lost the faith, and who but seem to be content. They are most miserable because they cannot practice their faith as long as they are Masons; and although they have not the courage of their convictions yet, they hope to renounce Masonry before they die, and to be reconciled with their Church. I, as a Catholic Priest, know this; for they have told me what they would not tell any fellow Mason on the subject — while they still intend to remain with the Lodge. A Catholic Mason is not a very happy man.

1131. Can a Mason become a Catholic?

Yes, provided he is sincerely convinced that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, and that he be prepared to sever his connection with the Lodge. He cannot become a Catholic while still remaining a member of any Masonic Lodge.

1132. Once a Mason, always a Mason!

That is merely a foolish superstition. If a man drops Masonry, altogether renounces it, and has nothing more to do with it, he ceases to be a Mason however much his fellow-Masons declare that he still belongs to them. Masonry does not grip a man body and soul for all eternity, with or without his will.

1133. May a Catholic join the Odd Fellows?

No, although that society does not fall under so strict a condemnation as Masonry. There are Catholic benefit societies which give all the temporal advantages to be secured in the Odd Fellows, or in other similar non-Catholic benefit societies. The Church naturally prefers her members to join Catholic societies. The majority of the Odd Fellows are non-Catholics, and no matter how good they may be, it is certain that their Lodge offers less suitable companionship for Catholics than a Catholic society. The Masonic Lodge is, therefore, absolutely forbidden; all other non-Catholic Friendly Societies are strongly discouraged.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0
http://www.celledoor.com/cpdv-ebe/


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Moral Issues; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; radiorepliesvolone
 Who is like unto God?........ Lk:10:18:
 And he said to them: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven.

Historical Context of "Radio Replies"


By markomalley

If one recalls the time frame from which Radio Replies emerged, it can explain some of the frankness and lack of tact in the nature of the responses provided.

It was during this timeframe that a considerable amount of anti-Catholic rhetoric came to the forefront, particularly in this country. Much of this developed during the Presidential campaign of Al Smith in 1928, but had its roots in the publication of Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, originally published in book form in 1919 and also published in pamphlet form in 1853.

While in Britain (and consequently Australia), the other fellow would surely have experienced the effects of the Popery Act, the Act of Settlement, the Disenfranchising Act, the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and many others since the reformation (that basically boiled down to saying, "We won't kill you if you just be good, quiet little Catholics"). Even the so-called Catholic Relief Acts (1778, 1791, 1829, 1851, 1871) still had huge barriers placed in the way.

And of course, they'd both remember the American Protective Association, "Guy Fawkes Days" (which included burning the Pontiff in effigy), the positions of the Whigs and Ultra-Torries, and so on.

A strong degree of "in your face" from people in the position of authoritativeness was required back in the 1930s, as there was a large contingent of the populations of both the US and the British Empire who were not at all shy about being "in your face" toward Catholics in the first place (in other words, a particularly contentious day on Free Republic would be considered a mild day in some circles back then). Sure, in polite, educated circles, contention was avoided (thus the little ditty about it not being polite to discuss religion in public, along with sex and politics), but it would be naive to assume that we all got along, or anything resembling that, back in the day.

Having said all of the above, reading the articles from the modern mindset and without the historical context that I tried to briefly summarize above, they make challenging reading, due to their bluntness.

The reader should also keep in mind that the official teaching of the Church takes a completely different tone, best summed up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324

269 UR 3 § 1.
270 Cf. CIC, can. 751.
271 Origen, Hom. in Ezech. 9,1:PG 13,732.
272 UR 3 § 1.
273 LG 8 § 2.
274 UR 3 § 2; cf. LG 15.
275 Cf. UR 3.
276 Cf. LG 8.
322 LG 15.
323 UR 3.
324 Paul VI, Discourse, December 14, 1975; cf. UR 13-18.

 

 

 

 

Rev. Dr. Leslie Rumble, M.S.C.

