Posted on 03/10/2012 1:02:27 PM PST by Teófilo
Brethren, Peace be with you.
I want to add these to your reading list: a six-part interview of a former Freemason on why Catholics can’t become such published serially in the Colorado Catholic Herald:
• Why Catholics Cannot Be Masons, Part 1
• Why Catholics Cannot Be Masons, Pt. 2
• Why Catholics Cannot Be Masons, Pt. 3
• Why Catholics Cannot Be Masons, Pt. 4
- Purchase Why Catholics Cannot Be Masons from Amazon.com
That makes no sense, old man.
carried US Mail in Goshen NY.******* Brings back a memory of my old grandma on my fathers side...the closest she ever came to swearing was saying......Land of Goshen......Goshen was an area in the Old Testament.........
I haven't asked you to stop posting what you feel is germane for discussion. I'll even happily concede, without being asked, that generally what you posted _is_ germane for discussion.
What disturbs me is _how_ you posted it, or, to be more precise, the underlying assumptions of your post, as you posted it. And, apparently, I am not the only one that reacted way.
Pax tecum.
Or, for the rest of you who have taken offense at my post, Pax vobiscum.
I am a Catholic and a Mason, 32nd degree. Never heard “you can’t be. Mason.”
question — if the higher degrees are wrong, doesn’t it mean that participating in the lower degrees actually perpetuates or promotes the higher degrees?
You are absolutely correct that Church teaching forbids it. I’m a 3rd degree Knight just for the record. The statement that posted which is dated 1981 was reaffirmed two years in a statement from The Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (then headed by our current Pope). It was reaffirmed for the specific reason that relatively new Code of Cannon Law did not discuss it. The fact that priests or laity are ignorant of it (or ignore it) is no excuse.
Another point...never completely rely on a local priest for official Church teaching. There is a saying “Trust...but verify”. In this age of the Internet, it is easy enough to go to the source.
They were decimated by secular princes -- mostly the French King (who was the most powerful at that time and wanted the Templar's money...
So, yes, the Knights Templar were an intrinsic part of the theocracy
Sorry for the horrendous grammar of my first post. I should have reread it. Anyway, the basic point still stands. Official doctrine is that Masonic-membership is not allowed at any level. The sad fact that there are ignorant or indifferent members of the Holy Orders saying that it’s ok speaks volumes about the schismatic nature of our beloved Church.
The betrayal of the Knights Templar was one of the most disgraceful things in the history of our Church’s leadership. It is a very sad story.
Non sequitor. Many Masons never go further than the 3rd degree or what they call the blue lodge.
A few things I never got about the masons, and I think US masonry is probably a very fine group of men who do a lot of good. I don’t buy any of that illuminaty/babylon mystery cult stuff, I see that garbage thrown at Catholics as well.
I think it is pretty weird that a group that has faith as a requirement then bans any discussion about it in the lodge, at least to my understanding. I see why they ban discussion of religion, to prevent hard feelings so they can get on with fellowship and doing good works together. But I just find it weird they have that requirement in the first place, if they then don’t let anyone talk about it.
Forget about the reasons why the Church teaches that Catholics shouldn’t join for a second. Why would an organization that has faith as a requirement want anyone to join whose faith teaches that they specifically shouldn’t join them? That if they join, they are barred from one of the central tenets of the faith? I mean, that has always seemed to me to be very self defeating, considering faith is a requirement in the first place, and the Masons must value some aspect of men with faith or they wouldn’t have it as a requirement.
I think this might only come up with those faiths that specifically say their members shouldn’t join and also have a central authority that actually has the power to speak for all of its members. Is there any other group that says you can’t be a mason, and also has central authority that speaks for all members? What about the Orthodox Churches or at least individual bishops?
Freegards
Apropos of absolutely nothing, a brand new season of “Ancient Aliens” starts soon.
:)
Thank You!!
I have been a Knight of Columbus since 1964 and a Fourth Degree member since 1965.
Jack Hydrazine:
Both the Masonic Order and the Knights of Columbus are fraternal organizations. Both are charitable organizations. Both have rituals and degrees.
Despite these superficial similarities, the Knights of Columbus are most certainly NOT a Mason-like organization. The Knights of Columbus is a strictly Catholic organization. Therefore, it recognizes the Holy Trinity of God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit, as the one true God. No deists or Buddhists or Hindus or Jewish folks or even Christians who are not Catholics although I am a bit confused lately as to Eastern Orthodox Christians who may be eligible without my understanding of the status between the Vatican and Eastern Orthodoxy in very recent times. I suspect that Eastern Orthodox Christians may not be entirely comfortable with us and vice versa for the reasons expressed in the mutual anathemas exchanged about a thousand years ago which may have been rescinded mutually without resolving the issues of the nature of the papacy and of the filioque question.
The Knights of Columbus is organized as a Catholic organization of men who have attained the age of 18 and have taken at least the 1st Degree (charity) and preferably but not necessarily the 2nd Degree (unity), and the 3rd Degree (fraternity). The 4th Degree which is entirely optional is patriotism, regarding one's loyalty to one's nation of origin or residence (United States, Canada, Mexico, Phillipines or Poland at the present time).
I don't know if Masons are, as an organization, devoted to any supranational world order (old or new). It has been my impression that the Masonic Order is quite favorable to religious liberty. I know that the Knights of Columbus will gladly settle for governments that reflect the principles of the Old and New Testaments and will insist upon religious liberty for the Catholic Church and its members and, in so doing, upon religious liberty for others as envisioned by the Founding Fathers of the USA. The K of C, of course, does NOT favor abortion or homosexual "marriage" or regard either as a matter of religious liberty even if practitioners of either pose as having a "religion" reflecting such views either for respectability and acceptance of such practices by society or for mere tax exemptions.
