Freemasons

[Loy]

So why do some Deacons, priests, Bishops and Arch-Bishops say that it is ok these days?

Completely irrelevent. There are some deacons, priests and even bishops who say that abortion and homosexual sex are okay. Rome is explicitly clear on the matter.

If an activity is said to be ok by the Bishop, what member of the laity has the right to tell a fellow member they may not receive Holy Communion?

Very likely none. But lay Catholics do have a complete right, in keeping with their knowledge and qualifications, to question the actions of pastors.

You see, my friends [there are several of them who are practicing Catholics] will most certainly ask me for proof what they are doing is wrong.

Evidence was presented to you, and you don’t believe it. I have a feeling your friends have already seen this evidence as well. Again, trusting the local pastors who disobey Rome is a most curious version of Catholicism.

It is no good you quoting from outdated texts or opinions of others. I want to see the hard evidence you have, that the Deacon, Priest, and Arch Bishop who told them it is ‘ok’ are wrong.

I keep asking the same question but no one is willing to give me the answer I need. They will not listen to me unless I can prove the Church is wrong and you are right

Outdated? Really! It was the current pope who explicitly ruled that it was unlawful to belong to a Masonic organization!!!

How does this work? Must the Vatican repeat and renew this injunction every time a bishop contradicts the explicit rulings of the Curia?

I understand the problems that the Vatican must have trying to enforce each and every ruling, especially when we live in such a rebellious age. If it were up to me (and good thing it’s not), I’d go medieval on these recalcitrant bishops in a hurry.

 

[Loy]

I also have Catholic friends who are members of Probis, who meet at the local masonic temple.

I have been asked, and agreed to give a talk to that group.

Reading all that has been said, it seems this group may also be in deadly mortal sin, condemned to hellfire for all eternity.

Can anyone tell me if I will be committing a serious grave offence on a par with murder [that is a mortal sin] by being a guest speaker to Probis who meet in the masonic temple?

Just in the off-chance that you are asking a serious question, where has anyone said that giving a talk in a Masonic hall is sinful or “on a par with murder”.

If you can answer that question, you will have your answer.

 

[Sixtus]

There are some deacons, priests and even bishops who say that abortion okay.

THis is news to me.

Quote:Originally Posted by Sixtus
If an activity is said to be ok by the Bishop, what member of the laity has the right to tell a fellow member they may not receive Holy Communion?

… lay Catholics do have a complete right, in keeping with their knowledge and qualifications, to question the actions of pastors. he priest in question has done great things in reconciling the people to Christ. But his own parishioners have tried to get him removed and defrocked because he is alleged to be a pagan not a catholic since he practices and teaches Yoga and Zen meditation

Quote:Originally Posted by Sixtus
You see, my friends [there are several of them who are practicing Catholics] will most certainly ask me for proof what they are doing is wrong.

Evidence was presented to you, and you don’t believe it. I am not a mind reader. Actually I am quite simple really, I do not ‘see’ the evidence. That is what I keep asking for. All I see is postings to internet, which I do not have access to, and other peoples opinions based on bigotry I have a feeling your friends have already seen this evidence as well. Again, trusting the local pastors who disobey Rome is a most curious version of Catholicism.The Arch-Bishop in question was appointed by Rome because of his commitment to root out practices not acceptable to Rome

Quote:Originally Posted by Sixtus
It is no good you quoting from outdated texts or opinions of others. I want to see the hard evidence you have, that the Deacon, Priest, and Arch Bishop who told them it is ‘ok’ are wrong.

I keep asking the same question but no one is willing to give me the answer I need. They will not listen to me unless I can prove the Church is wrong and you are right

Outdated? Really! It was the current pope who explicitly ruled that it was unlawful to belong to a Masonic organization!!!I have taken the time to look., I have not found one encylical in which Pope Benedict condemns freemasonry. Please cite or better still quote and I will show them. This is what they have asked for

How does this work? Must the Vatican repeat and renew this injunction every time a bishop contradicts the explicit rulings of the Curia?Lost on this one

I understand the problems that the Vatican must have trying to enforce each and every ruling, especially when we live in such a rebellious age. If it were up to me (and good thing it’s not), I’d go medieval on these recalcitrant bishops in a hurry.

Your next post, My question was not fecetious. I once confessed to a mortal sin. The priest was astonished. He told me 'no way was it a mortal sin, I was told by the priest that the definition of a ‘mortal’ sin is one whose gravity is so serious, that it is on a par with murder.

In this thread it has been said numerous times that Freemasonry and its practices [temple etc[ is a grave and mortal sin. That can only mean being a freemason is on a par with willful murder. I told my sacristan friend that and he questioned the mental health of those who said it. He questions this whole forum on the strength of the allegation that ‘to be a freemason is on a par with willfully and deliberatly killing someone’. This grieves me as I spend a lot of my time here.My sacristan friend thinks some contributors are either very bigotted or complete nutters[/COLOR]

 

[Sixtus]

Please note. I do not see any contributor to this or any other fhread as a nutter. I actually find this offensive.

I have only used the term in reference to what someone else has said as they have told me to tell my freemasonry friends that they are’ guilty of a grave and mortal sin’.

Yours most sincerely

 

[thistle]

Please note. I do not see any contributor to this or any other fhread as a nutter. I actually find this offensive.

I have only used the term in reference to what someone else has said as they have told me to tell my freemasonry friends that they are’ guilty of a grave and mortal sin’.

Yours most sincerely

Why do you not believe the evidence that has already been presented to you.

We gave you:

1. Humanum Genus, the Papal Encyclical on Freemasonry by Pope Leo XIII which remains valid.
2. A poster above has given you the statement by Cardinal Ratzinger that the Church teaching has not changed.
3. Canon law:

Can. 1374 A person who joins an association which plots against the Church is to be punished with a just penalty - one who promotes or takes office in such an association is to be punished with an interdict.

You now have the proof.

By the way to make a comment about “quoting from out of date texts” seems a bit odd. Does that mean we should ignore the Gospels because they were written 2000 years ago?

 

[marty54]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but is not the Roman Catholic Church in constant dialogue with other religions including the Protestant Church of England who’s head is the Queen who also happens to be the head of Freemasons in England.? (crazy innit?)
A lot has been said fore and against and it seems no one is able to give a proper explanation of what is wrong with being a freemason and what makes it a mortal sin.
In my country in the 1960’s it was a mortal sin to vote for the Labour Party, because it wanted to separate politics from religion. It no longer is and all the reforms proposed then have been adopted.
It seems that some bishops find it easier to take the “Mortal Sin” stance than try to give proper answers.

 

[fix]

In this thread it has been said numerous times that Freemasonry and its practices [temple etc[ is a grave and mortal sin. That can only mean being a freemason is on a par with willful murder. I told my sacristan friend that and he questioned the mental health of those who said it. He questions this whole forum on the strength of the allegation that ‘to be a freemason is on a par with willfully and deliberatly killing someone’. This grieves me as I spend a lot of my time here.My sacristan friend thinks some contributors are either very bigotted or complete nutters[/COLOR]

Perhaps part of the problem is a misunderstanding of mortal sin? We can know if one is in *objective *mortal sin, but we can never know if one is in *subjective *mortal sin meaning we cannot no how culpable one is.

You can find what constitutes mortal sin in the CCC. Murder is not the only possible mortal sin. I think it is a mistake to conclude only things like murder are mortal sins and set up a false measuring rod that would make every mortal sin seem minimal simply because it is not murder.

When we commit a mortal sin, any mortal sin, we reject the entire moral law and God. So, my point is willfully committing a mortal sin, like persisiting in Freemasonary when we have learned we ought not, it may very well be a mortal sin meaning deadly to our souls even though it is not equivalent to physical murder. Am I making sense?

 

[thistle]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but is not the Roman Catholic Church in constant dialogue with other religions including the Protestant Church of England who’s head is the Queen who also happens to be the head of Freemasons in England.? (crazy innit?)
A lot has been said fore and against and it seems no one is able to give a proper explanation of what is wrong with being a freemason and what makes it a mortal sin.In my country in the 1960’s it was a mortal sin to vote for the Labour Party, because it wanted to separate politics from religion. It no longer is and all the reforms proposed then have been adopted.
It seems that some bishops find it easier to take the “Mortal Sin” stance than try to give proper answers.

Haven’t you read Humanum Genus by Pope Leo XIII. It details exactly the Church’s position on Freemasons and why.

papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13human.htm

By the way it doesn’t matter what your opinion on the Freemasons is. As a Catholic you must accept the Church’s teaching on the matter which is a Catholic cannot become a Freemason and if they do its a grave sin.

 

[Karin]

By the way it doesn’t matter what your opinion on the Freemasons is. As a Catholic you must accept the Church’s teaching on the matter which is a Catholic cannot become a Freemason and if they do its a grave sin.

you mean as a Catholic I can pick and chose the teachings /dogma etc. I want …How Shocking

(said in Jest )

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Other:

you mean as a Catholic I can pick and chose the teachings /dogma etc. I want …How Shocking

(said in Jest )

I my opinion you already have, as have most others in this thread. Who raised the encyclical to the status of a dogma?, who claimed JPII’s reach to Protestants does not include Free Masons?, who persuades other to “damn” masons?, and who dismissed the catholic teaching on judging anybody? how many catholics are smeared on these threads for refusing to “damn”, judge, bad mouth, or slander others on issues as this? My opinion is those who reference the cafeteria are usually the first to dine there. But this is simply my opinion NOT Church teachings

 

[fix]

This is from the Vatican website:

*** DECLARATION ON MASONIC ASSOCIATIONS

---

 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 in 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 association 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 enrol 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; English language edition of *L’Osservatore   Romano*, 9March 1981).

  **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
*

 *[vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19831126_declaration-masonic_en.html](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19831126_declaration-masonic_en.html)*

 

[fix]

I my opinion you already have, as have most others in this thread. Who raised the encyclical to the status of a dogma?, who claimed JPII’s reach to Protestants does not include Free Masons?, who persuades other to “damn” masons?, and who dismissed the catholic teaching on judging anybody? how many catholics are smeared on these threads for refusing to “damn”, judge, bad mouth, or slander others on issues as this? My opinion is those who reference the cafeteria are usually the first to dine there. But this is simply my opinion NOT Church teachings

Are you claiming only Dogmas deserve assent and obedience?

 

[Karin]

I my opinion you already have, as have most others in this thread. Who raised the encyclical to the status of a dogma?, who claimed JPII’s reach to Protestants does not include Free Masons?, who persuades other to “damn” masons?, and who dismissed the catholic teaching on judging anybody? how many catholics are smeared on these threads for refusing to “damn”, judge, bad mouth, or slander others on issues as this? My opinion is those who reference the cafeteria are usually the first to dine there. But this is simply my opinion NOT Church teachings

You know what Texas Roofer…I have not done anything of the sort…The CHURCH tells me that I should not join the Freemasons…I DONT…plain and simple I follow her directives on this matter and for that, all matters.
It would seem that if you do not agree with the Churchs stance on FreeMasons than it is YOU who are shopping at the Caf!

This is from the Vatican website:
***DECLARATION ON MASONIC ASSOCIATIONS

***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 in 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 association 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 enrol 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; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9March 1981).

**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.

 

[marci]

I can’t believe this thread is still going on. How many different ways does a person need to be told “because the church says so, that’s why.”

If you deny the truth of church teaching on freemasonry, why don’t you just come out and say it.

I may disagree with you, but I will respect you for being honest and then we can go on.

As far as the posts about mortal sin being on par with murder, the church teaches that:
“One commits a mortal sin when there are simultaneously present: grave matter, full knowledge, and deliberate consent. This sin destroys charity in us, deprives us of sanctifying grace, and, if unrepented, leads us to the eternal death of hell…” (395., COMPENDIUM CCC)

I was always taught that missing mass for no good reason was a mortal sin, and one couldn’t receive communion without confessing that. Now that doesn’t sound the same as murder, but the church still considers it grave matter.

This is alot of the problem with the world today. Nobody thinks anything they do–short of murder–will warrent damnation.

 

[Loy]

Sixtus:

Loy:

There are some deacons, priests and even bishops who say that abortion okay.

THis is news to me.

Thank goodness they are in the minority, but it’s not a pretty world out there, is it?

Sixtus:

If an activity is said to be ok by the Bishop, what member of the laity has the right to tell a fellow member they may not receive Holy Communion?

Loy:

… lay Catholics do have a complete right, in keeping with their knowledge and qualifications, to question the actions of pastors.

he priest in question has done great things in reconciling the people to Christ. But his own parishioners have tried to get him removed and defrocked because he is alleged to be a pagan not a catholic since he practices and teaches Yoga and Zen meditation

I understand where they are coming from, and if they are pursuing this charitably it is their right. I hope that the correct decision is made. The question I would have is, if the priest is truly dedicated to pastoring his flock, what compels him to continue this practice if it scandalizes so many parishioners? Doesn’t he understand how divisive this would be? Perhaps he needs to ask whether he is doing it for Christ or doing for himself.

Sixtus:

You see, my friends [there are several of them who are practicing Catholics] will most certainly ask me for proof what they are doing is wrong.

Loy:

Evidence was presented to you, and you don’t believe it.

I am not a mind reader. Actually I am quite simple really, I do not ‘see’ the evidence. That is what I keep asking for. All I see is postings to internet, which I do not have access to,

You’ve got me really confused here. Nobody is asking you to read anyone’s mind. You don’t have access to the internet? You’re on the internet now?!??!?!?

In post #152 & 155, there were quotes from an official declaration of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Did you not see them? Did you not click on the links provided? These have been reposted in full in post # 167 & 169. Do you see those?

Do you understand that this official declaration from the Vatican is binding on the whole church, including Archbishops?

Sixtus:

and other peoples opinions based on bigotry

Just a suggestion: think about what you say before someone reports you to the moderators.

Sixtus:

Loy:

I have a feeling your friends have already seen this evidence as well. Again, trusting the local pastors who disobey Rome is a most curious version of Catholicism.

The Arch-Bishop in question was appointed by Rome because of his commitment to root out practices not acceptable to Rome

I don’t understand your point. All bishops and archbishops are supposed to be doing that. They don’t always do what they were appointed to do, do they?

Sixtus:

It is no good you quoting from outdated texts or opinions of others. I want to see the hard evidence you have, that the Deacon, Priest, and Arch Bishop who told them it is ‘ok’ are wrong.

I keep asking the same question but no one is willing to give me the answer I need. They will not listen to me unless I can prove the Church is wrong and you are right

Loy:

Outdated? Really! It was the current pope who explicitly ruled that it was unlawful to belong to a Masonic organization!!!

I have taken the time to look., I have not found one encylical in which Pope Benedict condemns freemasonry. Please cite or better still quote and I will show them. This is what they have asked for

See post # 167. The man who wrote that is Joseph Ratzinger. He was then a Cardinal and Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith when he made that official declaration on behalf of Pope John Paul II. Joseph Ratzinger is now known by the name Pope Benedict XVI. There has been no retraction of — or modification to — this declaration since it was made on November 26, 1983. It is still Church law.

Sixtus:

Loy:

How does this work? Must the Vatican repeat and renew this injunction every time a bishop contradicts the explicit rulings of the Curia?

Lost on this one

Do you understand that the official declaration set out in post # 167 is binding on your Archbishop? Can you explain why it wouldn’t be?

 

[Loy]

Sixtus:

My question was not fecetious. I once confessed to a mortal sin. The priest was astonished. He told me 'no way was it a mortal sin, I was told by the priest that the definition of a ‘mortal’ sin is one whose gravity is so serious, that it is on a par with murder.

I hope that there’s some misunderstanding and he didn’t really say that. It’s a poor and very misleading definition of mortal sin. Don’t take my word for it; read CCC paragraphs 1854-1864. Determining whether a sin is mortal or not by comparing it to murder just won’t cut it.

Let me try to explain it by comparing it to human law. In most states in the U.S., voluntary manslaughter is a felony. So is possession of a gram of cocaine. Is cocaine possession on a par with voluntary manslaughter? In the sense that they are both felonies, yes. But manslaughter is heinous gruesome, while cocaine possession is not. Many people would say that they are not “on a par” with each other.

Do you understand what I’m getting at? The Church has declared many sins to be grave. I would caution you not to rely on a simple and superficial test such as comparing the sin to murder to determine if it is mortal or not.

Sixtus:

In this thread it has been said numerous times that Freemasonry and its practices [temple etc[ is a grave and mortal sin. That can only mean being a freemason is on a par with willful murder.

Actually, it is the Church that has declared it to be a grave matter.

Sixtus:

I told my sacristan friend that and he questioned the mental health of those who said it. He questions this whole forum on the strength of the allegation that ‘to be a freemason is on a par with willfully and deliberatly killing someone’. This grieves me as I spend a lot of my time here.My sacristan friend thinks some contributors are either very bigotted or complete nutters

Did you tell your friend that we think membership in a Masonic organization is on a par with murder, then you did him and us a gross disservice.

OTOH, if he reads the Declaration on Masonic Associations (Quasitum est) dated Nov. 26, 1983, and still thinks we’re all nuts, then I think you should reconsider your relationship with him.
[/quote]

 

[Loy]

You know what Texas Roofer…I have not done anything of the sort…The CHURCH tells me that I should not join the Freemasons…I DONT…plain and simple I follow her directives on this matter and for that, all matters.
It would seem that if you do not agree with the Churchs stance on FreeMasons than it is YOU who are shopping at the Caf!

I think there has been a misunderstanding between Texas Roofer and you regarding whether the prohibition against enrolling in Masonic organizations is dogma or not.

If nobody is trying to contend that it’s dogma, then hopefully we can drop that part of the discussion and move on.

Texas Roofer has stated many times previously in this thread that Catholics should not join Masonic organizations. I don’t want to put words in his mouth, but I think the problem he is having is with lay persons acting as police on this issue. If he could clarify this last point, maybe we could discuss his views on that.

 

[Sixtus]

I was always taught that missing mass for no good reason was a mortal sin, and one couldn’t receive communion without confessing that. Now that doesn’t sound the same as murder,

Well it may not sound the same but it is.

Mortal sin is not on a graduated scale. A sin is either venial or it is mortal. Murder is mortal, missing mass is mortal, therefore by definition someone who willfully kills another is at most no more guilty than someone who intentionally misses mass on Sunday, I think that is where your logic is taking you

 

[Sixtus]

Some years ago, a staunch Catholic in our parish, Lord so and so [can’t give you his proper name] was a leading light in the charasmatic renewal, introduced clapping hands and holding hands into the mass and many others.

As he was a very generous ‘giver’ to the church funds clergy went along with his ideas. Though he was a multi millioniare, so proof he is no fool, he claimed the Holy Spirit spoke to him directly and told him what he was to do or not.

He as a very flamboyant character, you just could not help but like him. He found out I belonged to the Ancient Order of Druids, which the Church it transpired did not object to].

He got hold of the wrong end of the stick and assumed it was ‘Druidic’ and therefore a pagan organisation. He went to great lengths to get me excommunicated as I refused to publicly repent in front of the whole congregation.

He had an audience with the late Bishop and even consulted a canon lawyer. He failed in his attempt and promptly withdrew from our parish in disgust, leaving it to my pagan ways.

I discovered some while after that he was a freemason and had been for several years, including during that period when he was trying to get me dismissed from the church.

I asked him who he could be so hypocritcal. He stated that he had permission from Rome to be a freemason due to his Lordship and public office. He challenged me to ask Rome and make a fool of myself.

That completly changed my mind on the subject. Up until then, I had been against freemasonry. Now if he says he had permission from Rome, I have no reason to doubt it. He was and still IS a ‘big shot’ at diocesan level.

Suggests to me there is a two tier system going on in the church: one for the poor [non-millionares, non Peers ] and rich [millionares and Peers of the relm]. Now that cant be right can it!

 

[Sixtus]

You’ve got me really confused here. Nobody is asking you to read anyone’s mind. You don’t have access to the internet? You’re on the internet now?!??!?!?

Email is fine, problems on the net, computer does not stay on line long enough to call up any sites, It can take upto 20-minutes by which time my phone line loses the connection-outstanding problem with BT.I think, dont really understand this technology!!

Someone suggested that freemasonry ‘plots against the church’,. I have taken the trouble to go to a freemasonry lodge and ask. They were hysterical with laughter.

I shall write to His Holiness and ask if being a freemason is as has beed suggested, so serious that it is on a par with willful murder and forbidden by the Church. I shall ask why Peers of the English Realm are given special dispensation…I will get back to you with the response. If his Holiness says that it is forbidden, I shall publicly apologise on this thread.

God be with you