# why are Catholics "excommunicated"



## jhale1158 (Feb 13, 2013)

I read that Catholics, as deemed by te pope in 1730 something are to be excommunicated if they become Freemasons. Why is this?


----------



## chrmc (Feb 13, 2013)

I'd bet that back in 1730 the Catholic church was not super wild about Freemasonry, and probably threw us in with all the other devil worshipers and bad people running around back then. 
If you look at bit at some of the anti masonic websites I'm sure you can find the decree from back then.


----------



## Mac (Feb 13, 2013)

I don't have time at the moment to get into a detailed discussion, but this page contains many of the bulls and encyclicals issued by the Vatican with regard to Freemasonry, dating back to the first in 1738.

http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/anti-masonry/papal_encyclicals.html


----------



## Plustax (Feb 14, 2013)

Sad thing is that it continues to happen today. I know of a "X" mason in S. Texas who had to go thru a 6 month "probationary" period before he was accepted back in to the catholic church. Still hard for me to understand the mentality and how the clergy still permits this to be continued. It's as bad as if some churches still believed in "witch burning"... and probably some still do during this day & age. I personally lose respect & find it disappointing that people whom are highly recognized by the public, to still condone this type of belief & behavior. I wonder if I'll ever see the Catholic church do away with this nonsense. I know it can be changed... afterall it was changed that meat could be eaten on Fridays when I was a kid & that came all the way from the top. Ha ha Then again as I think about all this it is much like some things in our own Fraternity. Some mentalities won't change due to "older or Senior" brethren in high places continuing to push or influence those "younger" brethren in the mindset of old beliefs because "that's the way it's always been". Yet we often  hear "we need new & young blood in our fraternity". Maybe we should add to the end of that statement... "that believe in our old ways of thinking". JMHO


----------



## widows son (Feb 14, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

Great points. If I'm not mistaken, pope John Paul II revoked the excommunication ban for catholic masons.


----------



## otherstar (Feb 14, 2013)

The Revised Code of Canon Law (Church Law) published during the reign of John Paul II in 1983 was rather ambiguous about Masonic membership (and the Commentary made it seem like if Masonic organizations did not plot against the Church, Catholics could join).

In 1983, shortly after the publication of new Code of Canon Law, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF -- headed by then Cardinal Joesph Ratzinger,now Pope Benedict XVI) issued a document that stopped short of excommunication but did declare that Catholics who are Freemasons are in a state of "grave sin and my not receive communion." Here is that document. In 1985, and article appeared in the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano that further clarified the stance of the CDF, and hence the Catholic Church, against Freemasonry. Here is that article In the article, there is a notable shift in teaching away from "plotting against the Church" to opposing Freemasonry on the grounds that it promotes religious relativism, naturalistic religion, etc.

That being said, the penalty for belonging to the Masonic Lodge for a Catholic is no different than for a Catholic who uses artificial birth control. 

Plustax, I am not sure why your friend had to wait 6 months to get back into the Church. I've NEVER heard of that happening unless an annulment was involved and your friend had re-married before the annulment came through. I was raised Catholic, spent two  years in a Benedictine monastery, and have studied Catholic theology extensively (I have a Master's degree in Philosophy from the Univ. of St. Thomas in  Houston). I am currently an unaffiliated Mason, but am working on changing that (dimitted in 2004 for a variety of reasons, but being Catholic was not one of them).


----------



## widows son (Feb 14, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

Interesting. I didn't know that Benedict had made that change. I've read somewhere too that the whole excommunication thing started over the pope stating he should be the GM of the Masonic order. But I think that's more hearsay.


----------



## Mac (Feb 14, 2013)

That is absolutely hearsay.


----------



## Plustax (Feb 14, 2013)

I honestly don't know why he had to wait either, but this happened this past year down in S. Texas. I had actually met the person (introduced by my brother years ago.. (whom by the way is a KofC with the Catholic church). When I met the individual we always identified each other with a friendly gesture and although we were not personal friends we always greeted each other as "brother" as many of us masons do. It was mid year last year that my brother informed me that this person had gone back to the Catholic church (in my ol' hometown .. I didn't ask how long ago), but before he was allowed back in the Catholic church he had to renounce himself from being a Mason and wait 6 months. Marriage as far as I know, had nothing at all to do with it. Just a couple of weeks ago my brother told me that the individual is now back in the Catholic church and is very active (which by the way, I'm glad that he's happy).  It does puzzle me on how all this took place, but I don't see any use in trying to meet with the person and find out more specifics. It's not his fault, he's just complying so he can get back in the Catholic church. Again, it's "old rules, old laws, old beliefs", that keep certain things from moving forward. My own brother doesn't understand it either because he knows what I do as a Mason and a Shriner and finds it very admirable. I've even taken him to see my lodge so he could see for himself what is in there and how it's set up and explain to him as much as I can. He found it interesting, but I still sense something that he finds unsure. Probably because of what he's been told for many years by others. Funny, I was told the same things, but I continued to search for "more light" and became a Mason 27 yrs ago.... then Scottish Rite and then Shriners. I still respect the Catholic Church as I do other churches, but don't necessarily agree or follow in all their beliefs except for one thing.... GOD. To me, that's all that matters and all I care about. 

Plustax, I am not sure why your friend had to wait 6 months to get back into the Church. I've NEVER heard of that happening unless an annulment was involved and your friend had re-married before the annulment came through. I was raised Catholic, spent two  years in a Benedictine monastery, and have studied Catholic theology extensively (I have a Master's degree in Philosophy from the Univ. of St. Thomas in  Houston). I am currently an unaffiliated Mason, but am working on changing that (dimitted in 2004 for a variety of reasons, but being Catholic was not one of them).[/QUOTE]


----------



## usmc05 (Feb 14, 2013)

I understand some of y'all don't agree with the Catholic Church and their rules, but the great thing bout Freemasonry is we can worship in our own way. Plus in America we have freedom of religion. There is some of us who practice our Catholic faith along with Masonry in the open. I understand some not understanding the Catholic faith, but please don't say it should change when you don't even belong. Just my two cents.


----------



## otherstar (Feb 14, 2013)

usmc05 said:


> I understand some of y'all don't agree with the Catholic Church and their rules, but the great thing bout Freemasonry is we can worship in our own way. Plus in America we have freedom of religion. There is some of us who practice our Catholic faith along with Masonry in the open. I understand some not understanding the Catholic faith, but please don't say it should change when you don't even belong. Just my two cents.



My sentiments exactly, to be quite honest. When asked about the teachings of the Church, I like to tell what the Church teaches and not my opinion. I've been a KofC for almost 25 years and a Mason for almost 15 (though not affiliated that whole time).


----------



## Mac (Feb 14, 2013)

Agreed.  It's odd.  I grew up Catholic but left the church soon after becoming an adult.  I will not return, but I've been getting a significant amount of exposure to it while reading and listening to Catholic news organizations regarding the Pope's decision to step down.


----------



## Plustax (Feb 15, 2013)

Hey otherstar, I see you mention that you are a KofC and a mason. If I may ask... is this allowed throughout all Catholics? Personally, I find it great that you are active in both, but just wonder if it's only allowed in your area. Again, I ask this because there were a couple of gents in my area that were interested in petitioning for our lodge, but all of a sudden stopped. I wondered if it was because they were KofC's (which both told us that they were). We haven't seen them again and leaves some (me, in particular) wondering.  You see, this would be good if clergymen of the Catholic faith could answer some of these "modern day" questions. Whether people (masons and non masons) would agree with the explanations would be irrelevant to me. It would just clear up curiosities of our times in this day and age.. not of the times of "way back when". Personally I feel that there has been more progress (still more needed) in masonry between mainstream and PHA than there has been between Masonry and Catholics. Yet, we all believe in a Supreme Being, brotherly love, faith, hope & Charity.... just don't invite each other to our meetings or discuss our fraternity beliefs (whether we agree or not). It is what it is......