"I was brought up as a Protestant, probably with more inherited prejudices than most non-Catholics of these days.  My parents were Anglican and taught me the Angelican faith. My 'broad-minded' protestant teachers taught me to dislike the Catholic Church intensely. I later tried Protestantism in various other forms, and it is some thirty years since, in God's providence, I became a Catholic. As for the 'open, free, sincere worship' of a Protestant Church, I tasted it, but for me it proved in the end to be not only open, but empty; it was altogether too free from God's prescriptions."

Eventually, Leslie became a priest of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.

In 1928, Fr. Rumble began a one-hour 'Question Box' program on 2SM Sydney, N.S.W. radio on Sunday evenings that was heard all over Australia and New Zealand. For five years he answered questions on every subject imaginable that had been written to him from all over that part of the globe. His first show began with a classic introduction:

"Good evening, listeners all. For some time I have been promising to give a session dealing with questions of religion and morality, in which the listeners themselves should decide what is of interest to them. Such a session will commence next Sunday evening, and I invite you to send in any questions you wish on these subjects . . . So now I invite you, non-Catholics above all, to send in any questions you wish on religion, or morality, or the Catholic Church, and I shall explain exactly the Catholic position, and give the reasons for it. In fact I almost demand those questions. Many hard things have been said, and are still being said, about the Catholic Church, though no criminal, has been so abused, that she has a right to be heard. I do not ask that you give your name and address. A nom de plume will do. Call yourself Voltaire, Confucius, X.Y.Z., what you like, so long as you give indication enough to recognize your answer."

"By the summer of 1937, the first edition of Radio Replies was already in print in Australia, financed by Rt. Rev. Monsignor James Meany, P.P. - the director of Station 2SM of whom I am greatly indebted."

"I have often been mistaken, as most men at times. And it is precisely to make sure that I will not be mistaken in the supremely important matter of religion that I cling to a Church which cannot be mistaken, but must be right where I might be wrong. God knew that so many sincere men would make mistakes that He deliberately established an infallible Church to preserve them from error where it was most important that they should not go wrong."

Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty

I broadcast my radio program, the Catholic Radio Hour,  from St. Paul, Minnesota.

I was also carrying on as a Catholic Campaigner for Christ, the Apostolate to the man in the street through the medium of my trailer and loud-speaking system. In the distribution of pamphlets and books on the Catholic Faith, Radio Replies proved the most talked of book carried in my trailer display of Catholic literature. As many of us street preachers have learned, it is not so much what you say over the microphone in answer to questions from open air listeners, but what you get into their hands to read. The questions Fr. Rumble had to answer on the other side of the planet are same the questions I had to answer before friendly and hostile audiences throughout my summer campaign."

I realized that this priest in Australia was doing exactly the same work I was doing here in St. Paul. Because of the success of his book, plus the delay in getting copies from Sydney and the prohibitive cost of the book on this side of the universe, I got in contact with him to publish a cheap American edition.  

It doesn't take long for the imagination to start thinking about how much we could actually do. We began the Radio Replies Press Society Publishing Company, finished the American edition of what was to be the first volume of Radio Replies, recieved the necessary imprimatur, and Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen agreed to write a preface. About a year after the publication of the first edition in Australia, we had the American edition out and in people's hands.

The book turned into a phenomena. Letters began pouring into my office from every corner of the United States; Protestant Publishing Houses are requesting copies for distribution to Protestant Seminaries; a few Catholic Seminaries have adopted it as an official textbook - and I had still never met Dr. Rumble in person.

To keep a long story short, we finally got a chance to meet, published volumes two and three of Radio Replies, printed a set of ten booklets on subjects people most often asked about, and a few other pamphlets on subjects of interest to us.

Fr. Carty died on May 22, 1964 in Connecticut.

"Firstly, since God is the Author of all truth, nothing that is definitely true can every really contradict anything else that is definitely true. Secondly, the Catholic Church is definitely true. It therefore follows that no objection or difficulty, whether drawn from history, Scripture, science, or philosophy, can provide a valid argument against the truth of the Catholic religion."



