Masonic Conspiracy Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rumil
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And regarding the claim that any Masonic problems for the Church occurred long ago:

catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=2100&repos=4&subrepos=1&searchid=687575
It does not say what they were protesting. Could it have been the sexual molestation of children by members of the Catholic clergy which the Church covered up for many, many years? Please, don’t even try to say that there was not a cover-up. Even the good priests will dispute that one. They know the truth.
 
You know beischel, every other post out of your mouth is knocking the Knights of Columbus or the Church.

I think you ought to take a good look at where you place your priorities, and exactly why for you it appears the means justify the ends, i.e. the end of justifying the Masons, seems to mean to you it’s OK to knock the Church to achieve that goal.
 
You know beischel, every other post out of your mouth is knocking the Knights of Columbus or the Church.

I think you ought to take a good look at where you place your priorities, and exactly why for you it appears the means justify the ends, i.e. the end of justifying the Masons, seems to mean to you it’s OK to knock the Church to achieve that goal.
Oh but you are so wrong Shin. I am not knocking the KofC, I knock the fact that they do not offer the protection they purport to offer. That they only take the cream of the crop for insured and refuse those who need it most.

I do not knock the Church as a whole, but I do point out when I think it is wrong. I think it is wrong on its opinion of masonic fraternal groups and I think it is wrong to cover-up the vast molestation of children and provided protection to the guilty for so long.

Now we can differ on the Masonic thing. I can appreciate your position, though I do strongly disagree. But to defend the KoC insurance program if you know anything about it and to defend the Church when it committed vast wrongs for so long while so many children were hurt - and you seem to want to defend those actions by trying to turn the tables back on me for pointing out the issue, is frankly very disturbing.

The molestation of children issue will not go away by ignoring it. The Church did this to itself. It wasn’t the Masons who did it, it was those in authority of the Church who did it. Please don’t make the situation worse by pretending the issue never happened and pretending its an attack on the Church to even mention it.
 
BTW, what specifically is the Church citing as “principles (that) have always been considered irreconcilable”?

That does not sound like a re-review of Masonry to me. It sounds like a simple restatement.
You would have to read “Humanum Genus” to understand that. You do not at all seem like a “former” mason but one who is still an enthusiastic member. For faithful Catholics a notice from the CDF should be enough. The masons remain a secret society and that by itself would merit the condemnation of the Church. Masonry has a long history of anti-Catholicism, and anti-clericalism which of course all flows from its ideology of naturalism and religious indifferentism which it continues to propagate by “welcoming” all creeds. After the P2 scandal it Italy, (a subject you seem to want to avoid) there is no reason to believe anything is different. If Masonry wants to accept Christ as the Divine Redeemer that He is and renounce its secrecy and rituals, then perhaps the Vatican might take a second look. At present there is positively no reason to do so.
Yeah, I know they say they don’t propagate religious doctrine but that’s only what they say. We have to look at what** they do**.

C.
 
I never said a think about that issue – but that issue is not pertinent to the Masons. 😃

It is separate and not germane.

Moreover, it is actually immoral to use such a tactic, i.e. to try to win an argument using something not pertinent to it.

The Church is our Mother… Let’s say our mother forbids you to join some sports team, because of some problems with its morality… then to achieve your goal of justifying your defiance, you bring up some past bad actions of your mother, instead of dealing with the subject matter.

Well… it’s nearly the same sort of moral problem.
 
The argument is simple. How can the Church claim it is never wrong such as on the issue of Masons, then be wrong when it came to the protection of children? That’s the argument and it is a valid one. If the Church were so pure, then I think you might have a better argument when it comes to the Church’s positions on membership in the Masons. But if the Church was wrong in defending and protecting clergy who committed child abuse, then why can’t it be wrong on the Masons?

Second, Humanum Genus was written in the late 1800’s correct? Again, masonic organizations have changed over time.

Were some Masons anti-Catholic? Sure they were, but does that make the entire organization anti-Catholic? No!

