freemasonry

[DallasTexas]

Let’s also not forget that Jesus gave the Church the authority to bind and loosen – whatever they declare to be a sin on earth, WILL BE considered to be a sin in heaven on judgement day – we have Christ’s promise on this.

This is not to be viewed as Christ giving authority to men over God but instead it is to be looked at as a guarantee that because the church is guided by the Holy Spirit of truth, they will only be able to declare things which are true in heaven.

If the church declares membership in the Masons to be a mortal sin, then according to Christ’s promise, that is how it will be judged on Judgement Day.

Dallas Texas maybe this will help you. The Magisterium is infallible when it teaches officially because Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide the apostles and their successors INTO ALL TRUTH (John 16:12-13.) Maybe since you wont listen to what Sir Knight says, and what the Church says and the Pope says maybe hearing it straight from the bible and from John himself might help a little better. Jesus promised he would not leave us orphans John 14:18. he gave the sacraments to heal, feed and strengthen us. Christ the good shepherd called Peter to be the Chief Shepherd of his church John 21:15-17. He gave Peter the task of strengthening the other apostles in their faith ensuring that the faith of the Church would never go astray Luke 22:31-32 Peter led the Church in proclaiming the gospel and making decisions acts 2:1-41 15:7-12. Early christian writings tell us that Peters successors the bishops of Rome the POPE continued to exercise Peters ministry in the Church. Again read luke he promised that we would not go astray, thats what the Pope is doing still today. I know you dont agree with his decisions, but no disrespect Jesus did not leave the Church to you or I he left it to the Pope. Its not for us to question his decisions only to obey them, the way the apostles obeyed Jesus. there were alot of things they didnt understand either, but they obeyed him. Look at Job, what did Job say who are we to question God, Is not the Pope led by the Holy Spirit who in fact is God. If the Pope says no masons for Catholics, he has his reasons, he doesnt have to share anything with us. He does not have to explain himself to noone. And who in this world has the right to question him. one Person and that is God himself, and he is the person guiding him. If you really dont believe that God is leading the Pope, then you must question yourself, and get back into bible study and the church and ask God for the grace to help you get back on track. We cant question, not if we are faithful and our faith is true, We must have the faith to say, okay if this is what God wants and has led the Pope to do, rather I agree or disagree i must obey. Only the grace of God and the Holy Spirt can give you this unquestionable faith, I will pray for you that you can come to understand it better. God Bless you Dallas Texas and i will also pray for you to receive that gift. Also thankyou so much for your prayers. I need them at this time,and my Mom especially now that she is carrying this huge Cross Jesus has set before her. But i know with Gods grace also he will help her to also carry this cross. My mother doesnt understand either Dallas Texas why God had to taken her 39 year old son off of her and then turn around and 4 years later and take her husband (her rock) and she also (if i asked her does not agree with Gods decisions either) what i mean by that she dont like what God choose. But she like you Dallas has to except this cross and bear it. She dont want to. and she doesnt understand why she must do it, but she will how? By the Grace of God, she will carry her cross and finish what God says she must finish. Again she doesnt like Gods decision, but she also must obey and except it.I Hope some how some way this will also help you find some peace in what has to be. She will never get her answer until she meets God face to face, that may be when God answers you too. But please obey the church. Its our salvation.

Sir Knight and Rinnie,

Thank you for your posts.

Help me understand the Magisterium.

Wikipedia (which I admit is a very fallible source) states that there are different levels of the Magisterium–some fallible some infallible. Is that true?

The below link has a table. It seems to be well referenced (although I admit to not having performed due diligence on the sources).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magisterium

Where does Quaesitum est fit into this? It is a declaration from a then Cardinal. Is it considered part of the Magisterium?

According to the table, I think it would not be covered by infallibility. Is that correct?

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

 

[catharina]

Well beyond any limitations of a “then-Cardinal” within the Magisterium:

"DECLARATION ON MASONIC ASSOCIATIONS
Issued by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on November 26, 1983.

It has been asked whether there has been any change in the Church’s decision in regard to Masonic associations since the new Code of Canon Law does not mention them expressly, unlike the previous Code.

This Sacred Congregation is in a position to reply that this circumstance is due to an editorial criterion which was followed also in the case of other associations likewise unmentioned inasmuch as they are contained in wider categories.

Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic associations remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 [1981] pp. 240-241).

