Do you think Free Masonry is dangerous to the church?

[seabird3579]

paramedicgirl:

I know a doctor who grew up in a Freemason family in South Africa. According to him, at the very highest levels of the Freemasons, there is no out. Once you know their secrets, the only way out is death. He says that only the very highest levels are privy to that kind of information, and that the other levels don’t have a full understanding of the Freemason agenda, so aren’t aware of how dangerous an organization it can be.

Deception seems to be the name of the game with these “secret” societies…

To further quote the book I cited above, it talks about the “initiation” process on page 95:

…“In the first degrees of initiation, the initiates are told one thing; later, they are told something else; this process is called entering into a deeper understanding in the mysteries. It is during the introduction to these deeper understandings that the initiates are scrutinized to see just how much they will take in without questioning the source from which it comes.
Advancing toward the center of any one of these societies proceeds in this fashion. The candidate for initiation into the deeper mysteries of a particular society will be carefully observed as more and more of the ultimate purpose of the organization is revealed. At the first sign of shock, dismay or revulsion, that particular candidate will have reached as far into the society as he or she will ever go. This particular tactic of these groups is what has allowed them to recruit, train, and develop the determined, ruthless and dedicated members who can be found at their core.
With that in mind, it is a given that the overwhelming majority of people who undergo initiation into one of these secret societies remain forever within the confines of the outermost rings of knowledge and influence.”

So to conclude it states,

…“It must be remembered that these groups are wholly dependent on manpower, as the need for adequate leadership is constant. Thus those who become deeply involved in the secret sects can advance rapidly, particularly if they show the ruthlessness which is a mark of leadership within these groups.”

 

[Gelassenheit]

mosher:

His irregularity as a a priest begs to differ.

A non-answer.

First, you make a personal attack on Fr Martin, calling him paranoid, and then, when called on the fact that “paranoids” cannot be successful exorcists, you retreat behind a more vague personal attack, as though you perhaps want to insinuate something improper with respect to the late Fr Martin without actually having to substantiate it. That’s an easy game to play, but it’s only a game.

Fr Martin’s comments on freemasonry echo those of the Popes cited by the OP (as well as additional Popes). Were these Popes also “paranoid” or “irregular” (whatever that is supposed to mean) in your opinion?

 

[PJR]

Does anyone here have some links to info on Fr. Martin? I would like to read further on that, it sounds interesting and I had not heard of his position on Masons.

I agree that some of the claims against Freemasonry may be sensational, but I think there is enough evidence historically to validate most of those made here. I too wonder why someone claiming to be Catholic would be so defensive about these claims.

I find most of what Masons adhere to, even in the lower levels of “fraternal” beer buddies, to be very frightening. The ones I know are definitely anti-Catholic, some are ex-Catholics and I think were attracted to Masonry specifically because they had lots of baggage and an axe to grind and what better way to poo-poo organized religion than to swear an oath against it.

The links to all the Da Vinci Code stuff is very interesting too. I had someone ask me why the claims made in the book and the movie that Jesus was married with children was so damaging to Christianity. I was shocked!! She is a practicing Catholic. There will be so many people willing to believe the claims in this so called fiction and won’t even know why it is evil.

I guess that is why Catholics get lured into Freemasonry. They just think it’s a fun thing to do, nice little club, silly little rituals. What’s the big deal?

 

[Gelassenheit]

PJR:

Does anyone here have some links to info on Fr. Martin? I would like to read further on that, it sounds interesting and I had not heard of his position on Masons.

Fr Martin did a series of interviews with Bernard Janzen , all of which are available on audio cassettes, and some of which are now available in book form. None of them are specifically about the Masons per se, but in them he sometimes refers to the Masons when explaining world events or problems facing the Church.

 

[Jake1]