----------



## Mac (Feb 15, 2013)

I would not compare the rift between Mainstream and PHA Freemasonry to the difference between Freemasonry and Catholicism.  The Church has a very clear stance on the issue, and it's not necessarily a matter of sitting down and repairing a rift, nor is it our place to declare that their stance, as religious doctrine, is wrong.  At that point, we are criticizing a religion, which is exactly why we don't discuss religion in Lodge.  

Are Freemasons good people?  Mostly.  Is every rule in the Catholic Church necessary?  I would venture no, but that's why I left.  

If nothing else, I would just advise brothers to stay respectful while having this kind of discussion.


----------



## otherstar (Feb 15, 2013)

Plustax said:


> Hey otherstar, I see you mention that you are a KofC and a mason. If I may ask... is this allowed throughout all Catholics? Personally, I find it great that you are active in both, but just wonder if it's only allowed in your area. Again, I ask this because there were a couple of gents in my area that were interested in petitioning for our lodge, but all of a sudden stopped. I wondered if it was because they were KofC's (which both told us that they were). We haven't seen them again and leaves some (me, in particular) wondering.  You see, this would be good if clergymen of the Catholic faith could answer some of these "modern day" questions. Whether people (masons and non masons) would agree with the explanations would be irrelevant to me. It would just clear up curiosities of our times in this day and age.. not of the times of "way back when". Personally I feel that there has been more progress (still more needed) in masonry between mainstream and PHA than there has been between Masonry and Catholics. Yet, we all believe in a Supreme Being, brotherly love, faith, hope & Charity.... just don't invite each other to our meetings or discuss our fraternity beliefs (whether we agree or not). It is what it is......



Actually, I'm not currently affiliated with a lodge, but I did dimit in good standing so I am considered an "unaffiliated mason" (according to Texas Masonic Law). I am, however, investigating the lodge's near me and will likely re-affiliate in the near future. Joining this forum has made the decision to re-affiliate much easier :-D

I've never told any of my brother Knights about my masonic membership. Some would care, some would not. I'm not very attached to the Catholic Church (even less so since my very Catholic father died last October), nor would I call myself a very good Catholic because there are many teachings I have trouble with (but that is not for discussion here). I'm not sure that it's "allowed" per se, because the teaching of the Church is pretty clear on the issue, but I follow my own conscience. For the last few years, I've been little more than a dues paying member of my KofC council because I'm pretty busy with my 4 daughters (I show up for degree ceremonials, and that's about it....I personally find the Masonic Degrees to be much more enlightening).


----------



## jhale1158 (Feb 17, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

I was wondering because I like to know the history of things. A new brother who is also in my unit asked me about it, so I figured I would ask. I do not fully understand Catholicism and their views on Freemasonry, but now I have lots of information! I appreciate your feedback!


----------



## widows son (Feb 17, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

Essential nobody other than Christ can go through what we do in the third degree, according to the church, even though its allegorical. There is a much deeper issue here than what's seen on the surface.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Feb 18, 2013)

*Re: why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*



widows son said:


> Essential nobody other than Christ can go through what we do in the third degree, according to the church, even though its allegorical. There is a much deeper issue here than what's seen on the surface.



Please cite the specific church documents that state this as the problem. Otherwise, you're merely perpetuating rumor and hearsay, hardly a moral act.


----------



## Bro_Vick (Feb 18, 2013)

*Re: why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*



widows son said:


> Essential nobody other than Christ can go through what we do in the third degree, according to the church, even though its allegorical. There is a much deeper issue here than what's seen on the surface.



Yeah, I don't buy this at all.  How many plays and screen plays have the same theme, almost exact?  It is man facing his mortality and the fact that death can come upon you at any time, and that bad things happen to good people.  While in the York Rite lodges there is some amount of justice, in the Scottish Rite first three, not so much.

So yeah, any church member who says this (which I have never read or heard before).  I commented on the other thread as to what are the two main criticisms from Mainstream churches (i.e. not snake handlers) criticisms of Freemasonry.

S&F,
-Bro Vick


----------



## otherstar (Feb 18, 2013)

*Re: why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*



BryanMaloney said:


> Please cite the specific church documents that state this as the problem. Otherwise, you're merely perpetuating rumor and hearsay, hardly a moral act.



I agree with you on this. There is NO Church document which states this. The most explicit official document that explains the Church's teaching against Masonry is the encyclical letter _Humanum Genus_ written in 1884 by Pope Leo XIII. I don't have time to summarize it here, other than to say that it accuses Masonry of practicing naturalism (denial of supernatural reality), and popular sovereignty (the notion that our rights come from man, not God), and the total separation of Church and State. 

Per the article I posted from the Vatican website earlier in this thread, the objections have shifted somewhat to include a false ecumenism (false in the eyes of the Church because it doesn't the the Roman Catholic Church as the true church) because Masonry allows all men of good will to meet together.


----------



## widows son (Feb 18, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

I don't own the book where I read that so i cant quote out of it.  But I remember it also went on to say that the church saw masonry as a newly rising religion which it felt its responsibility was to stamp it out. Without getting into detail as I don't know if there are others who are not MMs on here, but from what I remember this book said that the specific part where the M gets R on the FPOF, is a resurrection. The author went on to say that the pope believed no man could go through that real or allegorical except Christ. I know there are many plays and dramas that exemplify this idea, but the Masonic degrees are of a deeper nature than being a mere play. But this is just what I've read. I've also heard that once masonry hit the European continent, the pope requested that he become the grandmaster of masons in, France, Belgium, and Austria. I guess both of these statements cant be guaranteed because they aren't official statements by the Vatican. I remember the book having a lot references though that were legit, but ill have to get it from my friend.


----------



## Mac (Feb 18, 2013)

The idea of the Pope demanding/asking that he be Grand Master of any masonic order is just not rational.

I mean, think about it:  He's already opposing an order based on ideological reasons.  Why would he seek to head it rather than deny or oppose it on behalf of the church?


----------



## widows son (Feb 18, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

I'm not saying it makes sense, just what ive came across in that book. Obv there aren't things that add up in it.


----------



## Bro_Vick (Feb 18, 2013)

*Re: why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*



widows son said:


> I'm not saying it makes sense, just what ive came across in that book. Obv there aren't things that add up in it.



Than why bring it up?


----------



## Brother JC (Feb 18, 2013)

The big problem in that mess is the wording. Calling it a "resurrection" is misleading and incorrect (at least in my jurisdiction). But of course, we can't tell our side of the story, so until a clergyman is Raised, he can never know the truth.


----------



## K.S. (Feb 18, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

I am a Catholic, raised a Catholic and just stayed with it, and I'm a Mason. However, when I attend mass, I will not take off my Masonic ring, but I will turn it so none of the clergy will see it. Mainly because I'm not sure what they will do and I would rather stave off a religious confrontation.
When I was in N.C. For my nephews baptism last year, (I'm his Godfather), I did not turn my ring, because I don't attend mass at that church. I know one of the clergy men saw it, because I watched him stare at it for a minute, lol, and he never said a word. To this day, almost a year later, I ask my sister-in-law if it's ever come up and she says no.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Feb 19, 2013)

We should not forget that Masonry in France became avowedly atheist and openly anti-Catholic--the same form of Masonry that was also a moving force in the French Revolution. British Masonry, while never officially anti-Catholic, served as a place where the leaders of Great Britain/United Kingdom met, these same leaders who produced the anti-Catholic "Penal Laws" . In Germany, Masonry was very often allied with either the strictly Lutheran Kaiser or the "liberals" (we would call them "conservatives" today, since the "liberalism" of the 19th century was about free trade, capitalism, and individual conscience). The German "liberals", themselves, enthusiastically supported Bismarck's purely political "Kulturkampf" against the Catholic Church. This issue is a two-way street.

While Freemasonry might be seen as having religious elements, people like to ignore the very uncomfortable political and cultural elements that went with it. It was a northwestern European, culturally Protestant development, imported as a foreign influence into southern European, Catholic countries. It doesn't matter that it didn't promulgate Protestant religious ideas. The issue is the culture clash.