The Knights of Columbus regard any obligations to our order as strictly subordinate to our obligations as Catholics, as citizens, as husbands, as fathers. The Knights of Columbus regard as nonbinding any membership obligations that actually conflict with our individual obligations as Catholics, as citizens, as husbands, or as fathers.
The Knights of Columbus do not and never have require(d) the taking of any oaths that involve(d) sin such as calling for oneself to be murdered or mutilated for revealing secrets or otherwise.
Nor have he Knights of Columbus any degree that symbolizes sin such as the 30th Degree of the Masons in which candidates plunge knives into a mock papal tiara symbolizing Pope Pius III whom the Masons regard as somehow improperly responsible for the death by burning at the stake of Masonic Grand Master Jacques de Molay (3/18/1314) together with three of his major colleagues at a scaffold erected in front of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.
I don't want to paint an overly one-sided picture in this comparison. The Masonic Order in the United States has been a magnificent source of works of charity. St. Jude's Hospital is one notable example. Another is the care displayed for many elderly and infirm folks who are provided with housing and medical care. 32nd Degree Masons (aka Shriners) are well known for entertaining children by donning clown costumes and performing before them and also by raising impressive amounts of funding for children's charities. Just as some Knights of Columbus have their faults, so it is also true that some of the finest human beings I know belong to Masonic Lodges. As much charity as the Knights of Columbus may engage in, we may only aspire at this stage to someday compete with the Masons.
That having been said, the Masonic concept of a "Grand Architect of the Universe" is not the equivalent of the one true triune God. If I understand it correctly, the GAOTU is essentially a deist concept for the Masonic organization and the Masons are willing to enroll anyone who recognizes a Supreme Being of whatever sort without modifying the specific beliefs of such candidates. In this manner, the Lodge is religiously "indifferent" except as to requiring belief in the existence of a Supreme Being (GAOTU). This is not a concept that Catholics are ever likely to find acceptable.
Catholic men have been enticed into the Masonic Order with reassurances by that order or its representatives that its principles are compatible with the Catholic as well as other faiths, that the Masons are glad to accept Catholics but only the Church stands in the way or that the Church no longer bans membership in the Masonic Order. Each of these propositions is wrong. The oaths of the Masonic Order are simply incompatible with Catholicism.
I believe that membership in the Masonic Order is also incompatible with membership in various other Christian churches: Eastern Orthodox Christian Churches, Missouri Synod Lutherans, Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, and very possibly others. I have enough trying to understand my own faith without trying to understand the others fully and I will gladly defer to any contrary opinion by practitioners of other faiths.
I would also note that the Knights of Columbus, Masonic Lodges and B'Nai Brith organizations have been known to join together in joint charitable activity compatible with all three in something called Brotherhood in Action. No one compromises their respective principles and everyone works together for good charitable causes. This exists in Connecticut where I lived most of my life but I have not seen it in Northwestern Illinois where I now live. Each of these groups has played an important role in their respective communities and there ought not be enmity among them.
Read your history books.
Members or B’nai Brith will absolutely say the same that they are NOT a Masonic-like organization.
Why do you think B’nai Brith was started? Because it clashed with Jewish theology and practices. Who started it? Jews who had been members of Freemasonry. They modeled their organization on Masonic structure not necessarily the teachings.
Father Michael J. McGivney, who started KoC in 1882, wanted to give Catholics an alternative fraternal, Freemasonry-like organization since Catholics were excluded from organizations that provided social services or barred from many popular fraternal organizations like the Freemasons. I don’t know if Father McGivney was ever a Freemason but he somehow obtained information about inside, basic workings of Masons that he used to model KoC on sans the disagreeable aspects.
What I am saying is that both are Mason-like in structure and basic operations and social support but those things which are in conflict with Judaism and Catholicism have been excised.
The creation of these two fraternal organizations is similar to people starting new churches or denominations are NOT like them but you look at the basics and you find similarities. Catholic churches and Protestant churches are both churches but they change the names, change the practices up a bit, change the clothing for the leadership, vocabulary, rituals, regalia, etc., etc.
There are many fraternal organizations but they each have their own distinct way of doing business. All of them in one way or another model themselves on Freemasons.
Look at Mormonism. Joseph Smith was a Mason and stole a bunch of material from them and used it to start his Mormon church with. From everything I know about them I would consider them a fraternal organization with a basic Masonic structure, not just a church. But will Mormons say that they are NOT Mason-like at all! LOL!
The king of France -- Philip IV wanted the Templar's money. Philip pushed his captive Popes (just as Henry 8 etc. could push their captive Archbishops) to comply to his wishes. The Pope's didn't "team up" rather were coerced by a powerful king who had already moved them out of Rome to under his thumb in Avignon.
The king of France -- Philip IV wanted the Templar's money. Philip pushed his captive Popes (just as Henry 8 etc. could push their captive Archbishops) to comply to his wishes. The Pope's didn't "team up" rather were coerced by a powerful king who had already moved them out of Rome to under his thumb in Avignon.
Furthermore, even after this Pope John XXII, the successor to the above Clement V was the one who allowed the reconstitution of the Templars (btw, the Templars STILL exist as a Catholic order) as the Order of Christ in Portugal.
The freemasons aren't derived from them, any more than whoever believes this would believe Dan Brown that Jesus got married and had kids...
It's like being part of say Scientologists -- the first steps are self-help etc. but the higher ones are strange. So, saying "oh, I just do the lower levels" doesn't quite cut it imho
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.