iThe free mason whole objective is to destroy all governments and all religious faiths especially catholics from within. This means that thet are to infultrait all aspet of religion and governments and work to destroy it. There are some cardnials in the vatican who are known to be free masons. all of our presidents from washington to grorge w bush were are still is a free mason. read behind the lodge door. The holy father knows about those cardnials who are free masons but they have been warned not to do anything that could possibly add more scandal to the church. if you do researc and also read hope of the wicked by ted flynn you come to see and believe what i have just told you. in the book hope of the wicke you see how they are all on the same page with the new world order. europe has already made the euro the currency of their continent. most all of the sherriffs in the usa all judges and most of all lawyers are free masons. Most free mason once they get to the third degree which is known as a master mason don’t go any farther because they think that is all they really need to know. But the way the masons are arranged , the firs degree does not know what the second degree is abut and the second does not know what the third is and so on. it is not until a man get higher involved that they realize what they have gotten into and feel trapped, that they just remain. The shriners and the shriners circus adn hospitals are free masons. THere are some requirements to becoming a free mason the first is you must believe in God. That is a trick statement. even the devil belives that God exsist. IF they were God fearing the question would be , do you worship God? the second is that you have to be white to be a free mason. and he cannot be handi capped in any way. most all kkk members belong to the ferternal order of masons. that is why david duke was an active member of the kkk. The blacks and other races have their own version of free masons. A priest friend of mine who os now deciesed shared with me much of ths info. He went into the seminary at the age of 59 years old and became a priest at the age of 65. While he was in seminary he came accross the free mason bible and all their books that they need to study from to become a free mason and he bought them all and read each and every one. I only wish that he would have passed them on to me. but instead he did pass them on to a deacon friend of mine. so if i need to do research on the subject i can call on deacon chris mouton. They are attacking the young men of the catholic faith to draw them into their society so we must inform ourselves and all catholics of this devil waiting to devour the young. please learn all you can so to be able to defend and protect our youth

 

[seabird3579]

When the Blessed Virgin Mary said, “…in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph…” --I firmly believe that she was talking about the Evil brought about by secret societies against the Catholic Church.

Her Rosary is a very powerful prayer in this regards. Father Corapi, a former marine before going into the priesthood, once said that no soldier goes into battle without his weapon. He then said the greatest spiritual “weapon” he has ever encountered was the Rosary. And he said he never fails to use it!

 

[Gelassenheit]

Jake1:

THere are some requirements to becoming a free mason the first is you must believe in God. That is a trick statement. even the devil belives that God exsist. IF they were God fearing the question would be , do you worship God?

seabird3579:

When the Blessed Virgin Mary said, “…in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph…” --I firmly believe that she was talking about the Evil brought about by secret societies against the Catholic Church.

So do I.

 

[mosher]

seabird3579:

You sound as though you may be defending freemasonry. Is that wise for a Catholic given its outright condemnation by so many popes?

No, I defend truth and abhor error of any sort. It is necessary to strip away the error of historical biases so that the true error can come forth and manifest itself. It is only then that true conversion can happen and an understanding of those Catholics that are masons can be turned away from the true errors of masonry because as it stands the silliness that is the normal condemnations beard by so many are not sufficient because they are generally not true characterizations of masonry in the first place.

 

[mosher]

Jake1:

iThe free mason whole objective is to destroy all governments and all religious faiths especially catholics from within. This means that thet are to infultrait all aspet of religion and governments and work to destroy it. There are some cardnials in the vatican who are known to be free masons. all of our presidents from washington to grorge w bush were are still is a free mason. read behind the lodge door. The holy father knows about those cardnials who are free masons but they have been warned not to do anything that could possibly add more scandal to the church. if you do researc and also read hope of the wicked by ted flynn you come to see and believe what i have just told you. in the book hope of the wicke you see how they are all on the same page with the new world order. europe has already made the euro the currency of their continent. most all of the sherriffs in the usa all judges and most of all lawyers are free masons. Most free mason once they get to the third degree which is known as a master mason don’t go any farther because they think that is all they really need to know. But the way the masons are arranged , the firs degree does not know what the second degree is abut and the second does not know what the third is and so on. it is not until a man get higher involved that they realize what they have gotten into and feel trapped, that they just remain. The shriners and the shriners circus adn hospitals are free masons. THere are some requirements to becoming a free mason the first is you must believe in God. That is a trick statement. even the devil belives that God exsist. IF they were God fearing the question would be , do you worship God? the second is that you have to be white to be a free mason. and he cannot be handi capped in any way. most all kkk members belong to the ferternal order of masons. that is why david duke was an active member of the kkk. The blacks and other races have their own version of free masons. A priest friend of mine who os now deciesed shared with me much of ths info. He went into the seminary at the age of 59 years old and became a priest at the age of 65. While he was in seminary he came accross the free mason bible and all their books that they need to study from to become a free mason and he bought them all and read each and every one. I only wish that he would have passed them on to me. but instead he did pass them on to a deacon friend of mine. so if i need to do research on the subject i can call on deacon chris mouton. They are attacking the young men of the catholic faith to draw them into their society so we must inform ourselves and all catholics of this devil waiting to devour the young. please learn all you can so to be able to defend and protect our youth

silly

 

[seabird3579]

mosher:

silly

do you believe freemasonry is harmless? that would put you in the extreme minority when it comes to knowledgeable Catholics…but all are welcome to post here…I’ve noticed…

 

[Gelassenheit]

mosher:

No, I defend truth and abhor error of any sort. It is necessary to strip away the error of historical biases so that the true error can come forth and manifest itself.