----------



## widows son (Feb 19, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

I've never personally met any catholic who has directly shown disdain for masonry. My family is predominately Catholic and Pentecostal, and a few of my cousins know I'm a mason but they don't care. My grandparents on my moms side are old and Italian, and have no clue what freemasonry is, nor have they heard of it. Same with my grandparent on my dads side. Both sides of my family have advocated the "your life, your choices, your consequences" motto, which all the family I have grown up with has followed, but they always made it clear that Christ wants to traverse the path with you. Such sweet people.  But I can't help feel that if any of my grandparents or elder aunts and uncles find out about masonry, and the stance the church has on it, (I'm not sure the Pentecostals stance on the craft)  that I might get an earful or worse. They are very open people, but at the same time very stubborn. Over the last year I've made some very dear friends and love being apart of the Masonic family, which I love along side my family.  I'd hate to be put in a position. Have any of guys been put in a similar position?


----------



## jwhoff (Feb 19, 2013)

Good take Brother Maloney.  And, everyone should remember the stakes (including death) were much higher in those days.  

Voltaire, were he alive, could surely enlighten us on that.  He found himself surrounded by zealots on all sides.  Brethren, what if we had to live his life?

Anyone feel up to it?


----------



## Ecossais (Feb 22, 2013)

I'd be disappointed if the RC Church lifted its age-old ban on Masonic membership ... disappointed in that it would mean that Freemasonry had simply become the "Rotary with ritual" that many run-of-the-mill Masons want it to become.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Feb 25, 2013)

Wel, Ecossais, let me begin your disappointment: While I am not Roman Catholic, I am Greek Orthodox, and my Bishops, Archbishops, and Patriarchs have denounced Freemasonry in the past. I was given permission by my priest to become a Mason.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Feb 25, 2013)

Ecossais said:


> I'd be disappointed if the RC Church lifted its age-old ban on Masonic membership ... disappointed in that it would mean that Freemasonry had simply become the "Rotary with ritual" that many run-of-the-mill Masons want it to become.



Why would it mean that? Are you claiming that there is actually something valid about allegations made about Freemasonry being inherently anti-Catholic or inherently anti-Christian? Exactly HOW would the Roman Catholic Church reversing its stance mean that Freemasonry has somehow become "Rotary with ritual". Elaborate upon this. Please, enlighten us all on how this works.

I predict you won't.


----------



## crono782 (Feb 25, 2013)

The statement by Ecossais sounded entirely tongue-in-cheek to me, but the base point sounded like, if Freemasonry were to become "watered down and abandoned any sense of esotericism in exchange for favorable public opinion" that the RCC would probably lift the ban (IMO) because what would it be then but a Rotary copy... Sad day indeed if Freemasonry were to place more importance on public opinion that its own ideals. I hope to never see that day.


----------



## jwhoff (Feb 25, 2013)

Brother Ecossais did so make his point, in a subtle sort of way.  Again, I suppose nothing is to be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## Michael Hatley (Mar 1, 2013)

I'm still confused about the letter of the law, to be honest.  My father-in-law would make a fine Mason, his father was an active Mason in his time, and he has expressed interest.  But he is Catholic, and KoC, and when I mentioned that he might want to check with his Church to make sure everything was all good the questions stopped.  I wish I was more knowledgeable about it all.

As an aside, I was once approached to join Opus Dei by a friend.  That is a long story, but this fellow is an academic and knew I was a Mason, and knew I would have to convert to Catholicism.  The odd things I found on cursory research had me raising my eyebrow.  I passed on that particular opportunity, but it still has me curious if nothing else to get it straight from them what their stance is on Freemasonry, with as much whys and whatfors as they'd give.


----------



## dfreybur (Apr 3, 2013)

*Re: why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*



K.S. said:


> I am a Catholic, raised a Catholic and just stayed with it, and I'm a Mason. However, when I attend mass, I will not take off my Masonic ring, but I will turn it so none of the clergy will see it. Mainly because I'm not sure what they will do and I would rather stave off a religious confrontation.



The objection to Masonry varies widely among the clergy.  There are a lot of Catholics and Orthodox in my mother lodge in California and they've never had any issue.  One of my Illinois lodge's attends an annual Saint John Day service at a member's church and we're announced as guests each year.  Yet I've seen objection by members of one of the Missouri Synod branches.


----------



## Ecossais (Apr 4, 2013)

I know quite a bit about the Roman Catholic Church and its Canon Law. If the RC Church ever lifts the sanction against becoming a Freemason, then it probably means that we have allowed our fraternity to become something so bland and empty and meaningless that it is no longer much more than Rotary with a bit of ritual. Of course, this will make a lot of our members happy, because they have been working overtime to demonstrate to the public that Masonry has no secrets and is not a secret society, and that Masonic ritual is nothing more than a bit of symbolism about working tools, living on the square, etc. The shame of it is that they have convinced most of our members that its true. But, when the public begins to believe it, then Freemasonry will have become what these nonsense peddlers want it to be.


----------



## Ecossais (Apr 5, 2013)

Brother Maloney: I just now saw your "challenge" to me to respond to your post of 2-25-2013. There seems to be quite of bit of anger in your posts, not that it matters, but I seem to have touched a nerve. BTW, its never smart to predict that someone won't respond to your post. It comes off as arrogant. It says, "my reasoning and logic is so on the money, and so correct and irrefutable, that I predict it will leave you speechless." If your post was so irrefutable that they do not post, then you didn't need to make the prediction in the first place. But, if they do respond to you, then they have proven you wrong. Ouch!

Anywayyy. I'm sorry I didn't respond sooner, but I don't spend a lot of time here on this forum.

You asked:  "Are you claiming that there is actually something valid about allegations made about Freemasonry being inherently anti-Catholic or inherently anti-Christian? Exactly HOW would the Roman Catholic Church reversing its stance mean that Freemasonry has somehow become 'Rotary with ritual'."

My answer:  Of course not! I never claimed that the RC Church's allegation that Freemasonry is "anti-Catholic" or "anti-Christian" was valid. 

You know, you shouldn't use these kind of tactics in debate. When you put words in the other man's mouth, attempting to set up a paper tiger that will make you look good when you knock it down, falls apart when the other party says, "Wait a minute. I never said that. You put words in my mouth." Which, of course, he will.

But, I digress. You asked: "Exactly HOW [all caps - nice touch - I'll try to use that, too] would the RC Church reversing its stance mean that Freemasonry somehow become 'Rotary with ritual'." In order to answer that, I need to educate you, apparently, on what the RC Church's historical objections to Freemasonry have been.

The objections that the RC Church have against Freemasonry are not only that Freemasonry is anti-Catholic or anti-Christian, although they do include those. The RC Church first condemned Freemasonry and its members when Pope Clement XII issued his Bull, In Eminenti, in 1738. In that, Clem (I call him "Clem") stated that Freemasons assume "natural virtue," and "associate in a close and exclusive bond ... and are bound by a stringent oath sworn on the Sacred Volume, and conceal their doings under heavy penalties." (Oh! Well. We certainly can't have any of that.) He continued to say that "If they are not acting ill, they need not avoid the light."

Over the next 160-some-odd years, no less than sixteen (16) Bulls were issued by seven of his successors in office, Pope Pius IX being the most prolific, issuing six anti-Masonic Bulls between 1846 and 1873. But, most scholars recall the 1884 Bull issued by Pope Leo XIII, titled "Humanum Genus." In that particular 25-page essay, Pope Leo XIII, speaking on behalf of his church, spelled out most, if not all, the pent-up objections the church had long harbored against our fraternity. He really cut loose, and let it all hang out. Here's a summary of excerpts from old Leo's Humanum Genus:

1.) "The human race is divided into two opposing parties, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan. Freemasonry belongs to the latter." (This is just his opening salvo. He explains this later.)

2.) This "capital enemy" (referring to Freemasonry) "is a danger to Christianity as well as to society." (It gets better.)

3.) It is the "real supreme sin of the Freemasons to persecute with untamed hatred Christianity." (Wait for it. He's just getting warmed up here.)

4.) "By opening their gates to persons of every creed they promote ... religious indifference." He explains that "the Catholic [church], which being the only true one, cannot be joined with others without enormous injustice." (Ah. Here we have it. According to Pope Leo, the ecumenical nature of the Craft, by itself, condemns the fraternity in the eyes of the church. It's the fault of all you Baptists and Methodists. LOL)

5.) Freemasonry "leaves to the members full liberty of thinking about God whatever they like, affirming or denying His existence." (Of course, this is not entirely true. Regular Freemasonry does not admit atheists. But, Anderson's Constitutions did state that Freemasonry only obliges Masons "to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves." The Freemasons call this "religious liberty," which the RC Church always despised, and old Pope Leo could never abide.)

6.) Freemasons "trust the education of their children to laymen and allow them to select their own religions when they grow up." (So, now he is attacking the public school system and religious liberty, and blaming the Freemasons for it. Well, we were complicit, after all. But, its interesting that RC Church, which has never, to my knowledge rescinded or denounced Pope Leo's Bull, points to Freemasonry's support of public education and religious liberty as one of the reasons that the fraternity is "allied with Satan.")

7.) The Freemasons teach that "the people are sovereign, those who rule have no authority but by the commission and concession of the people." (So, here, in one short sentence, Pope Leo condemns the American Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, blames it all on the Freemasons, and reveals that he is still clinging to the old notion of the divine right of kings, and he writes all of this over a century AFTER the American Revolution.) The Pope continued by adding that it is "a capital error to grant to the people full power of shaking off at their own will the yoke of obedience." (I love that part â€“ "yoke of obedience." He's a hoot! Again, the Pope condemns the American Revolution, a democratic republic, and the American government to boot. He's a fun guy.)

8.) The Freemasons believe that "the origin of all rights and civil duties is in the people or in the state." (I guess he didn't want to leave the Bill of Rights out of his condemnation. Actually, the Declaration of Independence states that we are "endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights." So, that document states that individual rights come from God, and not from the state. Of course, Freemasonry, in its formative documents is silent on this point, but the Pope is blaming Freemasonry for the American experiment in self-government.)

Okay, that's enough. It goes on. But, that's plenty for now.

(To read more, see the article on "Anti-Masonry" in Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia.)

So, the Church's historic condemnation of Freemasonry is based primarily on the fact that the fraternity admits men of all faiths, supports freedom of religion, public schools, democratic and representative government, the ability of nations of men to determine their own destinies and their own government, and all the other noble ideals that were embraced by the great revolutionary leaders of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

But, there is more to it than that. For one and a half millenia, the church had a monopoly on being the one and only bridge between man and God. The church ceded temporal power to the kings of Europe, but only insofar as the kings were anointed and crowned by the Archbishop of that jurisdiction. Maintaining this monopoly was easy, so long as the populace was illiterate, and only the priesthood could read and write. But, with the invention of the printing press, and the education of the populace, all this began to change. Soon, men could read the word of God on their own, and they could reason and debate spiritual and political matters, and they did! And they could publish their thoughts and beliefs, and spread their ideas over the continent for all to read. This was the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, and the RC Church quickly lost its monopoly over spiritual matters. 

Then, the American Revolution proved that educated men could create their own government, elect their own representatives, pass their own laws, and govern themselves with no need for a king, the Pope realized that the monopoly over temporal matters was lost as well. What part did Freemasonry play in all of this? There is plenty written that attempts to answer that question. 

In the second decade of the 18th century, the Freemasons of London knew that meeting in secret, with secret passwords and signs of recognition, might bring unwanted government scrutiny upon them from a paranoid government. Some have suggested that the four lodges that formed the first grand lodge did so in order to separate their lodges full of conservative Whigs from the other lodges across town that leaned heavily toward support of the Tories and Jacobites. 

In the mid-1700s, the Paris police, after raiding Masonic lodges and questioning the officers of those lodges, discovered that these Freemasons were actually electing their own officers, operating their lodges according to by-laws, and allowing their members to vote on decisions. This early experiment in democratic government was seen as seditious, conspiratorial and a danger to the welfare of society and the monarchy. (See the book Living the Enlightenment, by Margaret C. Jacob; 1991, Oxford Univ. Press.)

But, it was not just about politics. Churchmen have always looked askance at the Freemasons and their secret, mystical doings behind closed doors. In 1638, just a few years after the rise of speculative Freemasonry in Scotland, a poem titled "The Muses Threnodie" linked Freemasonry with clairvoyance ("second sight") and the mysterious "Brethren of the Rosie Crosse," all in one neat six-line passage. But, the common folk of Scotland already knew about the mysterious "Mason Word" and the alleged magical powers that it bestowed on those that had it.

Of course, today, all this makes many members of the fraternity very uncomfortable, because they don't understand our own history. So, rather than take the time to learn about our history, and learn about Freemasonry's place in the turbulent history of the past few centuries, they prefer to portray the Craft as a simple form of Rotarianism, or just another "civic club" that bases its metaphors on a half-dozen working tools that any do-it-yourself carpenter can understand. If Freemasonry really were that simple, it would have never survived the 17th century.

The question is: Can it survive the fraternity's current crisis in direction and leadership?

So, Brother Maloney, there's your answer that you predicted you'd never see. I hope it enlightens you.

BTW: Any member of this fraternity, who feels that, in order to become a Freemason, he must first get "permission" from his priest (or any other man, for that matter), is no Freemason. You need to learn to throw off that "yoke of obedience" that old Pope Leo talked about.


----------



## @nizo321 (Apr 7, 2013)

Hi


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## H~SL1141 (Apr 7, 2013)

I am a Roman Catholic and York Rite Mason and Shriner, my priest knows.  He says they are fine organizations and each man must decide for himself. 


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## BryanMaloney (Apr 10, 2013)

Ecossais said:


> So, the Church's historic condemnation of Freemasonry is based primarily on the fact that the fraternity admits men of all faiths, supports freedom of religion, public schools, democratic and representative government, the ability of nations of men to determine their own destinies and their own government, and all the other noble ideals that were embraced by the great revolutionary leaders of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.



And what is your point? At one time Leo XIII denounced the idea of separation of church and state on the American model and made it quite plain that Catholics were not to participate in American government. His successors have quietly forgotten _Testem Benevolentiae_.  Does that mean the USA now has become an arm of the Papacy and runs its government according to the dictates of the Curia? Does a more recent Pope's reversal of the decision against Galileo mean that astronomers have all become geocentrists? For the Catholic Church to lift its objections against Freemasonry to mean that Freemasonry has abandoned its principles is as absurd and outlandish as claiming that astronomers all now Ptolomaics because of John Paul II siding with Galileo!

You did not answer my question. You merely spouted a smokescreen.



> The church ceded temporal power to the kings of Europe, but only insofar as the kings were anointed and crowned by the Archbishop of that jurisdiction.


 
That's certainly not Orthodox Church doctrine. Emperors and kings had their own magistracy, not bestowed by any hierarch. The Tsars' claims to legitimacy did not rest upon Patriarchical approval.



> Then, the American Revolution proved that educated men could create their own government, elect their own representatives, pass their own laws, and govern themselves with no need for a king, the Pope realized that the monopoly over temporal matters was lost as well. What part did Freemasonry play in all of this? There is plenty written that attempts to answer that question.



And so what? How specifically would it mean that for Rome to recognize its errors that Freemasonry has abandoned its principles?



> Any member of this fraternity, who feels that, in order to become a Freemason, he must first get "permission" from his priest (or any other man, for that matter), is no Freemason. You need to learn to throw off that "yoke of obedience" that old Pope Leo talked about.



Then I demand you make every effort to have me expelled specifically on those grounds. I'm with Rockport Lodge #323. Call them up. Explain to them how I am "no Freemason" for that specific reason. Bring it up at the next GL meeting, if needs be. Demand the expulsion of all who do not share your anti-clerical form of religious views. After all, if each of us is "no Freemason", then we should be expelled, should we not?

You never answered my question. You merely blew smoke and outlined how the Catholic Church, IN THE PAST, opposed Freemasonry, not how it reversing that opposition would mean that Freemasonry had changed. As I already said, this would be identical to claiming that Galileo had become a geocentrist because John Paul II reversed the Church's decision on him.


----------



## Ecossais (Apr 10, 2013)

Brother Maloney:  You asked: "And what is your point?"

My point was simply to answer the question: "Why are Catholics excommunicated if they join Freemasonry?" (Sorry that got passed you. I thought it was obvious. I felt that rather than tell you what is in the mind of those that run the RC Church, I could better answer that question by quoting Pope Leo XIII. So, I gave you his words.

You said:  "You did not answer my question." 

Well, I thought I had. Let me make it simple for you. If the RC Church condemned us multiple times during the 18th & 19th centuries, and if that condemnation is still in place, and it has not reversed its position, like it has with other positions it has held, then it means that the RC Church still holds the same position it held in Pope Leo XIII's Papal Bull condemning Freemasonry, in which he stated his objections quite clearly (and I have quoted extensively it).

Ergo, if the RC Church ever changes its position on Freemasonry – which it has not – but if it does, it will be because either the Church or Freemasonry has changed – one or the other. My comment was to indicate that it will likely be, in my humble opinion, because Freemasonry stops being the staunch advocate of religious and political freedom. I don't see the RC Church changing its position any time soon. It doesn't seem to have budged much since 1738. 

BTW, you accused me of "spouting." Sorry if I "spouted." I'll try not to do that.

In response to my comment, "The church ceded temporal power to the kings of Europe, but only insofar as the kings were anointed and crowned by the Archbishop of that jurisdiction," you responded by writing: "That's certainly not Orthodox Church doctrine. Emperors and kings had their own magistracy, not bestowed by any hierarch. The Tsars' claims to legitimacy did not rest upon Patriarchical approval." 

You seem to want to defend the Eastern Orthodox Church, and/or the Russian Orthodox Church. But, my comments were about the Roman Catholic Church and its Papal condemnations of Freemasonry. What am I missing here?

Further, I'd recommend you read about the coronation of Charlemagne, king of the Franks, as emperor of the "Holy Roman Empire." This was a controversial and illegal proceeding, concocted by the Papacy as a political move to make Rome the seat of the newly created "Holy Roman Empire," which had the ultimate effect of separating east from west, and furthermore to place the Church, through the Pope and bishops, in the position of crowning and anointing kings. (To read more, see articles on Charlemagne, Coronation, and Holy Roman Empire in Encyclopedia Britannica, which is my most handy source, among others.)

You state that the successors of Pope Leo XIII "have quietly forgotten" his denunciation of "the idea of separation of church and state on the American model." It may be that they haven't been as outspoken as he was, but I don't know that they've "forgotten" it. Let me quote from the article on Roman Catholicism that appears in _Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia_:

"Many Roman Catholics in the United States ... have become so Americanized that they ignore and assume the nonexistence of some of the more questionable of their Church's hierarchical theories and policies. Some ... refuse to hear or read anything critical of the Church, and even rise to its defense when others challenge some Catholic act or statement." (Henry Wilson Coil, "Roman Catholicism," _Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia;_ Rev. Ed. 1995, Macoy Publ. Co. Inc., Richmond VA, 1961; pp. 570-572.)

You called me "anti-clerical." I guess you feel that way because I quoted from a Papal condemnation of Freemasonry. I'm not sure how that makes me "anti-clerical." Rather, those condemnations makes the Church "anti-Masonic" – condemnations that they've never felt ashamed of. And the condemnation against their members joining our fraternity remains in place. Freemasonry does not forbid Catholics to petition the fraternity, its the other way 'round. BTW, I am not "anti-clerical." I am simply against the abuse of religious authority by those in religious garb. It makes no difference to me whether that garb is a Papal robe or a powder blue suit worn by a preacher at a mega-church out on the highway. And I'm not anti-clerical when it comes to the ministers of my own denomination, or any other, for that matter, except when they presume to tell me what organizations I may or may not join.

I said, "Any member of this fraternity, who feels that, in order to become a Freemason, he must first get permission from his priest (or any other man, for that matter), is no Freemason."

You seem to take grave exception to that.

Again, let me quote from _Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia_, from the article on "Qualifications of Petitioners," which says that petitioners are required "to seek the degrees of their own _Free-Will and Accord...."_ This article also states that, in fact, it has often been the case in times past that "domestic servants" were disqualified "because their positions were deemed to effect a menial and servile attitude of mind." ("Qualifications of Petitioners," Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, 1995, pp. 493-498.)

This speaks directly to my previous comment. How can a man, who felt he needed "permission" of another man (a priest, employer or otherwise) to petition our fraternity, turn around and say that he is petitioning the lodge "of his own free will and accord?" Its fine that the priest gave his "permission," but what if that priest should die or move away, and then be replaced by another priest who then withdraws that "permission"? If your petition was dependent upon your local pastor's "permission," what do you do when you get a new pastor with a different opinion? How can a man claim to be "free" to make his own decisions, and act "of his own free will and accord," when his decisions are dependent on the decisions of another man? Do we want our members voting in our lodges, and in our grand lodge, if they are not free to act "of their own free will and accord"? 

I don't.

Let me provide a few gems about freedom and free will from Albert Pike's _Morals & Dogma of the Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry,_ which appear in the chapter on the Fellowcraft Degree:

"MAN IS SUPREME OVER INSTITUTIONS, AND NOT THEY OVER HIM." (The capitalization is his, not mine.) He continues to state that, this "Truth," once revealed, "imposed new duties on men. Man owed it to himself to be free." And, "It created a general outlawry of Despots and Despotism, temporal and spiritual." (Take note of his reference to spiritual despots.)

"Masonry felt that this Truth had the Omnipotence of God on its side; and that neither Pope nor Potentate could overcome it."

"The wiser a man becomes, the less will he be inclined to submit tamely to the imposition of fetters or a yoke, on his conscience or his person." (That is the "yoke" for which Pope Leo was such a proponent.

"A man's Faith is as much his own as his Reason is. His Freedom consists as much in his faith being free as in his will being being uncontrolled by power."

(Albert Pike, _Morals & Dogma of the Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry; _Annotated Edition, 2011, Supreme Council, 33Â°, Washington DC; pp. 95-132.)

Lastly, you demanded that I make every effort to have you expelled. Well, sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not going to do that. I'd prefer to enlighten you, and share with you the thoughts and opinions of those great luminaries of our fraternity that have given much thought to these questions. Go and read some of these articles and others. I hope that I can change your mind, and make you less defensive. These are not new issues and questions, but were the grist for the mill that gave us the "Age of Reason," the "Age of Enlightement," and ... Freemasonry. These issues are the very bedrock the foundation of our fraternity is built upon.

Fraternally.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Apr 11, 2013)

Ecossais said:


> Brother Maloney:  You asked: "And what is your point?"
> 
> My point was simply to answer the question: "Why are Catholics excommunicated if they join Freemasonry?" (Sorry that got passed you. I thought it was obvious. I felt that rather than tell you what is in the mind of those that run the RC Church, I could better answer that question by quoting Pope Leo XIII. So, I gave you his words.
> 
> You said:  "You did not answer my question."



That wasn't my question. My question was how could the reversal of such a position by the Roman Catholic Church mean that Freemasons had become nothing but Rotary with Rituals.  All you have done is blow smoke.

Likewise, if you truly believe that I am unworthy of being a Mason, then you must seek my expulsion if you have any moral fiber, whatsoever. You will never convince me to abandon my religion, no matter how much you wish to use Freemasonry as a vehicle for your personal religious beliefs.



> You state that the successors of Pope Leo XIII "have quietly forgotten" his denunciation of "the idea of separation of church and state on the American model." It may be that they haven't been as outspoken as he was, but I don't know that they've "forgotten" it. Let me quote from the article on Roman Catholicism that appears in _Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia_:
> 
> "Many Roman Catholics in the United States ... have become so Americanized that they ignore and assume the nonexistence of some of the more questionable of their Church's hierarchical theories and policies. Some ... refuse to hear or read anything critical of the Church, and even rise to its defense when others challenge some Catholic act or statement." (Henry Wilson Coil, "Roman Catholicism," _Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia;_ Rev. Ed. 1995, Macoy Publ. Co. Inc., Richmond VA, 1961; pp. 570-572.)