**In an audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II approved and ordered the publication of this Declaration which had been decided in an ordinary meeting of this Sacred Congregation. ** Rome, from the Office of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 26 November 1983.

JOSEPH Card. RATZINGER

Prefect

• Fr. JEROME HAMER, O.P.

Titular Archbishop of Lorium

Secretary"

 

[rinnie]

Hi Dallas Texas hope all is well, this is the best I can do, But Sir Knight is the one you want. The Magisterium together with the pope and bishops form the teaching authority of the which is called the Magisterium (Latin for teacher) its guided and protected from error by the Holy Spirit gives us certainty in matters of doctrine. The church came before the bible. not the NT before the church. Divinely inspired members of the church wrote the books of the NT, just as inspired writers wrote the OT the church is guided by the Holy spirit to guard and interpret the entire bible. both old and new. such an official interpreter is absolutley necessary is we are to understand the bible properly. The magisterium is infallible when it teaches officially because Jesus promised to send the HS to guide the apostles and their successor into all truth. Hope this helps sorry if spellings off, gotta roll, was supposed to take my Mom to pick out the stone today well she wasnt up to it so i dropped her off for therapy (THE CASINO) probally shouldnt have but hey, she gotta vent right. sometimes you gotta get away. so waiting for her to call, and gotta pick her up. She might be feeling a little better today, at least i got her out of the house. But sir knight will help you better. God Bless you Dallas Texas take care.

 

[Sir_Knight]

catharina already addressed this. The Magisterium teaching on this matter was APPROVED by the Pope.

 

[catharina]

catharina already addressed this. The Magisterium teaching on this matter was APPROVED by the Pope.

I know. I’m reminding dallas of that FACT.
It seems he can’t hear it if I say it.
Maybe he’ll hear YOU saying it. (?)

 

[Sir_Knight]

If we look at Acts 5:13, we see that the people acknowledged the apostles’ special authority and did not dare take it upon themselves or question it. The Magisterium together with the pope and bishops represents that SAME authority today since it was passed on from the Apostles to their successors via the laying on of hands (see Acts 1:20-22, 6:6, 13:3, etc.). Yet it is amazing how many people today think nothing of questioning that authority.

 

[zerinus]

catharina already addressed this. The Magisterium teaching on this matter was APPROVED by the Pope.

I know. I’m reminding dallas of that FACT.
It seems he can’t hear it if I say it.
Maybe he’ll hear YOU saying it. (?)

If we look at Acts 5:13, we see that the people acknowledged the apostles’ special authority and did not dare take it upon themselves or question it. The Magisterium together with the pope and bishops represents that SAME authority today since it was passed on from the Apostles to their successors via the laying on of hands (see Acts 1:20-22, 6:6, 13:3, etc.). Yet it is amazing how many people today think nothing of questioning that authority.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is not the Magisterium, and cannot make infallible declarations—according to Catholic doctrine. The mere “approval” by the Pope does not either. Have a look at these:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infallibility_of_the_Church

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

We’ve had this discussion before. If the church has ERRORED and is leading the faithful astray with FALSE teaching then it either can not be the Church that Christ established because Jesus said that the gates of hell would not over come HIS church.

Either that, or we can not believe in the promises of Christ.

Which one do you think it is?

Of course, there is the third option that the Church is correct and you are the one who errored.

You have an incorrect understanding of scripture. What would be the point of having the Holy Spirit guide the church in all truths if the church could ignore that influence?

If your understanding were to be correct, what would happen if the church ignored the direction of the Holy Spirit and declared a false teaching – recalling that Jesus also promised that whatever they bound on earth wound be bound in heaven.

Does that mean that this false teaching would also be bound in heaven? If it wouldn’t, then it would mean that Christ was a liar because not everything that they bound on earth would be bound in heaven.

The only correct understanding of that passage is that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church in all truth AND the church WOULD follow that direction.

Any other understanding opens up the problems that I just outlined above.

If it was impossible for the Catholic Church to err, why did Pope John Paul II publicly apologize for the past sins of the Catholic Church? Here are just a few links, out of thousands that can be found on the Internet:

beliefnet.com/story/14/story_1458_1.html
pbs.org/newshour/bb/religion/jan-june00/apology_3-13.html
archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/europe/03/12/pope.apology.02/index.html

This was already addressed in an earlier thread and I noticed that you didn’t comment on it …

Nowhere in scripture or any of the early church writings can one find references to Christians embracing any of the peculiarly Mormon doctrines, such as polytheism, polygamy, celestial marriage, and temple ceremonies. If the Church of the apostolic age was the prototype of today’s Mormon church, it must have had all these beliefs and practices. But why is there no evidence of them in the early centuries, before the alleged apostasy began?

---

Galatians 1:8*** is very clear on this point … But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! … pretty much shooting down the Mormon faith & beliefs.

… care to address it now?

For you and catharina:

Plurality of gods and deification of man was common teaching in the early Christian church. I have already addressed that in these posts in my Blog:

zerinus.blogspot.com/2007/07/deification-of-man-and-plurality-of.html
zerinus.blogspot.com/2007/07/more-on-deification-in-early.html

Polygamy was permissible in the Law of Moses, was practiced by the Jews in the time of Jesus, and was never condemned nor abrogated by Jesus or His Apostles. Probably some of His own disciples and Apostles practiced it.

Marriage for eternity and temple ceremonies are peculiar to the temples. We know that baptism for the dead was practiced; and we also know that the power to “bind on earth and it will be bound in heaven, and loose on earth and will be loosed in heaven” was also given, which is the power by which those ordinances are performed. Therefore they would have been performed at that time; although their application might have been limited because of the lack of suitable means and the persecution that the early church was subjected to.

zerinus

 

[rinnie]

If you go back and read what the Pope was saying, you can plainly see that he is asking for forgiveness for other Catholics who could have done better. He by no means every said anything about being wrong about scripture or decisions made by the church. By talking about the Church itself, He was speaking for the people of the church who could have done better. He didnt agree with some of the way Catholics went about doing things, he was sorry about the bridge that came between our religions because of what Man (some Catholics) went about things, he feels it could have been done differently, not as violent, etc. The Pope always put extra pressure of Catholics (we are the church) He put us as examples, and when one failed he felt they failed the Church also. He was a man of peace, and never believed in hate and fighting. He just admited man is human and could have done much better,and was trying to bring us all back to God where we belong, instead of fighting about the past, and what we all did, Catholics and Non-Catholics he just tried to make peace. But like any other thing the Pope has said, someone takes what they think he said and runs with it to be what they want. He was just a Man or believed in forgiveness, and showed how we all need to ask for forgiveness,and showed how yes People in the Church also could have done better, he didnt just blame everyone else. He more or less said all People have a role in the wrong done to the church (especially the ones who used the church as an excuse to do wrong). But his point was we are all to blame here, People not the CHurch in particular, but again he always set a high example with his own life and actions, and expected other Catholics to do the same.

 

[zerinus]

If you go back and read what the Pope was saying, you can plainly see that he is asking for forgiveness for other Catholics who could have done better. He by no means every said anything about being wrong about scripture or decisions made by the church. By talking about the Church itself, He was speaking for the people of the church who could have done better. He didnt agree with some of the way Catholics went about doing things, . . .

He was apologizing for the sins of the church, not the sins of a bunch of unsavory Catholics. If a Catholic committed murder, the Catholic Church does not need to apologize for it. It is not the fault of the Catholic Church. When he apologizes for the sins of the church, he is acknowledging that the church itself is in some way culpable for those wrong actions, not just a bunch of rogue Catholics.

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

He was apologizing for the sins of the church, not the sins of a bunch of unsavory Catholics. If a Catholic committed murder, the Catholic Church does not need to apologize for it. It is not the fault of the Catholic Church. When he apologizes for the sins of the church, he is acknowledging that the church itself is in some way culpable for those wrong actions, not just a bunch of rogue Catholics.

zerinus

Let me start by saying that zerinus was correct in a way about the ban itself. It was not an eternal ban that could never be lifted, but one of discipline.

As far as the pope apologizing for the sins of the Church, we must remember that there are multiple meanings of “Church.” The Church is, among other things, the community of baptised believers in Christ. When one of us does wrong, in the name of God, it reflects on us all. LEss than 1% of priests were ACCUSED of sexual abuse and look at the damage that has caused. When many of us do wrong in the name of the Church, it really looks bad.

What Catholics hold to is the fact that although every member of the Church is a sinner, the Church has never taught sin as virtue.

 

[DallasTexas]

catharina already addressed this. The Magisterium teaching on this matter was APPROVED by the Pope.

Sir Knight,

Thank you for your post.

