What about Freemasonry is "dangerous"?

[PSUCath]

Are you from USA? Because in USA, Masons for the last 50 or so years are like the friendly guys running the BBQ booth at the street fair and raising money for charity. Like the non-Catholic version of the KoC. Or like the joke lodge on cartoons like the Flintstones and Simpsons.

Yes, I’m an American, and this is exactly how I’ve seen the Lodge in my community. The guys in the little cars and the Shriners Hospitals. All of the people I know who are Masons have said most of what they do is drink beers and hang out, not come up with ways to topple Christianity. Maybe that’s why I’m confused.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I can recognize someone as having given a good answer without agreeing with them 100 percent. I do agree that Freemasonry probably wasn’t engaged in a worldwide conspiracy to take down the church (And Church Militant is not a reliable source for any subject these days); as has been mentioned, Anglo-American Freemasonry evolved in a much more benign way than Continental Freemasonry.

There were an awful lot of anti-Catholic/ anti-religious politicians and leaders in both Continental Europe and Latin America who were strongly influenced by Freemasonry and did very bad things against the Church, including killing Catholics, in some cases killing a lot of Catholics. “Masonic” in some countries such as France was shorthand for “Anti-Clerical” or “Anti-Catholic”.

Anti-clericalism and Freemasonry - Wikipedia

 

[PSUCath]

It seems like you are being willfully blind to that point.

This is insulting to me. I’ve already said (multiple times) that I’m aware of and agree with the Papal condemnations of freemasonry. See the first sentence in my original question for evidence. All I’m trying to do is figure out what danger there is to the Church from the Masons. I read all of the responses to my question, which either say “they’re dangerous just accept it,” or “there’s not really a conspiracy against the Church.” I’m just trying to get an educated opinion.

It’s the responsibility of Catholics with the ability to educate themselves to do so. Others should not have to explain every little point.

Uhh, that’s what this entire Forum is about… This really couldn’t be more wrong. I’m trying to rely on people who know more than me so I can educate myself on this. If you aren’t here to help educate people, why are you here at all?

 

[Margaret_Ann]

Is the author of the book a Freemason? If so, then obviously he thinks it’s a myth.

 

[PSUCath]

Is the author of the book a Freemason?

No. He was a well-respected historian with ties to Oxford and Princeton.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/J-M-Roberts

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’ve made an honest effort to engage in discussion. If you’re going to feel insulted, then I will bow out.

I think pointing you to sources (We’ve pointed to many) and making the comments made should be enough. It seems like every argument made, you are ignoring and continuing to insist on your original view, like we have to prove a point the Popes made over and over. That to me is not what the forum is all about. If you’re really interested in gaining a good understanding, you can refer to the sources you’ve been given, not keep asking for more and more. And then if you have a more specific question after reviewing, you can ask the more specific question.

We have a lot of people who ask questions on here who don’t really want to “do their homework”. They’re pretty much convinced they’re right, and if we don’t come up with the magic bullet to make them think differently, then it’s our fault somehow. It’s not the forum’s job to come up with a magic bullet.

The reason I asked if you read more than one book is that many academics, including those at very good schools, are dismissive of religion in general or Catholicism in particular and thus come up with all kinds of views. If you read academics from a variety of backgrounds you will get a more complete picture than reading just a couple.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

In Freemasonry, members are supposed to help each other even if it goes against the Church, their country or even their families.

True story: Albert Pike (who I posted about earlier) was a 33rd degree Grand Master of Freemasonry. He was caught & convicted of espionage. President Andrew Johnson, who was a lower degree Freemason, pardoned him because he was a Grand Master.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I was just watching a true crime about Dr. Crippen the British murderer, who was alleged to have been making Masonic signs to the judge during his trial in hopes the judge as a fellow Mason would be lenient. Didn’t work. Crippen was hanged.

 

[otjm]

Heresy is wrong. Heresy is not dangerous? Really???

