[Grem] Freemasonry

[Emoke Greschik]

The real reason Catholics can’t be Freemasons
by *Ed Condon
<http://www.catholicherald.co.ukwww.catholicherald.co.uk/author/edward-condon/>*
posted Thursday, 10 Aug 2017
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/issues/august-11th-2017/the-real-reason-catholics-cant-be-freemasons/
An 1891 cartoon in Puck shows Pope Leo XIII doing battle with Freemasonry

The principles of Freemasonry are fundamentally incompatible with Catholic
teaching

The mutual antagonism of the Catholic Church and Freemasonry is well
established and longstanding. For most of the past 300 years they have been
acknowledged, even in the secular mindset, as implacably opposed. In recent
decades the animosity between the two has faded somewhat from the public
consciousness as the Church’s direct institutional involvement in civil
affairs has become less pronounced and as Freemasonry has waned
dramatically in numbers and prominence. But as Freemasonry turns 300 years
old, it is worth revisiting what was at the core of the Church’s absolute
opposition to the group. Freemasonry can appear to be little more than an
esoteric men’s club, but it was and remains a highly influential
philosophical movement – one which has made a dramatic, if little-noticed,
impact on modern Western society and politics.

The history of Freemasonry itself is long and interesting. Its gradual
transformation from the medieval workers’ guilds of stonemasons into a
network of secret societies with their own Gnostic philosophy and rituals
is a fascinating tale in itself. The era of the latter version of
Freemasonry began with the formation of the Grand Lodge of England in 1717
in the Goose & Gridiron pub near St Paul’s Cathedral. In the early days,
before the Church made any formal pronouncement on the subject, many
Catholics were members and the English Catholic and Jacobite diaspora was
crucial to spreading Freemasonry to continental Europe. At one point it was
so popular among Catholics in some places that Francis I of Austria served
as a formal patron.

And yet the Church became the greatest foe of the Masonic lodges. Between
Clement XII in 1738 and the promulgation of the first Code of Canon Law in
1917, a total of eight popes wrote explicit condemnations of Freemasonry.
All provided the strictest penalty for membership: automatic
excommunication reserved to the Holy See. But what did and does the Church
mean by Freemasonry? What are its qualities which are so worthy of
condemnation?

It is sometimes said that the Church opposed Freemasonry because of the
lodges’ supposedly revolutionary or seditious character. There is a
widespread assumption that Masonic lodges were essentially political cells
for republics and other reformers, and the Church opposed them as part of a
defence of the old regime of absolute monarchy in which she was
institutionally invested. But while political sedition would eventually
come to the front of the Church’s opposition to Masonic membership, this
was by no means the initial reason the Church opposed the Masons. What
Clement XII described in his original denunciation was not a revolutionary
republican society but a group spreading and enforcing religious
indifferentism: the belief that all religions (and none) are of equal
worth, and that in Masonry all are united in service to a higher, unifying
understanding of virtue. Catholics, as members, would be asked to put their
membership of the lodge above their membership of the Church. The strict
prohibition, in other words, was not for political purposes but for the
care of souls.

>From the outset, the primary concern of the Church has been that Masonry
suborns a Catholic’s faith to that of the lodge, obliging them to place a
fundamental secularist fraternity above communion with the Church. The
legal language, and penalties, used in the condemnations of Freemasonry
were actually very similar to those used in the suppression of the
Albigensians: the Church sees Freemasonry as a form of heresy. While the
Masonic rites themselves contain considerable material which can be called
heretical, and is in some instances explicitly anti-Catholic, the Church
has always been far more concerned with the overarching philosophical
content of Freemasonry rather than its ritual pageantry.

Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, the Catholic Church and its
privileged place in the government and society of many European countries
became the subject of growing secularist opposition and even violence. Now,
there is little if any historical evidence of the lodges playing an active
role in beginning the French Revolution. However, the anti-clerical and
anti-Catholic horrors of the Revolution can be traced back to the
secularist mentality described in the various papal bulls outlawing the
Masonic lodges. Masonic societies were condemned not because they set out
to threaten civil or Church authorities but because such a threat was the
inevitable consequence of their existence and growth. Revolution was the
symptom, not the disease.

The alignment of Church and state interests, and their assault by seditious
and revolutionary secret societies, were clearest where the Church and
state were one: in the Papal States of the Italian peninsula. As the 19th
century began, a new iteration of Freemasonry came to prominence which was
explicit in its revolutionary character and avowed in its opposition to the
Church; they called themselves the Carbonari, or charcoal merchants. They
sanctioned and practised both assassination and armed insurrection against
the various governments of the Italian peninsula in their campaign for a
secular constitutional government, and were perceived as an immediate
threat to the faith, the Papal States and the person of the pope.

The link between the passive threat of the philosophy and secrecy of
Masonry and the active revolutionary plots and acts of the Carbonari was
laid out in Pius VII’s apostolic constitution *Ecclesiam a Jesu Christo*,
promulgated in 1821. While the Carbonari’s avowed and active opposition to
the temporal governance of the Papal States was addressed and condemned, it
was still made clear that the gravest threat posed even by these violently
revolutionary cells was their philosophy of secularism.

Throughout all the various papal condemnations of Freemasonry, even when
lodges were actively supporting military campaigns against the pope, as
they did with Garibaldi’s conquest and unification of Italy, what was
always the first objection of the Church to the Lodge was its threat to the
faith of Catholics and the freedom of the Church to act in society. The
undermining of the teachings of the Church in the lodges, and the suborning
of her authority on matters of faith and morals, were described repeatedly
as a plot against the faith, both in individuals and in society.

In the encyclical *Humanum Genus*, Pope Leo XIII described the Masonic
agenda as the exclusion of the Church from participation in public affairs
and the gradual erosion of her rights as an institutional member of
society. During his time as Pope, Leo wrote a great many condemnations of
Freemasonry, pastoral and legal. He outlined, in detail, what the Church
considered to be the Masonic agenda and, reading it with contemporary eyes,
it is still shockingly relevant.

He specifically referred to the aim of secularising the state and society.
He referenced in particular the exclusion of religious education from state
schools and the concept of “the State, which [Masonry believes] ought to be
absolutely atheistic, having the inalienable right and duty to form the
heart and the spirit of its citizens.” He also decried the Masonic desire
to remove the Church from any control in, or influence over, schools,
hospitals, public charities, universities and any other body serving the
public good. Also specifically highlighted was the Masonic push for the
reimagining of marriage as a merely civil contract, the promotion of
divorce, and support for the legalisation of abortion.

It is almost impossible to read this agenda and not recognise it as the
underpinning of almost all of our contemporary political discourse. The
settled view on these matters of many, if not all, of our major political
parties, indeed the very concept of the secular state and its consequences
on Western society, including the pervasive divorce culture and near
universal availability of abortion, is a victory of the Masonic agenda. And
this raises very real canonical questions about Catholic participation in
the modern secular political process.

Throughout the centuries of papal condemnations of Freemasonry, it was
normal for each pope to include the names of new societies that shared the
Masonic philosophy and agenda and which should be understood by Catholics
to come under the heading of “Masonic” in terms of canon law. By the 20th
century, this had come to include political parties and movements such as
communism.

When the Code of Canon Law was reformed, following Vatican II, the canon
specifically prohibiting Catholics from joining “Masonic societies” was
revised. In the new code, promulgated in 1983 by St John Paul II, explicit
mention of Freemasonry was dropped completely. The new Canon 1374 referred
only to societies that “plot against the Church”. Many took this change to
indicate that Freemasonry was no longer always bad in the eyes of the
Church. In fact, the reforming committee made it clear that they meant not
just Freemasons, but many other organisations; the “plot” of its secularist
agenda had spread so far beyond the lodges that to keep using the umbrella
term “Masonic” would be confusing. The then Cardinal Ratzinger issued an
authoritative clarification of the new law in 1983, in which he made it
clear that the new canon was phrased to encourage broader interpretation
and application.

Given the crystal-clear understanding in Church teaching regarding what the
Masonic plot or agenda against the Church includes (marriage as a merely
civil contract open to divorce at will, abortion, exclusion of religious
education from public schools, exclusion of Church from the provision of
social welfare and or control of charities), it seems impossible not to
ask: how many of the major political parties in the West can now be said to
fall under the prohibition of Canon 1374? The answer may well be rather
uncomfortable for those who want to see an end to the so-called culture
wars in the Church.

More recently, Pope Francis has repeatedly spoken of his grave concern at
Masonic infiltration of the Curia and other Catholic organisations. At the
same time, he has warned against the Church becoming a mere “NGO” in its
methods and goals – which is the direct danger of that secularist mentality
which the Church has always called a Masonic philosophy.

Masonic infiltration of the hierarchy and Curia has long been treated as a
kind of Catholic version of monsters under the bed, or McCarthyite paranoia
about commie infiltrators. In fact, when you speak to people who work in
the Vatican, you will quickly discover that for every two or three people
who laugh at the very notion, you can find someone who has directly
encountered it. I myself know at least two people who were approached about
joining during their time working in Rome. The role of Masonic lodges as a
confidential meeting point and network for those with heterodox ideas and
agendas has changed little from pre-Revolutionary France to the modern
Vatican; 300 years after the founding of the first Grand Lodge, the
conflict between the Church and Freemasonry is still very much alive.

*Ed Condon is a canon lawyer. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on the
history of the Church’s legal sanctions against Freemasons*

*This article first appeared in the August 11 2017 issue of the Catholic
Herald. To read the magazine in full, from anywhere in the world, go here
<http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/magazine/>*
--------- következő rész ---------
Egy csatolt HTML állomány át lett konvertálva...
URL: <http://turul.kgk.uni-obuda.hu/pipermail/grem/attachments/20170815/410ded51/attachment.html>