Biographies compiled from the introductions to Radio Replies, volumes 1, 2 and 3.

Source: www.catholicauthors.com

1 posted on 11/04/2009 9:01:35 PM PST by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fidelis; Atomic Vomit; MI; Sir_Humphrey; dsc; annalex; Citizen Soldier; bdeaner; CatQuilt; ...

Radio Replies Ping

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”

ON / OFF


2 posted on 11/04/2009 9:02:20 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

The Radio Replies Series: Volume One

Chapter One: God

Radio Replies Volume One: God’s Existence Known by Reason
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of God
Radio Replies Volume One: Providence of God and Problem of Evil

Chapter Two: Man

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Man & Existence and Nature of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Immortality of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Destiny of the Soul & Freewill of Man

Chapter Three: Religion

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Religion & Necessity of Religion

Chapter Four: The Religion of the Bible

Radio Replies Volume One: Natural Religion & Revealed Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Mysteries of Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Miracles
Radio Replies Volume One: Value of the Gospels
Radio Replies Volume One: Inspiration of the Gospels

Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 1]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 2]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 3]
Radio Replies Volume One: New Testament Difficulties

Chapter Five: The Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: The Religion of the Jews
Radio Replies Volume One: Truth of Christianity
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature and Necessity of Faith

Chapter Six: A Definite Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: Conflicting Churches
Radio Replies Volume One: Are All One Church?
Radio Replies Volume One: Is One Religion As Good As Another?
Radio Replies Volume One: The Fallacy of Indifference

Chapter Seven: The Failure of Protestantism

Radio Replies Volume One: Protestantism Erroneous
Radio Replies Volume One: Luther
Radio Replies Volume One: Anglicanism
Radio Replies Volume One: Greek Orthodox Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Wesley

Radio Replies Volume One: Baptists
Radio Replies Volume One: Adventists
Radio Replies Volume One: Salvation Army
Radio Replies Volume One: Witnesses of Jehovah
Radio Replies Volume One: Christian Science

Radio Replies Volume One: Theosophy
Radio Replies Volume One: Spiritualism
Radio Replies Volume One: Catholic Intolerance

Chapter Eight: The Truth of Catholicism

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of the Church
Radio Replies Volume One: The true Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Hierarchy of the Church
Radio Replies Volume One: The Pope
Radio Replies Volume One: Temporal Power

Radio Replies Volume One: Infallibility
Radio Replies Volume One: Unity
Radio Replies Volume One: Holiness
Radio Replies Volume One: Catholicity
Radio Replies Volume One: Apostolicity

Radio Replies Volume One: Indefectibility
Radio Replies Volume One: "Outside the Church no salvation"

Chapter Nine: The Catholic Church and the Bible

Radio Replies Volume One: Not opposed to the Bible
Radio Replies Volume One: The reading of the Bible
Radio Replies Volume One: Protestants and the Bible
Radio Replies Volume One: "Bible Only" a false principle
Radio Replies Volume One: The necessity of Tradition
Radio Replies Volume One: The authority of the Catholic Church

Chapter Ten: The Church and Her Dogmas

Radio Replies Volume One: Dogmatic Truth
Radio Replies Volume One: Development of Dogma
Radio Replies Volume One: Dogma and Reason
Radio Replies Volume One: Rationalism
Radio Replies Volume One: The Holy Trinity

Radio Replies Volume One: Creation
Radio Replies Volume One: Angels
Radio Replies Volume One: Devils
Radio Replies Volume One: Man
Radio Replies Volume One: Sin

Radio Replies Volume One: Christ
Radio Replies Volume One: Mary
Radio Replies Volume One: Grace and salvation
Radio Replies Volume One: The Sacraments
Radio Replies Volume One: Baptism

Radio Replies Volume One: Confirmation
Radio Replies Volume One: Confession
Radio Replies Volume One: Holy Eucharist
Radio Replies Volume One: The Sacrifice of the Mass
Radio Replies Volume One: Holy Communion