They are anti-Catholic; and some groups may be less so or more so than others. And their anti-Catholicism is more than just a negative attitude toward the Church; it is in their oath, in their charter, and will show up among members.

 

[Bithynian]

All I’m trying to do is figure out what danger there is to the Church from the Masons. I read all of the responses to my question, which either say “they’re dangerous just accept it,” or “there’s not really a conspiracy against the Church.”

It’s a very polarising topic so one is bound to come across a spectrum of views on the topic: from those who disagree civilly with Freemasons on a theological level, to those who think that the Freemasons are the instrument of Satan.

It’s possible for both positions to be true. Freemasonry isn’t a homogeneous institution, and most Grand Lodges are relatively autonomous with their approach to the Church varying according to time and place.

In Australia, for example, Freemasons are rather benign, and they barely even have any residual aura of secrecy or mystery since they’ve allowed public viewing of nearly all their rites and rituals. Largely this is because their membership has flatlined and most lodges will be extinct in a decade or two.

 

[PSUCath]

you are ignoring and continuing to insist on your original view, like we have to prove a point the Popes made over and over.

What are you talking about? Everybody on this forum has come up with a different take on whether Freemasonry is evil or not, and from what I’m seeing the only reason for this is that there is a difference between American and European Freemasonry. What you say makes no sense - I’m looking for an explanation of why the Popes condemned it, not trying to challenge it. You’re not providing that explanation, and saying it’s not your job to explain it. Why would you even answer this question is you weren’t willing to explain it?

They’re pretty much convinced they’re right, and if we don’t come up with the magic bullet to make them think differently, then it’s our fault somehow.

I’m not looking for a “magic bullet.” I just wanted to get a simple answer to my question: what makes masons dangerous? In response, I was sent to a 38-point papal bull. Is it too much to ask for me to get a simple answer that I can read? Nobody has been able to give that to me.

If you read academics from a variety of backgrounds you will get a more complete picture than reading just a couple.

I understand that. The whole reason why I came to this forum was that I was hoping to get opinions from people who already have done that research, instead of being told: “it’s History 101, go do it yourself.” This is just plain disappointing. Bithynian has been the only one to give me any sort of guidance or well-thought-out opinion.

 

[PSUCath]

It’s a very polarising topic so one is bound to come across a spectrum of views on the topic: from those who disagree civilly with Freemasons on a theological level, to those who think that the Freemasons are the instrument of Satan.

Thank you for understanding the root of my questions. I started on the first end of the spectrum you mentioned: disagreeing with Masonry on a theological level. I was under the impression that the Popes who condemned Freemasonry were also at this point on the spectrum. All I wanted to figure out is why there are people who are at the other end, who think that Masonry is Luciferian in nature. I’ve been given plenty of evidence on how they don’t like Catholics, but neither do Protestants or Orthodox. Just because these groups are opposed to Catholicism doesn’t make them evil. It makes them wrong, but that doesn’t make Protestants the pawns of the devil. If you disagree with that, then you are not taking the Catholic opinion.

 

[PSUCath]

it is in their oath, in their charter, and will show up among members.

Please, I’m begging you to give me evidence lol. That’s all I wanted lol.

We’re circling the drain, getting closer and closer.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

The Shriners are the outreach arm of Freemasonry. So yes, they help out sick children and at the local fire department etc. That still doesn’t mean one should get involved with them.

As the old saying goes: you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. And if you’ve ever caught a fly with honey, they’re usually stuck there and can’t get away.

Re the Flintstones: My siblings & I grew up with that show along with other Sat morning cartoons. The “lodge” in the cartoon is based on Freemasonry. So one gets thinking “oh this isn’t so bad” and they become indifferent.

I forget which Freemason said this but here goes: “A man who questions dogma is a Freemason without the apron.”

There is a short booklet on the Alta Vendita which was the plan to subvert the Church. Pope Leo XIII wanted it to be published so the world would know and be alert. Google “Alta Vendita” and it will come up. In short, almost everything the Freemasons planned 200 years ago has come to pass.