In the 1970s I knew plenty of Catholic men and even clergy that one could say were anti-African American. So, does that make the Church anti-African American? Surely not. You cannot put the actions of some on an entire group. So when you say Masons are anti-Catholic, that is exactly what you are doing.

I defend Masons because I was one. I enjoyed it and I enjoyed the fellowship of many of the members. They took care of my father-in-law when the family had nothing. So yes, I am going to defend them because I think the Church is wrongly persecuting them. The only reason I left the Masons is because I was told by the Church that I could not be a member. So I demitted. Frankly and honestly, I do not think the Church has the right to tell me who I can and cannot associate with. I should be the one deciding what organizations I can belong to, and who I can work for as long as it does not impact my faith. And the Masons NEVER impacted my faith, never tried to convert, never said anything against me or my Church, never tried to change my beliefs…it’s just a fraternal group with some secret frat-like initiation rituals, signs and handshakes. People put a lot more sinister things into it than what actually exist.

Masonry is like any other fraternal group. The Elks, Moose, Kiwanis, or the like are not going to Accept Jesus Christ as the Redeemer and as far as I know, the Church has not banned membership in those groups. So why do Masons have to accept it and Kiwanis gets a pass?
 
The argument is simple. How can the Church claim it is never wrong such as on the issue of Masons, then be wrong when it came to the protection of children? That’s the argument and it is a valid one.
The issue of the Masons has to do with the Church’s understanding of Divine Revelation and the nature of true Religion (the Church recognizing Freemasonry for what it is: a false religion - even when some of Freemasonry’s adherents naively and pertinaciously insist it isn’t); thus it pertains to The Church’s infallibility when teaching regarding Faith and Morals. The sins of commission and ommission of some priests and of some in the hierarchy in relation to the abuse of minors (or any other types of sins committed by priests and bishops) do not, however, pertain to the Church’s infallibility, since the Church through her Magisterium is not in any way promoting this abuse or teaching that this behavior is acceptable in her priests or anyone else. Simple.
 
. . .The only reason I left the Masons is because I was told by the Church that I could not be a member. So I demitted. Frankly and honestly, I do not think the Church has the right to tell me who I can and cannot associate with. I should be the one deciding what organizations I can belong to, and who I can work for as long as it does not impact my faith. And the Masons NEVER impacted my faith, . . .
And just about every one of your posts on CAF has to do with defending the Masons. Does your interest in the Catholic Faith go beyond attacking her teaching on the Masons and Masonic membership?
 
The argument is simple. How can the Church claim it is never wrong such as on the issue of Masons, then be wrong when it came to the protection of children? That’s the argument and it is a valid one. If the Church were so pure, then I think you might have a better argument when it comes to the Church’s positions on membership in the Masons. But if the Church was wrong in defending and protecting clergy who committed child abuse, then why can’t it be wrong on the Masons?

Second, Humanum Genus was written in the late 1800’s correct? Again, masonic organizations have changed over time.

Were some Masons anti-Catholic? Sure they were, but does that make the entire organization anti-Catholic? No!

In the 1970s I knew plenty of Catholic men and even clergy that one could say were anti-African American. So, does that make the Church anti-African American? Surely not. You cannot put the actions of some on an entire group. So when you say Masons are anti-Catholic, that is exactly what you are doing.

I defend Masons because I was one. I enjoyed it and I enjoyed the fellowship of many of the members. They took care of my father-in-law when the family had nothing. So yes, I am going to defend them because I think the Church is wrongly persecuting them. The only reason I left the Masons is because I was told by the Church that I could not be a member. So I demitted. Frankly and honestly, I do not think the Church has the right to tell me who I can and cannot associate with. I should be the one deciding what organizations I can belong to, and who I can work for as long as it does not impact my faith. And the Masons NEVER impacted my faith, never tried to convert, never said anything against me or my Church, never tried to change my beliefs…it’s just a fraternal group with some secret frat-like initiation rituals, signs and handshakes. People put a lot more sinister things into it than what actually exist.

Masonry is like any other fraternal group. The Elks, Moose, Kiwanis, or the like are not going to Accept Jesus Christ as the Redeemer and as far as I know, the Church has not banned membership in those groups. So why do Masons have to accept it and Kiwanis gets a pass?
You first point is rather absurd. It is not a matter of the Church’s teaching being “wrong” on the protection of children, its teaching on that indeed was never wrong. Some Church leaders were guilty of a cover-up however, and failed to protect children and that is reprehensible. That has nothing to do with the Church’s teaching against masonry. Since you don’t think the Church has the “right” to tell you who to associate with you are already rejecting the Church and that is a serious thing. The Church can indeed tell you who to associate with. That is part of the pope’s jurisdiction, recently re-affirmed by Vatican II.

Again the problem is you are not really grounded in the teachings of the Church. You want to blow off Humanum Genus without reading it and you want to claim the Masons have changed. How can we tell they’ve changed? They are still secret societies. The Church has always condemned secret societies, PERIOD. The Masons have no need of secrecy unless they’ve got something to hide… Sure you got conned by some guys who were nice to your family and they were the victims of the same con. Unless the Grand Masters are giving you a full accounting of what they do and how they spend your money, then you’ve got a HUGE problem. You pretend you know something about masonry, but in fact you were NOT privy to all its secrets. They showed you an innocuous face and you bought it.
Masonry remains a religion of mere natural righteousness, the Church rightly condemns it for that. “Humanum Genus” remains valid. So what it was written in the 19th century!
Masonry has not given up its secrecy or its espousal of naturalism. That is the point!
The Masons have whined about the Church’s condemnation of them for a long time but refuse to abandon their secrecy, naturalism, etc., so NOTHING has changed.

As usual, you want to dodge discussion of the P2 issue. So this is a pretty lame exercise at this point. I’m not sure what the status of the Elks, etc. is . If they engage in secrecy then membership in them would be inadmissible. Accepting the Divinity of Christ is only one condition as I noted.

C.
 
And just about every one of your posts on CAF has to do with defending the Masons. Does your interest in the Catholic Faith go beyond attacking her teaching on the Masons and Masonic membership?
Yes, simply trying to correct a wrong. Someone has to try and protect an underdog in a fight. But thanks for asking.
 
It appears the Third Secret of Fatima is indeed the corruption in the Church and it seems to be well established.

BTW, while on the subject of secrecy and its supposed evil, why wasn’t the Third Secret revealed as our Blessed Mother had instructed?
 
Yes, it does thank you. Except for the fact that most of the specifics are incorrect. Therefore, the Church is basing its ruling on incorrect information or at best, things taken completely out of context, and or distorted.

Pike as a mason wrote things as he saw it. That does not make it something that was endorsed or accepted by Masonic organizations. For example, if I wrote a book on the Catholic Church as I saw it, does that mean that everyone else should take my writings as that which was approved and accepted by the Church? Of course not. One person’s opinion should not be the basis to damn an entire organization.

Masonic organization clearly state over and over they are NOT a religion. Yet, it constantly surfaces and noted in this article are such proofs as having a “feast day” probably referring to “St. John’s Day” when the officers of the lodge all attend Sunday services at the church the lodge master belongs to so how that makes it a religions is beyond me. Burial ritual is another point cited. Seems our military also has a burial ritual so I guess our military is now a religion. I have never seen the cross referred to as a symbol of nature. I’ve never seen a cross used - period since Masons are of many faiths. Also, “their alter” was referenced except, there was no alter in our lodge. Ever. And what is the issue with other religions using their holy book - why is that a problem for Catholics? Why do we care? Oh, and yes, they use the term “seek light” but never as in spiritual instruction, but as truth…as in don’t we all seek the truth? I know I am trying here. While we are on truth, the name Jesus as NOT forbidden to be used in the lodge. Yes an oath is taken, and you are told the oath is symbolic and not literal. All I see are Catholics taking things to extreme and looking for issues and problems that are just not there.
Why is it extreme to obey Jesus’ representative here on earth, the Pope. Our Church, the Bride of Christ, has determined that Freemasonry is a hazzard to our spiritual health. If our plan is to be in heaven at the end of our earthly days, it would be prudent to follow the teachings of the Church.

If you have proof positive that the Masons have in fact revised their organizations principles to such an extent that the Church’s objection is not longer valid, you should make sure that the Vatican gets it so they can revise the teaching.
 
Why is it extreme to obey Jesus’ representative here on earth, the Pope. Our Church, the Bride of Christ, has determined that Freemasonry is a hazzard to our spiritual health. If our plan is to be in heaven at the end of our earthly days, it would be prudent to follow the teachings of the Church.

If you have proof positive that the Masons have in fact revised their organizations principles to such an extent that the Church’s objection is not longer valid, you should make sure that the Vatican gets it so they can revise the teaching.
OK, after doing some more reading on the infallibility of the Church as it concerns Faith and Morals, I can see the points being made by all of you on that subject. So I will agree with your statements in that regard. I guess I have to say further that I do not see membership in a fraternal organization to be a matter of faith or morals for the Church. Masonry never taught me anything from a religious standpoint, though the degrees do teach moral lessons in how to be an upright person. Many organizations teach similar lessons. So they have secrets. How is that immoral? Parents have secrets from their children. Priests have secrets from their parishioners. The government has secrets from the governed. So does having secrets make the person or groups immoral? Masonry is not, as some claim, to be a secret society. If it were, you would not know who the members are, where they meet, etc. Masonry does not even come close to meeting the definition of a secret society. It is simply a society with secrets. Big deal. Masonry has tried reaching out to the Church and are rebuffed. Where is the dialog? What is there to fear from open and honest discussions? The popes have preached dialog between nations to avoid war, but yet will not have discussions itself with a fraternal group to at least attempt to work out differences. All anyone points to are events that happened decades or centuries ago. Time to set-aside differences and talk and at least make an effort to find common ground and acceptance.
 
Since you cannot note which Masonic traditions are in conflict with the Church (please, from actual Masonic sources, not dribble that others write or interpret) we don’t know what has changed or not changed now do we? We just have generalized statements being quoted with no actual specifics.
And how, pray tell, am I going to find out the actual specifics from a secret organization?

🤷
My personal belief is that because it is a group open to those of all faiths, the Church is afraid that association with non-Catholics will cause even more Catholics to leave the Church. The Church really wants Catholics to mostly associate with other Catholics.
Hmm. Why was my mother allowed to marry a non-Catholic then? I guess I am unaware of the secret document that warns Catholics about associating with non-Catholics. Maybe you can point me to an actual Catholic source, not dribble that others write or interpret.
 
OK, after doing some more reading on the infallibility of the Church as it concerns Faith and Morals, I can see the points being made by all of you on that subject. So I will agree with your statements in that regard. I guess I have to say further that I do not see membership in a fraternal organization to be a matter of faith or morals for the Church. Masonry never taught me anything from a religious standpoint, though the degrees do teach moral lessons in how to be an upright person. Many organizations teach similar lessons. So they have secrets. How is that immoral? Parents have secrets from their children. Priests have secrets from their parishioners. The government has secrets from the governed. So does having secrets make the person or groups immoral? Masonry is not, as some claim, to be a secret society. If it were, you would not know who the members are, where they meet, etc. Masonry does not even come close to meeting the definition of a secret society. It is simply a society with secrets. Big deal. Masonry has tried reaching out to the Church and are rebuffed. Where is the dialog? What is there to fear from open and honest discussions? The popes have preached dialog between nations to avoid war, but yet will not have discussions itself with a fraternal group to at least attempt to work out differences. All anyone points to are events that happened decades or centuries ago. Time to set-aside differences and talk and at least make an effort to find common ground and acceptance.
Why do you think the primary reason for the Church’s objections are Masonry’s secrecy?

If Freemasonry is unwilling to give up on the principles that leads the Church to its negative opinion of it, how can the differences be set aside?

This would like asking the Church to set aside the Doctrine of the Trinity so Mormans could join the Church without changing any of their beliefs.
 
OK, after doing some more reading on the infallibility of the Church as it concerns Faith and Morals, I can see the points being made by all of you on that subject. So I will agree with your statements in that regard. I guess I have to say further that I do not see membership in a fraternal organization to be a matter of faith or morals for the Church. Masonry never taught me anything from a religious standpoint, though the degrees do teach moral lessons in how to be an upright person. Many organizations teach similar lessons. So they have secrets. How is that immoral? Parents have secrets from their children. Priests have secrets from their parishioners. The government has secrets from the governed. So does having secrets make the person or groups immoral? Masonry is not, as some claim, to be a secret society. If it were, you would not know who the members are, where they meet, etc. Masonry does not even come close to meeting the definition of a secret society. It is simply a society with secrets. Big deal. Masonry has tried reaching out to the Church and are rebuffed. Where is the dialog? What is there to fear from open and honest discussions? The popes have preached dialog between nations to avoid war, but yet will not have discussions itself with a fraternal group to at least attempt to work out differences. All anyone points to are events that happened decades or centuries ago. Time to set-aside differences and talk and at least make an effort to find common ground and acceptance.
Why don’t you post for everyone all the oaths required to be taken in the lodge? From the lowest level to the highest degrees. Shouldn’t be a problem, should it? Perhaps you could get some high level masons to help you with the higher degrees.
 
Masonry does not even come close to meeting the definition of a secret society. It is simply a society with secrets.
Help me out here a litte. What is the definition of a secret society? How does it differ from a society with secrets?
Time to set-aside differences and talk and at least make an effort to find common ground and acceptance.
Huh? What does it matter? Who are the Masons that Catholics need to be concerned about them (other than their supposedly superior insurance benefits…).

Do you have one of those COEXIST bumper stickers on your car or something? 😃
 
My big gripe is with catholics who are disobedient to the magisterium and the Church and remain in the Lodge…you are not allowed…canon law 1983…it is grave matter…and now you have** full knowledge**…so please do not have full consent and remain in the lodge…:eek:
 
And how, pray tell, am I going to find out the actual specifics from a secret organization?

🤷

Hmm. Why was my mother allowed to marry a non-Catholic then? I guess I am unaware of the secret document that warns Catholics about associating with non-Catholics. Maybe you can point me to an actual Catholic source, not dribble that others write or interpret.
That’s the point, it is NOT a secret organization. Anything you want to know about the Masons is available on the net or in most bookstores. Just use the Masonic sources instead of the anti-Masonic sources that tend to distort the facts to their sinister advantage.

As for association with non-Catholics. I went through Catholic Schools my entire life and this goes back to the early 1960s. Association with non-Catholics was very much frowned upon. We had our own sports leagues, scouting, etc. Not that you could not associate with non-Catholics, its just that the Church, priests and nuns wanted you to associate with Catholics as much as possible. Marriage outside of the faith was really frowned upon back then, though not prohibited. BTW, I never referred to there being any secret policy of such. Just stating how we were taught.
 
Dear gamewell/ex-mason’s here: Is this true?

Consider the penalties of the obligations (Nevada ritual, circa 1984):
"To all of which I do solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, without any hesitation, mental reservation, or secret evasion of mind in me whatsoever; binding myself under no less a penalty than that of having….
Entered Apprentice Degree: “…my throat cut across, my tongue torn out, and with my body buried in the sands of the sea at low-water mark, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, should I ever knowingly or willfully violate this, my solemn Obligation of an Entered Apprentice.”
Fellow Craft Degree: “…my left breast torn open, my heart and vitals taken thence, and with my body given as a prey to the vultures of the air, should I ever knowingly, or willfully, violate this, my solemn Obligation of a Fellow Craft.”;
Master Mason Degree: “…my body severed in twain, my bowels taken thence, and with my body burned to ashes, and the ashes thereof scattered to the four winds of Heaven, that there might remain neither track, trace nor remembrance among man or Masons of so vile and perjured a wretch as I should be, should I ever knowingly or willfully violate this, my solemn Obligation of a Master Mason.”

If that is true that is utterly vile and reprehensible. How can any Catholic, how can ANYONE, with a clear conscience even say that…?:eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top