Radio Replies Volume One: Priesthood
Radio Replies Volume One: Matrimony
Radio Replies Volume One: Divorce
Radio Replies Volume One: Extreme Unction
Radio Replies Volume One: Judgment

Radio Replies Volume One: The Millenium
Radio Replies Volume One: Hell
Radio Replies Volume One: Purgatory
Radio Replies Volume One: Prayer for the Dead
Radio Replies Volume One: Indulgences

Radio Replies Volume One: Heaven
Radio Replies Volume One: The Resurrection of the Body
Radio Replies Volume One: The General Judgment/The End of the World

Chapter Eleven: The Church in Her Moral Teachings

Radio Replies Volume One: Veracity/Mental Restriction
Radio Replies Volume One: Charity
Radio Replies Volume One: Ecclesiastical Censures/Liberty
Radio Replies Volume One: Index of Prohibited Books
Radio Replies Volume One: Persecution

Radio Replies Volume One: The Inquisition
Radio Replies Volume One: Jesuits/Catholic Intolerance
Radio Replies Volume One: Protestant services
Radio Replies Volume One: Freemasonry

3 posted on 11/04/2009 9:04:16 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

What I really like about Catholicism is that it doesn’t tolerate false doctrines.

What I don’t like about it is that it has quite a few of them itself.

I wish other christian denominations including my own (baptist) would be at least a little more bold in confronting false teachings that make their way into the church through organizations like the Masons.

Freemasonry = Universalism + Secular Humanism.
At least that’s my read on it.


4 posted on 11/04/2009 9:14:58 PM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

The Mason’s actually worship Satan, whether they call him that or not, their religion is one of the recognition (in their own mind) of the supremcy of man, and therefore deny Christ!~ I would pray for anyone require to join such an organization. STRONGLY, and WARN THEM!~ Thanks for posting this..am not Catholic, but am a Christian! Thanks brother.


5 posted on 11/04/2009 9:16:06 PM PST by JSDude1 (www.wethepeopleindiana.org (Tea Party Member-Proud), www.travishankins.com (R- IN 09 2010!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

NOPE, have been one since I was 21. Will be 62 in December.

Know a fair amount about the history of our “differences”.

Most self proclaimed authorities are “lacking” in honesty.

An honest discussion is one thing, but the usual discourse is not.


6 posted on 11/04/2009 9:18:23 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JSDude1
Thanks.

Yeah, Masonry is dangerous business.

7 posted on 11/04/2009 9:19:46 PM PST by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JSDude1

Most Masons don’t realize that or worship satan themselves. But from what I understand, the organization’s manual or whatever it’s called, contains the words, Lucifer, our father, or something to that affect.


8 posted on 11/04/2009 9:27:02 PM PST by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

CNN on congressional masons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC-IpwmwbW4


9 posted on 11/04/2009 9:46:53 PM PST by MurrietaMadman (Luke 23:31 http://www.restoretherepublic.org/?p=2330)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

pretty interesting stuff!


10 posted on 11/04/2009 9:47:24 PM PST by AmericanArchConservative (Armour on, Lances high, Swords out, Bows drawn, Shields front ... Eagles UP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

Most EVERYONE, authority or not, self proclaimed or not is “lacking” in honesty... moreso with self than with others.
And it’s kind of hard to know when we are less than honest with others, when we don’t even know when we are lying to ourselves.


11 posted on 11/04/2009 10:28:29 PM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

It has been a number of months since I entered a discussion on this subject with a similar tone.

Out of that discussion I found a couple of individuals that were knowledgeable to a point, and honest enough that away from the post we had exchanges for a couple of weeks.

A couple were Knights of Columbus and still did not understand where the divide began. Had been told all these horrible things that were simply not true, and after a time we, I think, gained some respect for each other.

We did talk about subjects that were unrelated to this topic also.