Look at Behind the Lodge Door too. That’s really good. (I had that and gave it away ).

 

[Margaret_Ann]

Just because these groups are opposed to Catholicism doesn’t make them evil . It makes them wrong , but that doesn’t make Protestants the pawns of the devil. If you disagree with that, then you are not taking the Catholic opinion.

Evil is the deprivation of good. Objectively speaking, other denominations are evil because they deprive people of the grace of God.

I have to leave for Liturgy soon. More tomorrow.

 

[Bithynian]

evidence

This is an excerpt from S. G. Payne’s chapter on the Portuguese monarchy in the 19th century (in A History of Spain and Portugal):

Members of the Masonic lodges played a major role in the rise of Portuguese liberalism and anticlericalism. Freemasonry entered Portugal from England before the middle of the eighteenth century and spread slowly there and in Brazil. By 1812 there were thirteen lodges in Lisbon alone. Brazilian Masons were active in the riots of 1801 and 1817, but in Portugal Masons were found on both sides of the Gomes da Freire revolt in 1817. By 1820, however, Masons were devoted almost unanimously to the liberal cause in politics, and their secrecy and cohesiveness enabled them to play a vital role in mobilizing support in a society in which there were few effective associations. Portuguese Freemasonry was middle class, especially upper middle class, with some aristocratic support. At the behest of leading Masons, D. Pedro himself joined the order. By the 1830s the Masons had become, by and large, the principal promoters of anticlericalism.

This was, essentialy, the norm for most continental European countries in the 19th century. Garibaldi, one of the leaders of the Italian reunification, was very anti-clerical (something about ‘there isn’t enough space in Rome for both me and the Pope’) and was an important figure in the revival of Italian Freemasonry.

Outside of small analyses such as this, it’s unlikely you’ll find the smoking gun evidence which you’re seeking. Freemasonry has been little studied at a professional level (whether historical, political or sociology) largely because (1) organisational secrecy and minimal record keeping; (2) the arcane, coma-inducing theosophical tangents that can oft permeate Freemason literature; (3) it’s hard to solicit any interest in Freemasonry as a legitimate subject of enquiry given that 99% of the writings tend to be about how they form a cabal with the Jews (sometimes even with the Pope!) that is set to rule the world via 5G mind control.

 

[PSUCath]

This is an excerpt from S. G. Payne’s chapter on the Portuguese monarchy in the 19th century (in A History of Spain and Portugal ):

Thank you so, so much. This is the type of evidence that I was interested in learning about - I just wanted a starting point for concrete evidence of the Masons being involved in anti-Catholic political unrest. I appreciate you finding that for me.

 

[PSUCath]

There is a short booklet on the Alta Vendita which was the plan to subvert the Church. Pope Leo XIII wanted it to be published so the world would know and be alert. Google “Alta Vendita” and it will come up. In short, almost everything the Freemasons planned 200 years ago has come to pass.

Look at Behind the Lodge Door too. That’s really good. (I had that and gave it away ).

Thank you for the recommendations! I will look into them both.

 

[Montrose]

I don’t think you’re being rude at all. I have read plenty of articles by Catholics, Freemasons, and folks not associated with either group. It’s just that I’m seeing more evidence that this is a harmless fraternity with a backwards idea of God than a dangerous hate organization.

I would see Freemasons like drug cartels. Drug cartels help the poor and build schools to deceive people into thinking they are a “harmless fraternity” but they are evil just as Freemasons are.

 

[PSUCath]

but they are evil just as Freemasons are.

I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again. I appreciate everybody’s (name removed by moderator)ut, but I’m not looking for these blanket statements with no evidence. I’m not looking for people to tell me that the Popes have condemned it. I want to know why, and nobody besides Bithynian has actually given me a concrete example of the reasons why we should think freemasonry is evil. Please do not peddle conspiracies with no evidence.