> Yes, Canon law trumps Freemason oath for a priest.
Or — to flip the situation on its head — perhaps Freemasonic Oaths trump Canon Law for these particular Catholic Freemasons, which includes priests...? Perhaps for them it is a question of which has priority?
Dunno. I can’t possibly comment on that. Freemasonry does not seek to undermine any religion, or any particular political structure, or indeed the family. Indeed it specifically seeks to supplement and support all of these, and for most Masons it does.
I do not know why there are Catholics who are also Freemasons: that is their business not mine.
> [Canon law vs. Federal Law is a facetious question.]
True, it was a naughty question. But I guess it is also an interesting one: to a Catholic, which trumps which? Do Catholics obey Canon Law or Federal Law, if the two come into conflict?
A priests whose vows do not have highest priority is no longer a priest in reality. Vows are to God and are perpetual. In Catholicism this is one of the Sacraments - Holy Orders.
In fact this cannot be revoked even by the Church, no more than Baptism can be revoked. A priest can be sanctioned to no longer administer valid sacraments, but he is still and always a priest.
So you may see how the question of another Oath taking priority would be nonsensical to a priest, unless he were corrupt.
Do Catholics obey Canon Law or Federal Law, if the two come into conflict?
Canon law governs relationships with the Church, the Sacraments, Clerics, Religious Orders, etc. So the conflict is rare. As it deals with morality and law, they cover basic strict Catholic teaching. This includes the sanctity of life.
Recent examples of this conflict are politicians promoting abortion and laws attempting to make Catholic hospitals perform various abortion services.
In those cases, Catholics should give priority to the Church's teachings. I think you can see by this explanation this is the higher code, if you will.
thanks for the question..