I generally resist the impulse to tread this turf. And probably should have tonight.


12 posted on 11/04/2009 11:14:55 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

Hey, I really like your animated gifs on your bio. LMAO


13 posted on 11/04/2009 11:17:02 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

Witch hunts and pogroms on FR?


14 posted on 11/05/2009 3:58:33 AM PST by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
For later.

Free masonry teaches religious indifference, and is not very compatible with Christianity.

15 posted on 11/05/2009 4:08:29 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

>>> I generally resist the impulse to tread this turf. And probably should have tonight.

Never know what you can learn from an argument until you get into it. If conversion of the other side is the only means by which you can measure success or benefit of the argument, then all you get is a fight... which of course is something you are correct in avoiding.

My experience has been that the deeper we go with truth, the more controversial it is going to get... so at some point we are going to have to learn how to deal with the controversy, or we will simply stagnate in our own growth.

I’m more than willing to take an argument as far as it will go until feelings completely overtake reason.


16 posted on 11/05/2009 8:03:50 AM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
>>> Hey, I really like your animated gifs on your bio. LMAO

lol... thanks...

That all started a long time ago with a freeper with the user name LiberalBassTurds. He had a 2d pic of that fish with a peice of poop behind him as a logo. I converted the fish into a 3D animated image, and took it to the next level.

We had so much fun with that eating a bunch of liberals... Those 4 on my page is only a small sample. We did LOADS of them... it was a real hoot.

I think one of my own favorites was the one I did on Barbara Streisand:


17 posted on 11/05/2009 8:13:11 AM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

Love it, only the nose escapes.

TNX


18 posted on 11/05/2009 8:58:41 AM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

I respect an honest discussion.

Unfortunately this “difference of opinion” is never likely to be overcome. It is based in a now foggy past that neither side any longer remembers accurately (none alive partook in the conflict and atrocities). But they none the less did take place. Although many deny them now.

Treachery has a way of cementing these things.

I have spent 40 years on the other side of the trench. And have spent a fair amount of time studying what is written about the events. Have many good Knights of Columbus friends who I have great respect for. And I have had open frank discussion of this with some of them, and we parted still as good friends. The top official in our state is a member of my lodge, and I am the secretary for that lodge. (member since my Junior year in College- 1969)

My Great Grandfather missed being a charter member by 2 weeks. We had our 100th anniversary a little over a year ago. My father and I are both actively involved.

TF


19 posted on 11/05/2009 9:16:18 AM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I guess i’m not quite sure what your position is on the matter, other than it sounds like you defend the craft against christian views which oppose it.

As for events/KoC, i’m not familiar with them.
I tend to focus on what literature is promoted as the defining documents/teachings of an organization.
The further we get away from the source, the muddier the water gets.


20 posted on 11/05/2009 10:51:40 AM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

My perspective is that our organization has been force for good since it’s inception. It is not at all clear when that actually was, public in 1717, but was active much before that.

There is a big difference between Grand Orient (in Europe) and Ancient Free varieties in the U.S. and England.

Your side denies many of the atrocities that happened early on. It also generally makes apologies for those who defend Monarchies as an acceptable form of government.

Yes, our organization has left it’s impression on this nation. You can see it in the opening and closing of the sessions of Congress, hear it in oaths of office for public officials.

I know of no other organization that is as careful about preserving truthfulness amoung it’s members.

And we admit NO athesists. None, Zero. Never have and never will.

We have protected persecuted groups on several continents. Fact.

In Texas the traditions are especially strong. Of the “old 300” of Austins colonists the number was significant. We are an old man’s organization today, but it has not always been that way.

I apologize to no man for my membership.


21 posted on 11/05/2009 12:10:43 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

>>> I apologize to no man for my membership.

I certainly hope that no-one expects you to.

Would the world be a better place without this or any other organization like it? surely not.

But... Is it the man that defines the organization, or the organization which defines the man? Tricky question? maybe... but then again, maybe the question itself is faulty.