Fair enough, in the interest of truth, can you please clear up a few things for those of us without your experience in Freemasonry?

For starters, does INRI have a significance for Masons other than Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum? If so, what would that be?

Is there an anti-Catholic motif involved in the 30th degree?

mosher:

It is only then that true conversion can happen and an understanding of those Catholics that are masons can be turned away from the true errors of masonry because as it stands the silliness that is the normal condemnations beard by so many are not sufficient because they are generally not true characterizations of masonry in the first place.

It almost seems as though you’re saying that Catholics need a course in Masonic apologetics, so that they might reject Masonry for the “right reasons.” Am I the only one here who finds this an odd approach?

Again, as has been stated by several posters here, starting with the OP, a number of Popes have warned us against having any truck with the Masons. Should that not be reason enough for any Catholic? Or are those Papal warnings just “silly”?

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger re-asserted the Church’s position against Masonic associations for Catholics in 1983, and declared that Catholics involved in masonry were in a state of mortal sin and not to receive Holy Communion.

Saint Maximilian Kolbe declared that the purpose of the Militia Immaculata was “to convert sinners, heretics, and especially Masons, and to sanctify all under the patronage and through the intercession of the Immaculate Virgin Mary.” Was he “silly” or a “paranoid”?

It would seem to me, at least, that Catholics involved in Masonry are not in need of courses in Masonic apologetics. They need to learn their own faith.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

 

[mosher]

Gelassenheit:

Fair enough, in the interest of truth, can you please clear up a few things for those of us without your experience in Freemasonry?

For starters, does INRI have a significance for Masons other than Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum? If so, what would that be?

No.

Gelassenheit:

Is there an anti-Catholic motif involved in the 30th degree?

No, in the old degree system of the Southen Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite the problem was in the 14th Degree.

Gelassenheit:

It almost seems as though you’re saying that Catholics need a course in Masonic apologetics, so that they might reject Masonry for the “right reasons.” Am I the only one here who finds this an odd approach?

To use an example - one must know Arianism to make a reasonable judgment against it.

Gelassenheit:

Again, as has been stated by several posters here, starting with the OP, a number of Popes have warned us against having any truck with the Masons. Should that not be reason enough for any Catholic? Or are those Papal warnings just “silly”?

No, all 14 documents that condemn freemasonry are good and have merit. However, some of the claims by Leo XIII are not consistant with the internal reality. This is not because he wanted to mislead anyone in his decree but rather that it is hard to know specifics when the degrees are secret.

Gelassenheit:

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger re-asserted the Church’s position against Masonic associations for Catholics in 1983, and declared that Catholics involved in masonry were in a state of mortal sin and not to receive Holy Communion.

Correct and the instruction is for the right reasons as in the philosophy is in part opposed the philosophy of the Church and thus the moral consequences were deemed to be grave - to which I agree.

Gelassenheit:

Saint Maximilian Kolbe declared that the purpose of the Militia Immaculata was “to convert sinners, heretics, and especially Masons, and to sanctify all under the patronage and through the intercession of the Immaculate Virgin Mary.” Was he “silly” or a “paranoid”?

No, but some of the assertions that he made in his publication were not true, but again, similar to Leo XIII these falsehoods were not a contrived deliberate attempt to abuse truth but rather out of ignorance.

Gelassenheit:

It would seem to me, at least, that Catholics involved in Masonry are not in need of courses in Masonic apologetics. They need to learn their own faith.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

Not quite, it is only is a deeper study of the symbolism and meaning of terms that a Catholic who is a mason will come to know why masonry is opposed to the faith. I know many good Catholics that are masons who cannot see how it is opposed to their faith and that is because they do not have a deep enough knowledge of some of the true philosophical errors that are inculcated in the degrees.

 

[Gelassenheit]

Thanks for your response.

Just for background, some of the questions I asked in the last post arose from reading this article:

catholicherald.com/saunders/05ws/ws050922.htm

mosher:

To use an example - one must know Arianism to make a reasonable judgment against it.

(and)

…it is only is a deeper study of the symbolism and meaning of terms that a Catholic who is a mason will come to know why masonry is opposed to the faith. I know many good Catholics that are masons who cannot see how it is opposed to their faith and that is because they do not have a deep enough knowledge of some of the true philosophical errors that are inculcated in the degrees.

I understand your example (the Arianism comparison), but I’m not sure that it applies well in this situation, given the secrecy involved. After all, as a non-mason and outsider, I’m limited in knowledge to what I read, and even then, I have little way to judge how true it is (as with specific aspects of the symbolism and meaning–I admit that I do not know, nor am I terribly interested, to be honest). And so there is no possibility of open debate or discussion for the most part, as there would be in the case of Arianism or other heresy.

Because I cannot really claim expertise or to be fully informed on those issues, I take it on faith that the Popes of the past several centuries are giving me good advice, and that’s enough for me.

Otherwise, if I am getting you correctly, I’d have to join the masons and advance in order to truly understand why I shouldn’t be one. No thanks. I’ll try to get by on faith alone.

 

[mosher]

Gelassenheit:

I understand your example (the Arianism comparison), but I’m not sure that it applies well in this situation, given the secrecy involved. After all, as a non-mason and outsider, I’m limited in knowledge to what I read, and even then, I have little way to judge how true it is (as with specific aspects of the symbolism and meaning–I admit that I do not know, nor am I terribly interested, to be honest). And so there is no possibility of open debate or discussion for the most part, as there would be in the case of Arianism or other heresy.

Because I cannot really claim expertise or to be fully informed on those issues, I take it on faith that the Popes of the past several centuries are giving me good advice, and that’s enough for me.

Otherwise, if I am getting you correctly, I’d have to join the masons and advance in order to truly understand why I shouldn’t be one. No thanks. I’ll try to get by on faith alone.

LOL. No, i would never assert that it is necessry to engage in sin to know sin which is a similar of some people. However, one must be knowledgeable and sift error and superstition and biases from fact. When I became a mason when I was 19 it was because I wanted to be part of something that was civic minded and a little esoteric. After joining and going through the degrees and sitting in the different chairs (lodge leadership) I spent much time in the study of masonry because the ritual intrigued me and the “philosophy” of masonry was interesting. However, when I had my conversion out of obedience I left the Lodge but still did not understand what the problem was. Not until I learned more about the Church was I able to see the problem. If it had not been for my specific knowledge of freemasonry I would not have understood why there was a problem.

There was one time when I was a masonic-apologist per se. I have written in defense of masonry and its compatibility with Christianity. In a general sense I still hold to that but one cannot say that it is compatible with the fullness of Christianity which is Catholicism. I have read nearly every anti-masonic writing from “New Age Cults and Religions” to “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” and i won’t even mention all the websites that I have read in full that at least make a claim to be or expose masonry. I have also spent much time studying the degrees themselves and the explanation of the degrees from the direct sources (the stuff that is locked in the vaults). It is a difficult topic to study because there is so much fiction rolled-up with fact. It is enough to say to the faithful Catholic that it is not permitted to join but to the Catholic who is already a member it will take much convincing apart from the hype that nearly every mason can counter by either common knowledge or specific knowledge. I am in no way an advocate of freemasonry but I am an advocate for the truth and even when the group or topic under discussion is not “good” per se I would rather have the discussion in the realm of reality and truth as opposed to something else.

 

[BJRumph]

Mosher,

A joy to read, as always. Too bad the audience is savoring the Jerry Springer version of the Masonic issue than what is really out there.

As to the rest;

Mosher has not once in any post on this, and I’d bet on any other, thread suggested or asserted that Catholicism and Masonry is compatible, nor that there was indeed no conflict. Close examination of his defences of “Masonry” will further show that he does not support the ultimate end of the organizations, but only seeks to debunk the myths everyone is so eager and ready to believe (regardless of how irrational the are) For those of you who really wish to understand the issue, read what he is actually, articulately and explicitly, saying.

He has done nothing except defend the Truth of the issue, regardless of the source of error being inserted into the topic.

As a former Mason myself, who is coming “home” to Catholicism this very week, I agree with his basic and truthful assertion:

The Truth itself will expose the incompatibility between Catholicism and Masonry; therefore there is no need to resort to sensationalistic and easily disproved 1/2-truths and outright falsehoods to make the point.

Additionally, the actualities of the issue are not something that you are going to find in a “Reader’s Digest” conversation, but in higher level discourse not meet for trivial argumentation.

If you are not interested in understanding the nuances and truths of the issue, then suffice yourself with the simple statement of the Church as to the incompatibility.

Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; therefore, it does not behoove His holy cause for you to use the “firey darts” of the Enemy, which in this case is mere lies and ignorance, neither of which harm a Mason (who will typically laugh off such drivel). The Church does not excuse a means for the sake of the end; therefore to Lie, even (or especially) in the Holy Name of the Lord, is just as sinful as you imagine the target of such dubious discourse to be. In fact, to launch such easily refuted attacks (as has been seen in this thread alone) only gives ammunition to the mason you are conversing with regarding the ignorance and religious bigotry of Catholics (which they are already prone to conclude due to their own protestant backgrounds). Somehow I doubt that that is the point you wish to make to a Mason, therefore, don’t make it for them.

In short, if any of you are truly interested in learning about the real incompatibilitis between Church and Lodge, then stop attacking Mosher and listen to his points. Even if your favorite argument is debunked, then you will ultimately only be made stronger for it, and perhaps actually produce an argument that will actually garner a Mason’s attention and prayerful consideration.

Catholics cannot become Masons, no one is denying this, especially myself or Mosher. Do not lose sight of this fact due to a prideful attatchment to a debunked argument based on false or faulty “information”.

Inter arma caritas

 

[Gelassenheit]

mosher:

LOL. No, i would never assert that it is necessry to engage in sin to know sin which is a similar of some people. However, one must be knowledgeable and sift error and superstition and biases from fact. When I became a mason when I was 19 it was because I wanted to be part of something that was civic minded and a little esoteric. After joining and going through the degrees and sitting in the different chairs (lodge leadership) I spent much time in the study of masonry because the ritual intrigued me and the “philosophy” of masonry was interesting. However, when I had my conversion out of obedience I left the Lodge but still did not understand what the problem was. Not until I learned more about the Church was I able to see the problem. If it had not been for my specific knowledge of freemasonry I would not have understood why there was a problem.

There was one time when I was a masonic-apologist per se. I have written in defense of masonry and its compatibility with Christianity. In a general sense I still hold to that but one cannot say that it is compatible with the fullness of Christianity which is Catholicism. I have read nearly every anti-masonic writing from “New Age Cults and Religions” to “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” and i won’t even mention all the websites that I have read in full that at least make a claim to be or expose masonry. I have also spent much time studying the degrees themselves and the explanation of the degrees from the direct sources (the stuff that is locked in the vaults). It is a difficult topic to study because there is so much fiction rolled-up with fact. It is enough to say to the faithful Catholic that it is not permitted to join but to the Catholic who is already a member it will take much convincing apart from the hype that nearly every mason can counter by either common knowledge or specific knowledge. I am in no way an advocate of freemasonry but I am an advocate for the truth and even when the group or topic under discussion is not “good” per se I would rather have the discussion in the realm of reality and truth as opposed to something else.

I see where you’re coming from more clearly now, and I understand your position. Of course, the problem with the nature of the subject is that it is no accident or fault of non-Masons that they may be “uninformed” on some of the issues, as that inherent with the secrecy. And so basically when someone such as yourself enters into dialogue with non-Masons, you claim a position of special authority within argument that is neither falsifiable nor verifiable for others, and “debate” as such, goes out the window. But I do see how your background would come in handy for helping Catholics who are Masons, so point taken.

BJRumph:

Too bad the audience is savoring the Jerry Springer version of the Masonic issue than what is really out there.

Hmm…now who’s throwing around generalizations?

BJRumph:

If you are not interested in understanding the nuances and truths of the issue, then suffice yourself with the simple statement of the Church as to the incompatibility.

Strangely enough, I think that’s pretty much what I argued in post 53, typed while chanting “JER-RY! JER-RY!” at my computer. But let’s be honest–even if I were interested in the nuances, which I am not–I have no access to that information as a non-mason, so it’s really not an option.

And by the way, welcome home to the Catholic Church.

 

[BJRumph]

Sorry Gelassenheit if my remarks seemed too pointed at you; they were not. I only just discovered this thread today (my participation here at CA is necessarily limited these days), and so I was, perhaps over-zealously, responding to certain posts throughout the thread (and not necessarily the most recent ones), especially those that were directly attacking Mosher, who in my experience here has been a most helpful and intellegent resource here regarding the “Masonic issue”. To see him being personally attacked by other Catholics for simply holding fast to the Truth came accross as rather distasteful as I read them.

And, yes, I do agree that it is not entirely the fault of those “outside” the debate to be under the influence of faulty information being presented as fact. The WWW has allowed an almost unassailable bulk of nonsense to be publicly prolifierated, and reproduced by those with no knowledge of its provenance. Still, such a condition only requires all the more willingness to recognize that some of their information is just plain wrong when it is pointed out to them.

Though I am not quite done reading it (as I only discovered it about ten minutes ago), it is a great (imho) Church document regarding the real issues regarding the incompatibilities of masonry with the Church, despite not directly being intended as such. It is the encyclical of Pious X entitled “Pascendi Dominici Gregis” (of 9/8/1907). While it is targeting the “modernists” within the Church of the time, the fundamental attitudes and philosophies addressed are at the heart of masonry to one degree or another, and so simply swapping out “Modernist” for “Freemason” in this letter should give interested parties a taste of the real issues involved in the incompatabilities, and the real “dangers” mentioned in the OP. To venture a guess, I think Mosher would see it more in the paragraphs discussing the “philosophers” (paragraphs 6-13), whereas my own experience relates it more in line with the sense of the “beleivers” (paragraphs 14-18) and therefore why I have in the past labled the masonic “instituion” a fundamentally “protestant” one (see para. 14), despite such not being a full measure or characterization of the issue of freemasonry.

At any rate…

I am a little curious as to Mosher’s answer regarding the “INRI” question, though he does not need answer me here (if at all).

Caritas numquam excidit

 

[BJRumph]

For an example of a faulty argument that gets a wide run in the internet, consider the “Lucifer” issue mentioned breifly in one of the earlier posts.

The argument, from anti-masons, is that Albert Pike, in his supposedly authoritative Morals & Dogma, states that Lucifer is the “Light of Masonry”; thereby “proving” the satanic nature of Masonry.

The typical masonic response is that M&D is not authoritative, and is especially well unknown outside of the Scottish Rite system of higher degrees (even further divorcing it from “real” universally Masonic authority, which doesn’t exist as such), and finally (and incorrectly) to assert that Pike was simply discussing the title “Lucifer” whose literal translation is “Light Bearer”, not the fallen angel of Christianity.

Unfortunately both pro and anti arguments in this case suffer from falsity deriving from non-judicious editing of the source text being debated.

When read in its entirety, to obtain the context of what Pike actually wrote, you find several things which disrupt both answers. First, the “Lucifer” of the passage was, indeed, the personality of Christianity, not simply a titular expression; however, Pike was not, as the “anti” crowd would assert/assume, presenting this as a positive injunction.

When read in its entirety, Pike is lamenting the fact that there are so many masons who are seeking degree after degree only for their material trappings and titles (and thereby settling for the* false* light of Lucifer), rather than seeking the true meaning of the degrees and living by the morality contained therein.

When Pike says he has no doubt that Lucifer is the light of masonry, he is not making some form of universal “admission” or “confession” of Satanism; but rather recognizing, and forcing his audience to recognize, that even in their “High Degrees” (wherein only the best and most sincere are supposed to exist), there are indeed those who are seeking only the base things offered by the false light offered by trinkets and grandios titles, rather than a “higher” understanding of masonic philosophy (which Pike would assert is the true light of God).

So, in the end, both sides lose the argument, because both sides neglect the Truth of the matter, and instead jump in to the sensationalistic aspect of arguing or defending a half-truth that doesn’t really exist to begin with. Masons consider the argument either specious (as Pike, as far as they are concerned, has nor had any masonic “authority” over them, so even if he proclaimed Satan the ruler of Masonry, they would in no way be obliged to accept such as binding), or “answered” (“lucifer” is a title, not personality). Anti-masons just consider the non-answer as further “proof” of satanic influence, mind-controll, and/or ignorace of the “true motives” of the Higher Masters/Illuminati/Aliens/ whatever. And so the argument goes on, spinning in place because it revolves around a matter that is non-existent. Such a condition of animosity and distraction can only benefit the side that stands the most to lose from a progressive resolution to the issues that are really at the heart of the matter. Neither the Church or masonry gains anything from such irresolvable conflict. The only one who gains from this condition is Satan.

Yes, ideologically, the Church and Lodge are at war, but it is one that can be resolved if we would just stick to the Truth, which will set us all free. Fighting it with Truth also allows Love to be an effective weapon and salve, rather than the worldly practice of hatred.

But, its all just the late-night rambling of noone in particular…

Inter arma caritas

 

[BJRumph]

Perhaps a little aside will prove beneficial for those of you wishing to evangelisize Masons:

Masonic “apologetics” is somewhat different from your typical religious apologetic, suchas you will find elsewhere on these forums. Masons are not “trained” or indoctrinated to “defend” masonry as such. Historically, it is only individual masons who respond to the various attacks made on its institution, but the organization as a whole simply bears such attacks silently and typically without rebuttle.

As such, the rationalization used is significantly different from what you may be expecting. The reason for the need for truthful discourse when dealing with masons is that when being attacked, a mason will only listen up until he encounters the first thing that he personally knows to be untrue before dismissing the whole as the ravings of the ignorant. There is no institutionalized need to actively defend Masonry, so the individual mason is left to his own desire to put up with such antagonisms as they are willing to entertain. There is no obligation or drive to prove the truth, and in many cases they would not feel they could tell the truth as so many have such differing ideas as to what is, and is not, a “secret”, and in anycase, most are of a mind to recognize that you cannot change a mind already convinced of its own superiority. Something about horses and water…

For instance, someone earlier posted something about the aim of Masonry being to destroy all governments; such a statement will immediately mark you as a crank to a mason, whom in my personal experience, are all proud of (if not prideful) the historical instumentality of masons (and therefore masonry) in the founding and creation of Our Nation. It is patently absurd to a Mason to suggest that their organization which contributed many modern ideals to the creation of America is out to destroy the same. Thus, to use such an argument will only close any and all doors you had hoped to use to convert.

If you want to successfully convert a Mason to the Church, you only need to convince him of the Truth of the Church, you do not need to convince them of the “falsity” of masonry. That comes with the Formation process. As Mosher already said, mason-catholics *come *to an understanding of the irreconcilabilities of the two, it is not something to be proven or grasped, mostly due to the masonic approach to religion and “ecumenism”.

When I first descided to become Catholic, I knew there would be “issues” with me being a Mason, though I held out to the hope that it would be reconciled in some fasion to allow participation in both. However, the Church asked me to end my masonic activities. Out of Discipline, I did; though not because I beleived that there was a true incompatibility. Most of the objections seemed born of misperceptions, so I held to the hope that someday the ban on Masonry would be removed.

However, as I continued my process through RCIA, and my formation, I slowly began to understand the nature of the very real, and very invincible, incompatabilities between Masonry and the Church. So, like Mosher, I still say that Masonry is compatible with Christianity, but not the Fullness of Chritianity as held by the Catholic Church. The Church and the Lodge cannot be fundamentally reconciled. Thus, it is no longer a mere matter of “discipline” that I no longer participate masonically; but a matter of Faith and religion, for after Saturday, I will be a Catholic, and as such, I can no longer be a Mason.

But note, this is not because I was brow-beaten with sensational claims of devil worship or other over means to dis-prove Masonry, but because I drew closer to the positives of Truth.

Unlike with the religion I left, there is no doctrine to assail, no historical fact to dredge from obscurity, no “tangible” device to grab hold of to debunk or disprove Masonry. Only by convincing a Mason of the Truthfulness of the Catholic Church can you “win” their soul from masonry. It is through the acceptance of the reality of an Absolute Truth that is the key to fighting masonic philosophy. Again, imho…

So, in short, bring them into the Church, and she will do the rest in Christ.

 

[seabird3579]

BJRumph,

Your discourses are far too long to take point by point, but suffice it to say that I believe your “emotional” attachment to the Masons has clouded your view on the issue.

I will say that you make grand assumptions about other posters without specifics, and you seem to be trying to say that it’s “okay” to be both Mason and Catholic.

One moment you say it shouldn’t be, the next moment you try to justify it. You also seem to be dealing with a little bit of a superiority complex and you dismiss those who would even dare consider challenging your “superior” view of the Masons and how they operate.

We do know that when anyone comes under a certain kind of mind control through various groups, not just the Masons, it takes a great deal of time and “deprogramming” to see clearly.

I think you are well on the way, but you would do better to “defer” to the Church’s teachings and not be so antagonistic towards those that are trying to warn you about serious spiritual dangers.