concerns about freemasonry

[kinja]

The Church has been wrong in the past when it has acted beyond the guidance provided by the Holy Spirit. Example, the universe revolves around the earth. I don’t know that the clergy always have our best interests at heart, just look at the sex abuse scandal. Many high ranking Church officials, Cardinal Rigali, Cardinal Law, Cardinal Mahoney, to list a few, put their careers, the Church’s image, and the Church’s assets ahead of protecting people. The Church hierarchy has marginalized those that put people first and have tried to help victims.

I received the Holy Spirit at Conformation, I don’t think you can argue that the Holy Spirit effects people differently.

No the Church has not been wrong in matters of faith and morals. This is the point. The doctrine of the Church is preserved. YOu will never find “The Earth is flat” in any Catholic document on these two topics because our belief in astronomy is not a matter of faith or morals nor is it a doctrine or dogma.

About the sex scandals: the Church’s teachings are true regarding dogma and doctrine, the constituents of the church (you, me and the priests and popes) have and will sin. We are all born in sin and shaped in iniquity yes? Having said that priests and bishops do wrong things and succumb to temptations sometimes even because they are human just like you and I. The Church does not and has not pronounced any of these acts as right or good because the guilty perpetrators have acted outside the beliefs and values of the Church.

That is like saying that if my father tells me that smoking is bad for me and I see him smoking then that automatically means that smoking must not be bad. Because some priests fall this has nothing to do with the solid teachings of our Church. The early church had many a leader who fell at some point or the other. Priests are not super human so why do you expect them to live up to the teachings of the Church perfectly at all times? Do you?

 

[kinja]

Jesus said YOU not you and everyone that comes after you. Jesus didn’t say the anyone would inherit the power he gave to Peter. Jesus didn’t give that authority to the other Apostles (the bishops). I don’t think you can claim the Church hierarchy has limitless authority based upon “what you bound on earth is bound in heaven and what you loose on earth is loose in heaven”.

So what you are saying is that Jesus meant for his Church to die and be without a leader after Peter died? As a Catholic you should know that every pronouncement Jesus gave to His apostles was lasting until His second coming. As far as I know His second coming has not happened as yet. Do you know somehting we do not?

He also said that His church will not be overcome and the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church. The only church that has lasted from Christ’s institution to now is Catholicism which has maintained and preserved His inerrant Word as He said it would. Who are you to question that covenant? You say you are a Catholic but the your fruits are telling a different story.

 

[kinja]

No they don’t. Ask them. They just have to believe in a Higher BEING, the devil can be a higher being for people. A FALSE god can be a higher being.

But lets go to what you just said, can the devil be their god then? Do they define WHO you can and cannot worship? You seem to be in contradiction of yourself really.

Youl said its not a Relgion but you HAVE to believe in God. WHY if its not a religion?

In many faiths you are your own god. Look at the LDS they feel the can become gods etc.

It’s also no “secret” that some Freemasonic rituals have their roots in Egyptian mythology and religious practices. If it is just a big boys fraternity to make men better men, why the need for all the symbols and rituals, oaths and secrecy? If it’s not a religion then it should not have all the trappings of one and atheists should be welcome there as well yes?

 

[rinnie]

You have much to learn about the Catholic Faith. You should spend more time on that and less on how to defend Freemasonry.

My Dad has been gone for 3 years. But when you wrote this its like you quoted him word for word.

 

[rinnie]

It’s also no “secret” that some Freemasonic rituals have their roots in Egyptian mythology and religious practices. If it is just a big boys fraternity to make men better men, why the need for all the symbols and rituals, oaths and secrecy? If it’s not a religion then it should not have all the trappings of one and atheists should be welcome there as well yes?

See I am like you, I never heard it said you must believe in GOD. In the Knights you must state that you believe in the Trinity. Our God is the F,S HS. that is clear.

In the masons I have always heard you just must believe in a higher being. I could be wrong. but I don’t think I am.

 

[rinnie]

Jesus said YOU not you and everyone that comes after you. Jesus didn’t say the anyone would inherit the power he gave to Peter. Jesus didn’t give that authority to the other Apostles (the bishops). I don’t think you can claim the Church hierarchy has limitless authority based upon “what you bound on earth is bound in heaven and what you loose on earth is loose in heaven”.