I look at it this way... What organization for the common good or evil for that matter will ever face the judgment seat of Christ? Where is the heart and soul of any organization that will be held responsible for the good or evil that the organization stood for or against?

The unification of a large number of peoples with a common goal will inevitably lead to a diverse range of individual beliefs within the group which must eventually face either resolution or compromise when the beliefs of the group are being defined for public record. The question is, at what point does the individual choose to sacrifice or compromise his/her beliefs to remain part of the group, and at what point do they conclude that separation from the group is required in order to remain true to their individual principles? Clearly, responsibility rests with the individual when making these types of choices. No one will be able to say “Lord... the organization is at fault for my actions and beliefs”. Conversely true, nobody will be able to say “Lord... my membership in this organization which did great things should count for me in sharing in it’s rewards” (because again... the organization itself is not judged in the hereafter).

Jesus said that we are either For Him, or against Him.
When He said this, he wasn’t talking to any group or organization. He was talking to individuals. We are individually responsible for making that determination as to whether an organization is For Christ or against Him... and it is our affiliations and memberships which do carry strong influence which will either lead people to Christ, or away from Him.

At the real heart of the matter though is this question...

Assuming for a moment that the Masonic organization is FOR Christ (insert reason), Does that righteousness automatically transmit itself from the organization to it’s members? Let’s say that it does (for argument sake)... How are the good deeds or righteousness of the individual going to affect whether or not he/she will go to heaven or hell?
What reward is there in Hell?... What punishment is there in Heaven? Is it more important for us eternally that we did the right and good thing on earth? Or is it more important that we restore our relationship with God first, and let the good works come as a matter of His leading?

In other words, is the individual saved by Grace or by Works?

The Christian teaching is that we are saved by Grace.
The world teaching is that we are saved by works.

Individually, we are responsible first for answering that question for ourselves. We are then held responsible for determining what parts of our lives support our convictions and what parts of our lives oppose them... and respond accordingly.

Is it the good deed we do? or is it what the good deed leads to which is more important?


22 posted on 11/05/2009 1:37:13 PM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

“Assuming for a moment that the Masonic organization is FOR Christ (insert reason)”

Open prayers in Christ’s name are always said, beginning & ending. Contrary to what some of you have stated and been taught (in error).

Exclusivity of “Sect” is not. And yes, each of us must answer for his own actions. We have no differences along these lines.

But I see no need to answer to anyone but God and Christ. I worship no “human” in any capacity. Pope, Prince, King other than Christ.

Christianity is not about Compulsion, but Free Will. Some “sects” do not seem to understand that.

And yes, there are lodges where Jews, Muslims, and other monotheistic religion believers attend. In the U.S. I have never met a Muslim Mason. There are lodges that I am familiar with in Wichita KS that are almost totally Jewish. I have no problem with that. The organization is not a religion, but an association of men.


23 posted on 11/05/2009 2:26:00 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

>>> The organization is not a religion, but an association of men.

An organization does not have to be a religion in order to teach religious principles.

Frankly, i doubt we can find any organization that does not teach religion in some form or fashion.

My point was that the more diverse the beliefs within an organization, the farther you get from the truth AS an organization. That goes for any group... not just masons.
And if Jesus does not occupy the center of ALL things which guide it, error cannot help but follow.

It is certainly a good thing that the name of Jesus is spoken as you say... But it is my point that Jesus doesn’t like sharing the stage. I think that is the primary christian argument against the masonic lodge.

Oh.. and of course there’s that Grace vs Works thing.

But please keep in mind that it is not you and your beliefs that I examine. It is the teachings that are put forth by the organization... such as the oaths of the first 3 degrees if we were to parse them word for word.

My father is a 32nd degree mason. He is also a very loyal and loving christian. I don’t question his salvation status at all, even though I seriously question this organization that he so deeply loves as well.


24 posted on 11/05/2009 10:08:28 PM PST by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson