Freemasons - I have a few questions.

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock
Yes, as they have also consistently condemned Catholics being Masons. What is your point?

That the infallible leaders of your church have done the same thing they accuse Masons of doing?

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock

No, I represent a faithful Catholic who simply affirms the authority of the papacy on this matter. That's not extreme Catholicism, but just true, fundamental Catholicism (the primacy of Peter).

The Pope's stance on Freemasonry was never spoken ex cathedra, but rather represents the opinion of the current papacy.

Pope Pius IX was undoubtedly a Freemason, and his signature and records still exist in the books of a Lodge in Monte Video. On the other hand, Pope Benedict XVI (previously Cardinal Ratzinger) has always been outspoken about his distaste for Freemasonry, even long before he ever became the Pope.

Why should his opinion, which he (seemingly) had even before he was ordained a priest, be considered as authoritative, simply because he was elected into the office he holds today, while previous Popes have been outspoken in their support of Freemasonry, and have even joined the fraternity, as in the case of Pope Pius IX?

Originally posted by Saurus

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock

No, I represent a faithful Catholic who simply affirms the authority of the papacy on this matter. That's not extreme Catholicism, but just true, fundamental Catholicism (the primacy of Peter).

The Pope's stance on Freemasonry was never spoken ex cathedra, but rather represents the opinion of the current papacy.

Pope Pius IX was undoubtedly a Freemason, and his signature and records still exist in the books of a Lodge in Monte Video. On the other hand, Pope Benedict XVI (previously Cardinal Ratzinger) has always been outspoken about his distaste for Freemasonry, even long before he ever became the Pope.

Why should his opinion, which he (seemingly) had even before he was ordained a priest, be considered as authoritative, simply because he was elected into the office he holds today, while previous Popes have been outspoken in their support of Freemasonry, and have even joined the fraternity, as in the case of Pope Pius IX?

edit on 8/4/2011 by Saurus because: Fixed Typo

This isn't a novel opinion. This is the consistent teaching of the Church. 8 popes have outright condemned Freemasonry since 1738, and the rest have supported these pontiff's decisions. In fact, never has there been a pope who overturned or spoke out against this consistent teaching.

www.ewtn.com...

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock
Yes, as they have also consistently condemned Catholics being Masons. What is your point?

That the infallible leaders of your church have done the same thing they accuse Masons of doing?

There's a fundamental difference in allowing all men to worship whomever they want and praying with others. The Church has always taught that one is saved through one Man alone.

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock
The Church has always taught that one is saved through one Man alone.

What does "through one man" really mean?

Does it mean that one must follow his teachings? (Freemasons' viewpoint)
Or worship him? (if so, where did Jesus say this? Didn't he say that we should worship His father?)
Or take communion? Or the sacraments?

How do you personally (as a Catholic) interpret this statement?

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock

This isn't a novel opinion. This is the consistent teaching of the Church. 8 popes have outright condemned Freemasonry since 1738, and the rest have supported these pontiff's decisions. In fact, never has there been a pope who overturned or spoke out against this consistent teaching.

The link you posted includes Pope Pius IX as one of those 8 who spoke out against Freemasonry. The author disagrees with the fact that he was a Freemason, since the Pope allegedly made a statement declaring that he was not a Freemason.

On the other hand, Masonic records have his membership clearly documented. He was initiated in Lodge Eterna Catena of Palermo on 15th August 1839, along with his signature and other documents written by him. The fact is beyond dispute.

It is entirely possible that the Pope did indeed declare (lied) that he was not a Freemason and spoke out against it purely to appease the Catholic public or administration at that time, perhaps indicating that, as you say, the Catholic Church was against Freemasonry.

However, Pope Pious IX understood Catholicism well enough to become Pope, and was also Freemason. This means that, in his opinion as the highest authority on Catholicism, and as the only Pope to properly understand Freemasonry (due to being one), he believed that Freemasonry was compatible with Catholicism. The other Popes were never Freemasons, and therefore did not understand Freemasonry well enough to be able to make such a opinion! All the other Popes' opinions were based on hearsay.

How is it possible that the official opinion of the Catholic Church is based on hearsay, when the only Pope who understood both Catholicism and Freemasonry believed the two were compatible?

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock

Yes, as they have also consistently condemned Catholics being Masons. What is your point?

That if not praying with others is the grounds by which Catholics condemn Freemasonry, it's a test several Popes fail.

There's a fundamental difference in allowing all men to worship whomever they want and praying with others.

And, as has been mentioned, several Popes have done the latter.

Originally posted by Saurus

However, Pope Pious IX understood Catholicism well enough to become Pope, and was also Freemason. This means that, in his opinion as the highest authority on Catholicism, and as the only Pope to properly understand Freemasonry (due to being one), he believed that Freemasonry was compatible with Catholicism.