Please accept my most sincere apology for not having seen the previous post on the matter. Due to previous events, I don’t really put any faith in what the above referred to poster says. Nevertheless please refer me to the post when you have a chance.

Does “approving it” the same thing as “in union with?”

Sir Knight and Rinnie,

Thank you for your posts.

Help me understand the Magisterium.

Wikipedia (which I admit is a very fallible source) states that there are different levels of the Magisterium–some fallible some infallible. Is that true?

The below link has a table. It seems to be well referenced (although I admit to not having performed due diligence on the sources).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magisterium

Where does Quaesitum est fit into this? It is a declaration from a then Cardinal. Is it considered part of the Magisterium?

According to the table, I think it would not be covered by infallibility. Is that correct?

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

I have reinserted my previous post because I still have the same questions.

Thank you,

 

[catharina]

Sir Knight - it is most kind of you to act as an unnecessary but besieged intermediary. It seems that dallas is still in a state of continuous refusal to see/absorb any of my posts since I will NOT applaud him for his decision to reject Church Teaching re masonry. Such is life, I guess, for some folks. Again, YOUR patience and kindness are much appreciated. Bravo, Sir Knight.

 

[rinnie]

He was apologizing for the sins of the church, not the sins of a bunch of unsavory Catholics. If a Catholic committed murder, the Catholic Church does not need to apologize for it. It is not the fault of the Catholic Church. When he apologizes for the sins of the church, he is acknowledging that the church itself is in some way culpable for those wrong actions, not just a bunch of rogue Catholics.

zerinus

well see thats how you see it, but that is not how i am seeing it. How can a Church be responsible for such things, how can a Church sin, its impossible, what is the Church, it is Christ himself, Christ cannot sin, again it was people who were bad examples, that the Pope was talking about. , The Church and Christ again are one. If you read the bible it will tell you that. I understand that is not the way you understand it, and i also understand that is not the way you will see it, But again its circles around to the same old thing, Why we must be faithful to the Pope and let him tell us,not us tell him. But see if people want to tear down the Church, and blame it for every human mistake what can we do about it nothing, But it just makes you wonder WHY? Why are people so quick to judge the Church so bad. Could this come from God. I would have to say no. Why would God as people to question and try to talk negative about his Church. So if it is not God who is doing this who is left. Only one person the same person who has been trying to tear it down from the get go. The devil.

 

[FCEGM]

He was apologizing for the sins of the church, not the sins of a bunch of unsavory Catholics. If a Catholic committed murder, the Catholic Church does not need to apologize for it. It is not the fault of the Catholic Church. When he apologizes for the sins of the church, he is acknowledging that the church itself is in some way culpable for those wrong actions, not just a bunch of rogue Catholics.

zerinus

This is what you, of course, want to see there, but it’s interesting that you do not link to the actual documents but only to commentaries on them which reflect your own misunderstanding of what the Holy Father actually said.

BULL OF INDICTION OF THE GREAT JUBILEE OF THE YEAR 2000:

vatican.va/jubilee_2000/docs/documents/hf_jp-ii_doc_30111998_bolla-jubilee_en.html

First of all, the sign of the purification of memory; this calls everyone to make an act of courage and humility in recognizing the wrongs done by those who have borne or bear the name of Christian.

Yet it must be acknowledged that history also records events which constitute a counter-testimony to Christianity. Because of the bond which unites us to one another in the Mystical Body, all of us, though not personally responsible and without encroaching on the judgement of God who alone knows every heart, bear the burden of the errors and faults of those who have gone before us. Yet we too, sons and daughters of the Church, have sinned and have hindered the Bride of Christ from shining forth in all her beauty. Our sin has impeded the Spirit’s working in the hearts of many people. Our meagre faith has meant that many have lapsed into apathy and been driven away from a true encounter with Christ.

As the Successor of Peter, I ask that in this year of mercy the Church, strong in the holiness which she receives from her Lord, should kneel before God and implore forgiveness for the past and present sins of her sons and daughters. All have sinned and none can claim righteousness before God (cf. 1 Kgs 8:46). Let it be said once more without fear: “We have sinned” (Jer 3:25), but let us keep alive the certainty that “where sin increased, grace abounded even more” (Rom 5:20).

The Liturgy for the Day of Pardon:

bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/cjrelations/resources/documents/catholic/johnpaulii/day_of_pardon_mass.htm

International Theological Commission: MEMORY AND RECONCILIATION: THE CHURCH AND THE FAULTS OF THE PAST, December 1999:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000307_memory-reconc-itc_en.html#John%20Paul%20II’s%20Requests%20for%20Forgiveness

None of these - including the Holy Father’s prayers on the Day of Pardon speak of the Church as sinning, but only of the sons and daughters of the Church who have sinned.

In Lumen Gentium 1:4 (The Dogmatic constitution of the Church) quotes St. Cyprian of Carthage: “Hence the universal Church is seen to be a people brought into unity from the unity of the Father, the Son and Spirit.”

Here, St. Cyprian, of course, and the 2nd Vat. C. also, spoke of “A PEOPLE” as one organic whole, not as merely the sum of the number of individuals. That is because the Church is One Mystical Person of Christ and Body in a supernatural union of Grace by the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit in three states: of blessedness in Heaven, of purification after death, of visible communion on earth. This means that Christ dwells in all and only in all that comes from Him (what He joins to Himself), but not in any of what contradicts Himself. This is why there can not be a facile identification of the Church with its visible members with all the actions of all or any of its members. All that comes from the sin of its visible members is, of course, not the Church, because it departs from union with Christ.

 

[distracted]

Maybe he’s not outnumbered within his cult.
I don’t know what mormons think about excommunication OR masonry.

i meant he was wrong to say that people are not excommunicated automatically by joining the masons and that things have changed (pope’s view on masonary has “softened”)…

Catholics cannot join the masons without automatic excommunication… that has not changed…

 

[zerinus]

Let me start by saying that zerinus was correct in a way about the ban itself. It was not an eternal ban that could never be lifted, but one of discipline.

As far as the pope apologizing for the sins of the Church, we must remember that there are multiple meanings of “Church.” The Church is, among other things, the community of baptised believers in Christ. When one of us does wrong, in the name of God, it reflects on us all. LEss than 1% of priests were ACCUSED of sexual abuse and look at the damage that has caused. When many of us do wrong in the name of the Church, it really looks bad.

The sins he was apologizing for were those that had the backing and support of the church hierarchy at all levels; or were instigated by them. They were not actions of just some rogue Catholics.

What Catholics hold to is the fact that although every member of the Church is a sinner, the Church has never taught sin as virtue.

Wrong actions result from, or are justified by, wrong teachings or beliefs. You can’t separate actions from teachings or beliefs. If wrong thing were done, it was because it was believed, or they were taught, that they were the right things to do.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is not the Magisterium, and cannot make infallible declarations—according to Catholic doctrine. The mere “approval” by the Pope does not either. Have a look at these:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infallibility_of_the_Church

zerinus

As a side note, I should like to add that I do not accept the infallibility of the Catholic Church or of the Pope. I was discussing the subject within the context of Catholic theology or doctrine. I have nothing against the Catholic Church. I believe that the Catholic Church is an honourable and respectable institution, and its members and prelates are often worthy and decent individuals and true Christians. But it does not have the authority to speak infallibly on Christian doctrine; and its previous infallible pronouncements (such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary, for example) have been wrong.

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

The sins he was apologizing for were those that had the backing and support of the church hierarchy at all levels; or were instigated by them. They were not actions of just some rogue Catholics.

Wrong actions result from, or are justified by, wrong teachings or beliefs. You can’t separate actions from teachings or beliefs. If wrong thing were done, it was because it was believed, or they were taught, that they were the right things to do.

zerinus

Alrighty, then, let’s play along together. Show me one sin that was committed by the Church because of the teachings or beliefs of the Church.

And I do not take this as an attack by you on the Church, only as a statement of your position.

 

[zerinus]

Alrighty, then, let’s play along together. Show me one sin that was committed by the Church because of the teachings or beliefs of the Church.

And I do not take this as an attack by you on the Church, only as a statement of your position.

You are asking the wrong question. You are putting the cart before the horse. The right way to investigate that question is to look at any of the sins that the Pope had apologized for (i.e. the Inquisition, or the Crusades, or the treatment of the Jews, or forced conversions, or use of violence by the church, or injustice to women etc.), and then work your way back to see why that particular sin was committed. In each instance you will find that it was done because the idea was allowed to be formed in their minds that that was the right thing to do. Either the wrong idea was inculcated into them by the church at some point from the beginning, or the church failed to act to rectify the incorrect perception after they had become aware of it.

zerinus