And Mr. Coil has a thoroughly unbiased view of Roman Catholic doctrines? Sounds to me like he has a religious axe to grind, too, and is just using Freemasonry as his whetstone.



> Again, let me quote from _Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia_, from the article on "Qualifications of Petitioners," which says that petitioners are required "to seek the degrees of their own _Free-Will and Accord...."_ This article also states that, in fact, it has often been the case in times past that "domestic servants" were disqualified "because their positions were deemed to effect a menial and servile attitude of mind." ("Qualifications of Petitioners," Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, 1995, pp. 493-498.)



Then you had better tell my sponsors and committee of how they intentionally violated fundamental Freemasonic doctrine. They were all aware of my situation.



> "MAN IS SUPREME OVER INSTITUTIONS, AND NOT THEY OVER HIM."


 
Freemasonry is an institution. Does that make me supreme over Freemasonry?


----------



## Bill Lins (Apr 11, 2013)

Bro. Bryan, While I am NOT "trolling" and have no wish to become embroiled in y'all's argument, I have a question for you- the reason for which I'll provide after you answer, if you so choose. I do not know if you sought your priest's blessing to join our Fraternity, and, quite frankly, it's really none of my business but let's say, for the sake of my question, that you did. If he had disapproved, would that have kept you from petitioning? Again, I don't intend to put you on the spot here, it's just that we have a situation in our Lodge that your answer might help me solve.

Thanks, Bill


----------



## Ecossais (Apr 11, 2013)

Brother Lins: I hope you weren't referring to me when you said Brother Maloney was having an argument with someone. Of course, I guess it depends on what you mean by "argument." I previously made a comment that Brother Maloney either did not understand or took exception to. Since then, I have been at pains to explain my comment to him, and the background behind it. I don't feel that I've been arguing, but again, semantics, I suppose.

Brother Maloney:  You wrote: "My question was how could the reversal of such a position by the Roman Catholic Church mean that Freemasons had become nothing but Rotary with Rituals."

I answered that. Go back and read paragraphs three and four of my last post. If Freemasonry stops being the advocate of religious and political freedom, then it will be nothing more than Rotary with ritual.

You may not LIKE my answer, but there it is. Please don't ask me to repeat it. If you are going to challenge me on what I've said and not said, then at least read my posts, don't just skim over them.

You wrote:  "If you truly believe that I am unworthy of being a Mason, then you must seek my expulsion if you have any moral fiber, whatsoever."

I never said that you were "unworthy of being a Mason." (You may well be, but that's for you and your other lodge Brothers to decide. Freemasonry is running amok with members that are unworthy of membership.) Again, please read my posts, and don't put words in them that aren't there. I implied that you did not meet the "qualifications" set out for petitioners, because you did not petition of "your own free will and accord." You may aver that you did indeed petition "of your own free will and accord," but then I'd ask (again) then why did you feel the need to "ask permission" of another. And I'd ask, what you would have done if he had said "No, you may not petition Freemasonry"? But, I've already asked you all those questions. (It appears that you don't mind ignoring my questions.)

You wrote:  "Sounds to me like he [Henry W. Coil] has a religious axe to grind, too, and is just using Freemasonry as his whetstone."

I don't know that he has a "religious axe to grind." After all, he wouldn't have much to write about if eight (8) Popes hadn't written and issued a total of seventeen (OMG - SEVENTEEN, LOL) - ahem - seventeen Papal Bulls condemning the fraternity. I mean, the RC Church wouldn't even be mentioned in the article on Anti-Masonry, and it certainly wouldn't warrant a separate article about it if it had never taken an anti-Masonic position. So, anyway, Coil, in writing his Masonic encyclopedia devotes a bit of space to reporting and commenting on the Church's ongoing condemnations of Freemasonry, and YOU declare that Coil has "a religious axe to grind." (Too funny.)

Now, this next part is just silliness. You responded to the quote from Albert Pike, where Pike says that "Man is supreme over institutions, and not they over him." You wrote:

"Freemasonry is an institution. Does that make me supreme over Freemasonry?"

You know what? I'm going to ignore that. That is what is called being "obtuse," or "thick." Don't make me explain to you what Pike meant by the term "Man." Don't make me explain that he did not mean that Bryan Maloney was supreme over the Grand Lodge of Texas. Come on, Bryan. Now, take a deep breath, and, for your homework assignment, I want you to sit down and think about what Brother Pike meant? Okay?

Lastly, you wrote:  "You will never convince me to abandon my religion, no matter how much you wish to use Freemasonry as a vehicle for your personal religious beliefs."

Bryan. I never asked you to abandon your religion. Your losing it, Brother. Calm down. And by the way, you aren't even a Roman Catholic! You're Greek Orthodox. You said so yourself in a previous post. That's two different denominations.

Look. Here's the bottom line. The Roman Catholic Church has condemned the Masonic fraternity numerous times, and been very clear as to WHY the Church has condemned it. In light of the fact that this condemnation had a lot to do with the fact that the Popes didn't like individual men throwing off "the yoke of obedience" (I just love that quote from Pope Leo), and enjoying freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom to elect their own representative government, etc., it is now a little embarrassing for a lot of American Catholics when they hear what was in those condemnations. But, the point is that either the Church was right or it was wrong. And if it still stands by those condemnations, you have to choose between the Church or the fraternity. In my opinion ... okay?

You may not like my opinion, but its the result of a lot of time spent thinking about this issue, and reading what other, greater Masonic writers have said about it. I don't owe the RC Church anything. I'm not a member of it. But, I do owe my fraternity all the support that I can muster for its philosophical tenets, and I think I'm doing that. Are you?


----------



## nothuman (Apr 11, 2013)

True

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Michael Hatley (Apr 11, 2013)

So are there any known cases of an American Freemason being excommunicated from the Catholic Church because of their membership in Freemasonry in the last 20 years?  A documented instance.

If not, then Occam's razor probably would give a man a good close shave.


----------



## otherstar (Apr 12, 2013)

A few observations: 

First, the excommunications formerly incurred by Catholics who joined the Mason's was _latae sententiae_ (immediate--no formal action required by a Bishop)

Second, as I said in POST #6 (though admittedly not very clearly) the penalty for a Caholic who joined the Mason's was changed from_ latae sententiae _excommunication to being unable to receive communion because they are in a condition of grave sin:

"Precisely by considering all these elements, the Declaration of the Sacred Congregation affirms that membership in Masonic associations Â«remains forbidden by the ChurchÂ», and the faithful who enrolls in them Â«are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy CommunionÂ».

​​With this last statement, the Sacred Congregation points out to the faithful that this membership objectively constitutes a grave sin and by specifying that the members of a Masonic association may not receive Holy Communion, it intends to enlighten the conscience of the faithful about a grave consequence which must derive from their belonging to a Masonic lodge." -- Source -- link is to a document from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith.
​​
Being "in a condition and not able to receive communion" is much different that excommunication. One can merely quit the Mason's, confess, and receive communion again. When one has been excommunicated, one has to clear that with the Bishop.

This only applies to the Roman Catholic Church, and those Churches in union with Rome. I am not familiar with the laws that govern the Orthodox Churches.​


----------



## tomasball (Apr 12, 2013)

In 1996, the Bishop of Lincoln clamped down a bit.  http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2863


----------



## Michael Hatley (Apr 12, 2013)

Ah, so Bishops have the power to make rules/judgments on this matter for their jurisdiction?  No wonder the situation is so confusing.


----------



## otherstar (Apr 12, 2013)

Michael Hatley said:


> Ah, so Bishops have the power to make rules/judgments on this matter for their jurisdiction?  No wonder the situation is so confusing.



They do have that power, as long as they are still within the norms established in Canon Law, by the different Vatican Congregations, and Bishops Conferences. Bishop Bruskewitz was well within his limits by doing that.


----------



## Ecossais (Apr 12, 2013)

Term of the Day:  "Cognitive dissonance." 

Freemasons who are members of the Roman Catholic Church, often experience cognitive dissonance when they find themselves in a discussion like this one. On the one hand, their church declares them to be in a state of "grave sin" and are unable to received communion. But, on the other hand, they enjoy their Masonic membership because they like the fellowship, the degree work, and so forth.

Then, one day, they find themselves in a discussion where they learn that the positions and teachings of their church are diametrically opposed to the age-old tenets of Freemasonry. That's got to be confusing. This is what we call "cognitive dissonance."

Cognitive dissonance is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology. The term was coined by the Social Psychologist Leon Festinger in 1956. One example of cognitive dissonance is the experience of the Seventh-Day Adventist, who whole-heartedly believes the world will end on a given night. He goes to bed that night, confident that he will be taken to heaven overnight in the great rapture, only to awaken the next morning and discover that everyone else in his town is going about their usual morning routines without any knowledge of the impending doom that just never materialized.

The confused Adventist then experiences "cognitive dissonance," which is the distressing mental state people feel when they find themselves doing things that don't fit with what they know, or believe. (For example, learning that your church has condemned Freemasonry, when you are the Senior Warden of your lodge.) Festinger observed that people, when they find themselves in similar circumstances, simply reduce their feelings of dissonance by altering  cognitions, adding new ones, or reducing the importance of the  dissonant elements. In other words, they consciously concoct some excuse that minimizes the confusion and disappointment. 

A key assumption is that people want their expectations to meet reality, creating a sense of equilibrium. (A man who is a Freemason would like to believe that his church does not disapprove of his membership in the fraternity. When he does find out that it condemns the fraternity, he creates a new reality for himself by rationalizing that the condemnation doesn't apply to him, or to his lodge, or some other form of alternate reality.) 

Another assumption is that a person will avoid situations or  information sources that give rise to feelings of uneasiness, or  dissonance. (So, when a Catholic Freemason discovers what Albert Pike wrote about how Freemasonry's support of individual freedoms runs contrary to historical church teaching, or he reads what Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia says about the history of Church condemnations of the fraternity, the individual will probably stop reading the works of Albert Pike, and may choose to not join the Scottish Rite, and will avoid using Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, for fear that he will be further confronted with information and evidence that Freemasonry is, indeed, contrary to Roman Catholic Church doctrine. He'd rather not know that.)


----------



## dfreybur (Apr 12, 2013)

otherstar said:


> Being "in a condition and not able to receive communion" is much different that excommunication. One can merely quit the Mason's, confess, and receive communion again.



Yet one of my lodge goes annually to the Catholic church of one of our PMs for a St John Day observance.  We are announced by the priest as visitors to the congregation and welcomed.  When the communion is called our Catholic members go front to receive communion.  Some of our non-Catholic members who go to churches that practice communion regularly go front to receive communion.  Some of our members who view the Eucharist as something reserved for Catholics wait respectfully until all return to our seats.  Each year I've gone and each year I've seen none object.

I've read about the various Papal Bulls.  The most recent one seems to be that it is a matter of individual conscience.  I have read that the decision can be made at the Bishop level.  Giving clergy that sort of authority is beyond my kenn but I'm not Catholic so my reaction does not apply directly.


----------



## dfreybur (Apr 12, 2013)

Ecossais said:


> Term of the Day:  "Cognitive dissonance."
> 
> A key assumption is that people want their expectations to meet reality, creating a sense of equilibrium ...
> 
> Another assumption is that a person will avoid situations or  information sources that give rise to feelings of uneasiness, or  dissonance ...



Incidentally this is why we discuss neither religion nor politics in tiled meetings and have a tradition for those topics to be avoided at non-tiled meetings as well.  We can go years working with a brother not knowing his religious or political affiliation and then one day we learn it and there is cognitive dissonance.  But having known the man for years we know to be generous in our reaction.  So we are supposed to resolve the cognitive dissonance by an expansion of our mind and heart to be more tolerant of differences.  Without any need to agree or accept the stance we respect and stay at peace with him and his stance.  Boom we become a better man.

I see this entire discussion as a quest for that boom.  Which is the better reaction?  To not give the clergy that much authority in our lives?  To be obedient to our church?  To work within our church to reform the stances?  To observe that religions are human institutions and human institutions are not the ultimate authority?  When observing as an outsider the issue becomes more difficult because it's about trying to convince others without having to face the choice ourselves.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Apr 12, 2013)

Ecossais said:


> I answered that. Go back and read paragraphs three and four of my last post. If Freemasonry stops being the advocate of religious and political freedom, then it will be nothing more than Rotary with ritual.



So?  How does that prove that the only way the Roman Catholic church in the future could ever reverse its stance would be for Freemasonry to cease this advocacy? After all, Galileo didn't become a Ptolomaic astronomer for John Paul II to reverse his church's position. I did read your post. You assume a great deal about all possible futures.



> I implied that you did not meet the "qualifications" set out for petitioners, because you did not petition of "your own free will and accord." You may aver that you did indeed petition "of your own free will and accord,"


 
If I do not meet qualifications, I would be, by definition, unworthy. It's that simple. Since you are infallible, by your tone, and anyone who would ask permission of his priest would not meet qualifications, and I have already admitted asking permission of my priest, you must demand that I be expelled as innately unworthy. You know my lodge.



> Now, this next part is just silliness. You responded to the quote from Albert Pike, where Pike says that "Man is supreme over institutions, and not they over him." You wrote:
> 
> "Freemasonry is an institution. Does that make me supreme over Freemasonry?"
> 
> You know what? I'm going to ignore that. That is what is called being "obtuse," or "thick."


 
No, it is not. It is called "what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander". If "Man" is to be taken as "man" in the collective, then the institution of Freemasonry is still inferior to "Man". If it is always acceptable for this construction of "Man" to proclaim superiority over a church, it is equally so to claim it over a fraternity, thus rendering the decisions of church or fraternity to ultimately be on equal footing, neither one superior to the other.


----------



## JFS61 (Apr 12, 2013)

Sorry that my original (now edited) response was a bit flippant, good brother, but you and Ecossais have gotten yourselves into a negative feedback loop in regards to this matter. It would probably be best for both of you to take a breather and step back for a bit of perspective on the discussion, as no one likes to see two brothers become out of harmony with one another.


----------



## widows son (Apr 16, 2013)

*why are Catholics &quot;excommunicated&quot;*

I think bro. Ecossais is bang on. Keep up the light brother.


----------



## flaxgord (Apr 18, 2013)

TBH, I haven't heard of anyone in the United Kingdom get excommunicated, this a new one on me. Maybe this feed was based on some historical anecdotal quip, but hey what do I know.


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## fellow_of_the_craft (Apr 24, 2013)

I know im new here brothers but I have found ( and many of you may know of this book) a book called Born In Blood.  I believe it answer the majority of the catholic question but the book also in my opinion give great non bias insight to what may be the origins of freemasonry.   However if the thesis is correct (which we may never know) it opens room for more discussion as to why our rituals
And tool are what they are.

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## URSA (Apr 27, 2013)

I was recently given a book called Freemasonry: Beyond the Light... I only got a few chapters in because I found it to be typical Christian anti everything that isn't Christian rhetoric. I don't see why the Church comes against a Fraternity of brothers who as charitous to mankind in the name of God as Masons are.

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## dfreybur (Apr 28, 2013)

URSA said:


> I don't see why the Church comes against a Fraternity of brothers who as charitous to mankind in the name of God as Masons are.



Human organizations suffer from human frailties.  No matter how much authority a church asserts it can never be other than a human organization.  We follow the divine and often do so through churches.  If a church takes a stand against teaching brotherly love in doing so that church reveals just how much they have succumb to human frailty and diverged from following the divine - IMO.


----------



## jwhoff (Apr 28, 2013)

These human "organisms" show up everywhere under the square.  After all, it is a material world.  Anything "man-made" is subject to misguided information and abuse.  That includes the fraternity of freemasonry.  However, neither the Christian nor the mason (Christian or other monotheistic brother) can let the human frailties of religion or masonry dissuade them from the purpose.

Remember, it's not mine or the next guy's relationship with the maker but your own that must stand the test of reason.


----------



## jmflores (May 28, 2013)

I am thinking about joining with or without permission. There is no unassailable reason why the church prohibits us from joining. Every reason I have come across thus far I can with my reason and experience can challenge and at length defeat those conclusions that the church has stated. 

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## Bro_Carl (May 28, 2013)

jmflores said:


> I am thinking about joining with or without permission. There is no unassailable reason why the church prohibits us from joining. Every reason I have come across thus far I can with my reason and experience can challenge and at length defeat those conclusions that the church has stated.
> 
> Freemason Connect Mobile



I came to the same conclusion before i petitioned

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## LittleHunter (May 28, 2013)

I was raised Catholic. I go to mass. I receive Communion. I do not ask permission from anyone. It is neither my Priest's nor the Pope's business what I do. I am accountable only to God. Men of the cloth have no moral authority over me.


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## jmflores (May 28, 2013)

I wanted to speak to archbishop but got to speak to auxiliary bishop who said no because the Masonic lodges here in the US are associated with the anti-clerical anti-catholic Masonic lodges elsewhere in the world like in Mexico and France.

Even though I stated that the previous and retired archbishop said in a letter to the Texas research lodge that Freemasonry in the US is not anti catholic. And as far as he knew that men joined mostly for social reasons, also adding that in Texas the church and Freemasonry have co-existed in harmony.

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Freemasonry mobile app


----------



## LittleHunter (May 28, 2013)

It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Follow your heart


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## jmflores (May 28, 2013)

LittleHunter said:


> It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Follow your heart
> 
> 
> Freemason Connect Mobile



Thank you for your input, I will follow my heart and petition, I have been wanting to go to a Lodge and start the process and meet the brothers but I get a little nervous. 

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Freemasonry mobile app


----------



## LittleHunter (May 28, 2013)

I was nervous when I first started looking for a Lodge. I was recently raised and I've made great friends. I'm so happy I've chosen this path; it's helped me grow a lot 


Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## jmflores (May 28, 2013)

Wonderful

Freemason Connect Mobile


----------



## FlBrother324 (Aug 30, 2013)

otherstar said:


> The Revised Code of Canon Law (Church Law) published during the reign of John Paul II in 1983 was rather ambiguous about Masonic membership (and the Commentary made it seem like if Masonic organizations did not plot against the Church, Catholics could join).
> 
> In 1983, shortly after the publication of new Code of Canon Law, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF -- headed by then Cardinal Joesph Ratzinger,now Pope Benedict XVI) issued a document that stopped short of excommunication but did declare that Catholics who are Freemasons are in a state of "grave sin and my not receive communion." Here is that document. In 1985, and article appeared in the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano that further clarified the stance of the CDF, and hence the Catholic Church, against Freemasonry. Here is that article In the article, there is a notable shift in teaching away from "plotting against the Church" to opposing Freemasonry on the grounds that it promotes religious relativism, naturalistic religion, etc.
> 
> ...



If their reasoning is because Masonry is a religion in the eyes of the "church", and therefore contrary to its' doctrines of faith, any man that is a practicing Mason is living in "mortal sin". Then they need to use that same argument for any man that actively participates with such organizations as, YMCA, and SALVATION ARMY just to name a couple.

YMCA established in England in 1844 by George Williams (Knighted by Queen Victoria 1855) under the Church of England. The same "church" founded by excommunicated King Henry VIII a dissident of the Roman Catholic Church.

The Salvation Army, an Evangelical society established by William Booth (also considered a dissident of the Church of England), had its' origins in 1874 when they were known as the "Hallelujah Army". Later penned (1878) by "General" Booth as the "Salvation Army" was known for converting the dregs of society into practicing Christians under their religious organization. 

Both of these Christian based groups accept men and women of any creed, into their ranks. Yet I don't see any Papal Decrees or Cardinal laws banning Roman Catholics from joining these religious organizations.

Note, that both of these organizations were rejected by the people and "established churches" at their inception as contrary to church doctrine.

As I stated in previous post, I am a lifelong Roman Catholic, and a lifelong Mason, and if being a Mason is wrong, then I don't want to be right. Masonry neither conflicts with, nor admonishes me to violate any part of my faith. In fact it has strengthened those teachings and beliefs I learned growing up from both the Church and my Parents.


May you be blessed with a glorious day!

Yours, in His service.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Aug 31, 2013)

Actually, the Salvation Army is explicitly a church and has always presented itself as such, or at least it used to.


----------



## FlBrother324 (Aug 31, 2013)

BryanMaloney said:


> Actually, the Salvation Army is explicitly a church and has always presented itself as such, or at least it used to.



Br. Maloney, 
You are correct. It is, and has been since its' inception an Evangelical Church. Which was denounced by both the Roman Catholic, and Church of England, and most established churches and the majority of people through its' beginnings. They were even faced with angry mobs when they tried to minister to those not deemed "worthy" to attend church. My point being that many people from many creeds volunteer and are associated with them today. Why are Brothers and any practicing Catholic not threatened by the Vatican for their affiliation. 

In my humble opinion, I see no difference, except Masonry is not a religious organization. The only religious requirement to be a Mason is, we must profess to believe in a Higher and Holier being, "God", or whatever the Brother considers his creator to be. We can't be an Atheist. 




May you be blessed with a glorious day!

Yours, in His service.


----------



## usmcvet (Oct 30, 2013)

This thread has been an interesting read. 

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-does-the-church-say-about-freemasonry


----------



## safehouse (Oct 31, 2013)

My Freemasonry


----------



## j_gimpy (Oct 31, 2013)

safehouse said:


> If Catholics are excommunicated or been masons, why then was Adam Weishaupt allowed to remain a Jesuit?
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry



He was not a Jesuit, he merely had a Jesuit education. 



Master Mason
Phoenix Lodge #154
Sumner, Washington


----------



## safehouse (Nov 1, 2013)

Every blessing 


My Freemasonry


----------



## Brother JC (Nov 1, 2013)

I'd be interested to know the source material for the claim he was ordained a priest. As for the Latin word "lucifer," it existed prior to the formation of the Society of Jesus, as did the Latin language in general.
As many alumni of catholic schooling can attest, it is common to go to a Jesuit school without being a Jesuit.


----------



## safehouse (Nov 2, 2013)

My Freemasonry


----------



## safehouse (Nov 2, 2013)

My Freemasonry


----------



## Brother JC (Nov 2, 2013)

The word "lucifer" is found in the Vulgate, which was commissioned a millennium prior to Ignatius Loyola's birth. It was first capitalized in the KJV ( your preferred translation, I believe) and used exactly once; in Isaiah, not Revelations.

Last I looked, you thought the "gay agenda" was responsible for the NIV. Now it's the Jesuits? I really can 't keep up...


----------



## safehouse (Nov 2, 2013)

.

My Freemasonry


----------



## bonesman (Nov 2, 2013)

Noelly


My Freemasonry


----------



## safehouse (Nov 2, 2013)

My Freemasonry


----------



## bonesman (Nov 2, 2013)

Am good brother enjoying my masonry 


My Freemasonry


----------



## Brother JC (Nov 2, 2013)

I, too, look for unity and peace. If that is what you desire, you might consider other Brethren before you post your somewhat vicious attacks. There may be Catholic Brethren here who you've offended. There may be gay Brethren here you've offended. We all hold the VSL in the highest esteem, but it is not always the same Volume.
We all have our opinions, but we also have our Obligations. I need to remember that as much as the next man.


----------



## jwhoff (Nov 2, 2013)

Well said brother.  Well said indeed.


----------



## safehouse (Nov 3, 2013)

.


----------



## safehouse (Nov 3, 2013)

.


----------



## usmcvet (Nov 5, 2013)

I had both if my daughters baptized Sunday after Mass.  I took my Proud to Be a Mason tie tac off my tie! :blink::blink:No lightning bolts!  Seriously I sat and thought during mass and I will not be vocal about my membership but I'm not going to be ashamed either. I did have a friend approach me after Mass about the Knights of Columbus!


----------