I'm not sure that necessarily follows. After Pius IX was crowned, he urged South American bishops to take harsh measures against Freemasonry. This led to Pius being expelled from the fraternity on March 27, 1874. His expulsion was signed by the king of Italy (Victor Emmanuel), who was also Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by Saurus

However, Pope Pious IX understood Catholicism well enough to become Pope, and was also Freemason. This means that, in his opinion as the highest authority on Catholicism, and as the only Pope to properly understand Freemasonry (due to being one), he believed that Freemasonry was compatible with Catholicism.

I'm not sure that necessarily follows. After Pius IX was crowned, he urged South American bishops to take harsh measures against Freemasonry. This led to Pius being expelled from the fraternity on March 27, 1874. His expulsion was signed by the king of Italy (Victor Emmanuel), who was also Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy.

edit on 8-4-2011 by Masonic Light because: (no reason given)

OK, fair enough - I didn't know that.

Thanks for the info, ML!

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock
Yes, as they have also consistently condemned Catholics being Masons. What is your point?

That the infallible leaders of your church have done the same thing they accuse Masons of doing?

There's a fundamental difference in allowing all men to worship whomever they want and praying with others. The Church has always taught that one is saved through one Man alone.

That man is Jesus. By him, salvation.

reply to post by jrstock

That man is Jesus. By him, salvation.

So sayeth the church, but I would say, each man finds his own way to salvation. If it be by Jesus, then wonderful, but I do not believe that is the "only" way.

However, as a Mason, I do respect your right to believe Jesus is the only way, so long as you agree to respect my opinion that there are many ways.

Get it? You can be a devout Christian, with no gray area whatsoever, even fanatical in your view, and still be respected by a Mason, but you will only be comfortable as a Mason if you can reciprocate and be tolerant of everyone else's fanatical views as well.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by jrstock

 

That man is Jesus. By him, salvation.

So sayeth the church, but I would say, each man finds his own way to salvation. If it be by Jesus, then wonderful, but I do not believe that is the "only" way.

However, as a Mason, I do respect your right to believe Jesus is the only way, so long as you agree to respect my opinion that there are many ways.

Get it? You can be a devout Christian, with no gray area whatsoever, even fanatical in your view, and still be respected by a Mason, but you will only be comfortable as a Mason if you can reciprocate and be tolerant of everyone else's fanatical views as well.
Fanatical is an extreme term. That I am not. I push not that quote earlier on no one, It was an answer to a question.

Isis means what in the craft? The symbol $. Is it Isis overlaid upon each other? Another loose end, so to speak.

reply to post by jrstock


I didn't mean to suggest that you were fanatical. I only meant that you could be fanatical in your view, and I would still respect your right to hold that view.

On a personal note, I actually hold more respect for the fanaticals than I do the moderates. If you are going to "be" something, then be the hell out of it, don't go halfway. Why hold any belief at all if you are willing to constantly compromise? That is not to say that I am fanatical, or that I agree with any fanaticals, I do not. But, I respect their tenacity, LOL!

reply to post by jrstock


Isis has no meaning in the blue lodge. I can't speak for the appendant bodies, but it sounds specious.

Right, thank you for clarity. Yes I understand the all or nothing mind set. (My motto actually)

Originally posted by jrstock
Isis means what in the craft? The symbol $. Is it Isis overlaid upon each other? Another loose end, so to speak.

Neither Isis, nor any other Egyptian god, is not mentioned in any of the Blue Lodge degrees. There is one allegorical Scottish Rite degree that takes place in the Egyptian afterlife, and Isis is one of the characters, along with Horus, Duamutef, Kebehsenuef, Hapy, Imsety, Atum, Maat, Anubis, Osiris, Thoth and Nephthys.
In the introduction to the degree, the class is told

This Degree presents an allegorical representation of the final judgement common to many world religions. It is portrayed within the context of ancient Egyptian mythology, which shared many similarities with the Judeo-Christian religions. As in other degrees of Masonry, you are instructed to look beyond the mere symbol and discover for yourselves what you can learn from the lesson presented. We do not assert the reality of the Egyptian gods, but see in them the personifications of natural forces and cosmic events. Whatever religious truths you may ascribe to them personally is your own concern. At the very least, they are actors in a great play, attempting to convey the lesson that we are accountable for our actions.

(from the Synopsis of the Thirty-First Degree)

Originally posted by AntoniusBlock
one is saved through one Man alone.

Freemasonry is not religious but still most of us happen to be pluralists. Pluralists dont much mind exclusivists like you, but exclusivists dont like pluralists. Thats just the nature of things.

Pluralists acknowledge the validity of a number of different paths/religions, exclusivists say their own path is the only path. Presumably their purpose for doing so is to gain a greater single-pointedness of devotion to their respective faith. The disadvantage of that is interolance and a lack of a wider scope of education.

This is a very cool post from someone in your position