Oh really so then Jesus lied to us then or what. When he said I am with you ALWAYS until the end of age. How do you explain that then?

 

[EzraJacob]

Jesus said YOU not you and everyone that comes after you. Jesus didn’t say the anyone would inherit the power he gave to Peter. Jesus didn’t give that authority to the other Apostles (the bishops). I don’t think you can claim the Church hierarchy has limitless authority based upon “what you bound on earth is bound in heaven and what you loose on earth is loose in heaven”.

How are you Catholic when you do not believe on of the central beliefs on the Catholic Faith?

The argument here that you used, is the same Orthodox and Protestants use against the Church.

 

[Brian_H]

No they don’t. Ask them. They just have to believe in a Higher BEING, the devil can be a higher being for people. A FALSE god can be a higher being.

But lets go to what you just said, can the devil be their god then? Do they define WHO you can and cannot worship? You seem to be in contradiction of yourself really.

Youl said its not a Relgion but you HAVE to believe in God. WHY if its not a religion?

In many faiths you are your own god. Look at the LDS they feel the can become gods etc.

I’ve looked at a blue lodge petition, the question asked of a candidate is “do you believe in God?”, not do you believe in a higher being. A muslim doesn’t think Jesus is God, Christians disagree with Muslims, Freemasons work from the common ground of a belief in God and put their differences beyond that aside to try and make the world a better place. For example, in America, they put their differences aside and spend approx. $500 million a year providing medical care to children and they ask nothing in return. The reason they must believe in God is because an oath to God would have no significance for an atheist, an atheist would feel free to disregard such an oath. 12 step programs encourage a belief in a higher power to fight addictions, should Catholics be banned from 12 step programs because they foster religious indifference and present a naturalistic religion by not promoting Catholicism over other faiths, some of which don’t accept that Jesus was the son of God? 12 step programs claim they aren’t a religion, are you suggesting that 12 step programs are a religion and that Catholics shouldn’t be involved with any of them? You have to believe in God to be a Boy Scout also, atheists can’t be in scouts, that doesn’t make Boy Scouts a religion either.

 

[Brian_H]

Oh really so then Jesus lied to us then or what. When he said I am with you ALWAYS until the end of age. How do you explain that then?

Jesus was not a liar. Let me point out that the great Fathers of the Church saw no connection between the verse which Jesus addressed to Peter and the Bishops of Rome. Not one of them applies “Thou art Peter” to anyone but Peter. One after another they analyze it: Cyprian, Origen, Cyril, Hilary, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine. They’re not exactly Protestants. Not one of them calls the Bishop of Rome a Rock or applies to him specifically the promise of the keys. All the Councils of the Church from Nicea in the fourth century to Constance in the 15th agree that Christ himself is the only foundation of the church, that is, a rock on which the church rests. Perhaps this is why not one of the Fathers speaks of a transference of power from Peter to those who succeed him; not one speaks, as church documents do today, of an “inheritance”. There’s no hint of an abiding Petrine office. Insofar as the Fathers speak of an office, the reference is to the episcopate it in general. All bishops are successors to all the apostles. The Apostles were all flawed humans just like you and I.

 

[Brian_H]

How are you Catholic when you do not believe on of the central beliefs on the Catholic Faith?

The argument here that you used, is the same Orthodox and Protestants use against the Church.

I think I answer this in my last post. Maybe St. Augustine was Orthodox or Protestant if you apply your criteria to him.

 

[Brian_H]

It’s also no “secret” that some Freemasonic rituals have their roots in Egyptian mythology and religious practices. If it is just a big boys fraternity to make men better men, why the need for all the symbols and rituals, oaths and secrecy? If it’s not a religion then it should not have all the trappings of one and atheists should be welcome there as well yes?

I disagree based on what I have seen. The allegories taught in the degrees are based upon the building of Solomon’s Temple and the symbolism is derived from Solomon’s Temple and the Ark of the Covenant. The allegories and symbols teach lessons on striving to be a better person and make the world a better place. Atheists aren’t welcome because an oath to God would not deter an atheist.

 

[Brian_H]

No the Church has not been wrong in matters of faith and morals. This is the point. The doctrine of the Church is preserved. YOu will never find “The Earth is flat” in any Catholic document on these two topics because our belief in astronomy is not a matter of faith or morals nor is it a doctrine or dogma.

About the sex scandals: the Church’s teachings are true regarding dogma and doctrine, the constituents of the church (you, me and the priests and popes) have and will sin. We are all born in sin and shaped in iniquity yes? Having said that priests and bishops do wrong things and succumb to temptations sometimes even because they are human just like you and I. The Church does not and has not pronounced any of these acts as right or good because the guilty perpetrators have acted outside the beliefs and values of the Church.

That is like saying that if my father tells me that smoking is bad for me and I see him smoking then that automatically means that smoking must not be bad. Because some priests fall this has nothing to do with the solid teachings of our Church. The early church had many a leader who fell at some point or the other. Priests are not super human so why do you expect them to live up to the teachings of the Church perfectly at all times? Do you?

I pointed out the sex abuse scandal only to show that Church leaders do not always have our best interests at heart.

In response to your claim that the Church has never been wrong about morals, I’m not so sure. Just as an example, Pope Paul VI released Humanae Vitae in 1968. There has been a great deal of dissent from theologians and bishops over that encyclia ever since. The majority of American Catholics disregard the Church’s teaching on birth control. The more orthodox position would be that Pope Paul VI was right, but there are certainly a lot of people that disagree. Two other examples, that the printing press and the smallpox vaccine were evil, the Church no longer endorses either of these moral declarations.

 

[jam070406]

I’ve looked at a blue lodge petition, the question asked of a candidate is “do you believe in God?”, not do you believe in a higher being. A muslim doesn’t think Jesus is God, Christians disagree with Muslims, Freemasons work from the common ground of a belief in God and put their differences beyond that aside to try and make the world a better place. For example, in America, they put their differences aside and spend approx. $500 million a year providing medical care to children and they ask nothing in return. The reason they must believe in God is because an oath to God would have no significance for an atheist, an atheist would feel free to disregard such an oath. 12 step programs encourage a belief in a higher power to fight addictions, should Catholics be banned from 12 step programs because they foster religious indifference and present a naturalistic religion by not promoting Catholicism over other faiths, some of which don’t accept that Jesus was the son of God? 12 step programs claim they aren’t a religion, are you suggesting that 12 step programs are a religion and that Catholics shouldn’t be involved with any of them? You have to believe in God to be a Boy Scout also, atheists can’t be in scouts, that doesn’t make Boy Scouts a religion either.

Do the boy scouts or 12 step programs force you to swear an oath that binds you to have your throat cut, tongue torn out, vitals or bowels removed and body burned if you betray said oath?
Sorry, this is not from the one true God. In fact Jesus commanded NOT to take oaths like this.

 

[EzraJacob]

I think I answer this in my last post. Maybe St. Augustine was Orthodox or Protestant if you apply your criteria to him.

On this website, St. Augustine wrote.

AUG; I have said in a certain place of the Apostle Peter, that it was on him, as on a rock, that the Church was built. But I know that since that I have often explained these words of the Lord, you are Peter, and on this rock will I build my Church, as meaning upon Him whom Peter had confessed in the words, You are Christ, the Son of the living God; and so that Peter, taking his name from this rock, would represent the Church, which is built upon this rock. For it is not said to him, you art the rock, but, you are Peter. But the rock was Christ, whom because Simon thus confessed, as the whole Church confesses Him, he was named Peter. Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions seems to him the more probable.

Also

CYRIL; According to this promise of the Lord, the Apostolic Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud, above all Heads and Bishops, and Primates of Churches and people, with its own Pontiffs, with most abundant faith, and the authority of Peter. And while other Churches have to blush for the error of some of their members, this reigns alone immovably established, enforcing silence, and stopping the mouths of all heretics; and we, not drunken with the wine of pride, confess together with it the type of truth, and of the holy apostolic tradition.

catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Matthew16.php

And according to Haydock website

Thou art Peter;[2] and upon this (i.e. upon thee, according to the literal and general exposition of the ancient Fathers) I will build my church. It is true St. Augustine, in one or two places, thus expounds these words, and upon this rock, (i.e. upon myself or upon this rock, which Peter hath confessed: yet he owns that he had also given the other interpretation, by which Peter himself was the rock. Some Fathers have also expounded it, upon the faith, which Peter confessed; but then they take not faith, as separated from the person of Peter, but on Peter, as holding the true faith. No one questions but that Christ himself is the great foundation-stone, the chief corner-stone, as St. Paul tells the Ephesians; (Chap. ii, ver. 20.) but it is also certain, that all the apostles may be called foundation-stones of the Church, as represented Apocalypse xxi. 14. In the mean time, St. Peter (called therefore Cephas, a rock) was the first and chief foundation-stone among the apostles, on whom Christ promised to build his Church. (Witham)

No where have I seen St. Augustine declare a disbelief in the Papal Authority.

haydock1859.tripod.com/id34.html

Now I have given what my resources claim the early fathers wrote. If you disagree, then prove these sources wrong

 

[Brian_H]

Do the boy scouts or 12 step programs force you to swear an oath that binds you to have your throat cut, tongue torn out, vitals or bowels removed and body burned if you betray said oath?
Sorry, this is not from the one true God. In fact Jesus commanded NOT to take oaths like this.

Matthew Chapter 5: Jesus said “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." If you take this verse literally, then no oath should ever be taken. Jesus was teaching that oaths shouldn’t be made to establish your honesty. Is there another verse you are referring to? If so, please point it out, this is the verse I thought you were referring to, but I could be wrong.

The Boy Scouts do take an Oath. Boy Scout Oath: On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.

The Masonic oaths have existed for hundreds of years and oaths of that kind were very common when they were developed. As a side note, I hope you have never said “cross my heart and hope to die” or “I swear on my mother’s grave”, because by your reasoning Jesus commanded that those type of oaths not be taken either.

 

[jam070406]

Matthew Chapter 5: Jesus said “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." If you take this verse literally, then no oath should ever be taken. Jesus was teaching that oaths shouldn’t be made to establish your honesty. Is there another verse you are referring to? If so, please point it out, this is the verse I thought you were referring to, but I could be wrong.

The Boy Scouts do take an Oath. Boy Scout Oath: On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.

The Masonic oaths have existed for hundreds of years and oaths of that kind were very common when they were developed. As a side note, I hope you have never said “cross my heart and hope to die” or “I swear on my mother’s grave”, because by your reasoning Jesus commanded that those type of oaths not be taken either.

So you admit that the Lodge makes one take an oath that binds them to the consequences of being dismembered if broken?

 

[Brian_H]

On this website, St. Augustine wrote.

Also

catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Matthew16.php

And according to Haydock website

No where have I seen St. Augustine declare a disbelief in the Papal Authority.

haydock1859.tripod.com/id34.html

Now I have given what my resources claim the early fathers wrote. If you disagree, then prove these sources wrong

Fr. Haydock lived in the late 18th and early 19th century, I believe that alone establishes he is not a Church Father.

I don’t think what you have supplied from St. Augustine supports your argument. Would you explain why you think what you’ve posted supports your argument? I’m not trying to be difficult, I’m just not sure that what you’ve quoted supports what you are claiming it does.

I would also point out that the New Testament makes it plain that Peter himself made tremendous errors both before and after Jesus died. When, for instance, Jesus insisted that he had to go up to Jerusalem where he would be crucified, Peter protested so much that Jesus called him a “satan” in his path. After Jesus’ resurrection, Peter made an equally bad blunder. “Heresy” is not too bad a word for it. Gratian, a canon lawyer, said in 1150: “Peter compelled the gentiles to live as Jews and to depart from gospel truths”.

 

[Brian_H]

So you admit that the Lodge makes one take an oath that binds them to the consequences of being dismembered if broken?

Why don’t you respond to what I posted instead of dodging questions?

 

[jam070406]

Why don’t you respond to what I posted instead of dodging questions?

Because your question was a strawman. Unless there is a secret oath to some grand architect, in rehab or scouts, that allows for one to be dismembered if broken.
Which would be a violation of the True God’s law, which would mean it is forbid.
Swearing such an oath would not be approved by God, therefore it doesn’t come from the Holy Spirit but from the enemy.

 

[At_Trent]

Why don’t you respond to what I posted instead of dodging questions?

you are the one who sidesteps