Posted on 10/30/2009 9:01:19 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
A few years ago I was told that at the ceremony of induction of the vicar of one of the local Anglican churches, the Bible which was handed to him had embossed on its front cover the emblem of the Freemasons, the square and compasses. It subsequently came to light that nearly all the male members of his Parochial Church Council were "on the square", and his predecessor as vicar had been a Mason as well. This is not a "low", or Evangelical, church, but very firmly in the Anglo Catholic tradition, where a number of clergy and lay people over the years have talked of becoming Catholics.
Why is all this a problem? The reason is that the Catholic Church teaches that Freemasonry and Christianity are incompatible. The Holy See in 1983 reiterated the traditional position that Catholics who are Freemasons are in a state of grave sin and may not receive the sacraments - the Declaration on Masonic Associations was signed by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and makes it clear that local bishops cannot dispense from its provisions. There were two reasons for this document: first, the new Code of Canon Law, which came out at the same time, no longer mentioned Freemasonry by name in its list of organisations which Catholics are forbidden from joining; second, mistaken advice had been given in the late Seventies in Britain and America which suggested that Catholics could be Freemasons if local lodges were not anti-Catholic; the 1983 rescript corrected that advice. Consequently, Anglicans or others who are Freemasons wishing to become Catholics will have to discard their aprons: this may keep the numbers of potential converts down.
It is often claimed by Freemasons and others that the reasons for the Catholic Church's hostility to Freemasonry are to do with politics - the political hostility between the Church and what is known as "Grand Orient" Freemasonry in the rest of Europe and Latin America; English Freemasonry is completely different, it is claimed; unlike the "Grand Orient" it has retained belief in the "Supreme Being". But this is nonsense: the Church's original condemnations from the 18th century related to English Masonic lodges in Florence and elsewhere in Italy.
The reasons for our teaching, expounded in teaching from many popes since the 18th century, are theological. In the first place, Freemasonry is a naturalistic religion. Its rituals and constitutions present the member as a man who is able to advance towards enlightenment through his own efforts - a good parable of this is the depictions of the trials of Tamino in Mozart's opera The Magic Flute. The Mason can earn his salvation through rites of initiation and the activities of the lodge (including charitable giving); it is thus, in a way, the perfect religion for the "self-made", middle-class professional man. It is totally at odds with the Christian vision, in which we need God's grace, through the death and resurrection of Our Lord, to grow in holiness.
Second, the prayers in its rituals specifically exclude reference to Our Lord. They are often prayers of Christian origin which have been vandalised.
In order to encompass adherents of other faiths the Saviour of the world is simply removed and set aside: he is not important. How can any Christian go along with this?
Third, the oaths required in the initiation rites require the new Mason to promise to keep secret the organisation's rituals, even though he does not at that point know what they are. These oaths are what Christian moral theologians call "vain" - they are not acceptable and cannot bind the person making them, even if they are done in the name of God. This is the problem with the oaths, not (as is sometimes claimed) the dire penalties which used to be referred to in the rituals.
These are the principal reasons why we teach that Freemasonry and Christianity are not compatible. In addition, we could cite the reactionary world view espoused in the rituals, supportive of the status quo and urging members to "keep to their station" in society. This, coupled with the make-up of lodges and the mechanisms of social control identified in exposés written in the Eighties reveal the movement as being somewhat at odds with the social teaching of the Catholic Church and our witness for justice and peace in the world. The "preferential option for the poor" would not find a place in the lodge. One could also point to the exclusion of women from lodge membership and the strain placed on many marriages by the commitments demanded of Freemasons: in spite of claiming to be a "system of morality" infidelity and adultery seem often to be viewed with some indulgence.
It is important that Catholics rest their challenge to Freemasonry on the clear theological arguments which I have advanced and that we are well-informed about the subject: sometimes criticisms of Freemasonry are inaccurate and frankly hysterical, and we should avoid conspiracy theories. It is also true that it is somewhat weaker than it was, partly as a result of the books written 20 years ago and pressure for Freemasons to reveal their membership, particularly in the police and the legal profession. Because of the decline, Freemasonry is very conscious of its public image and superficially less secretive than in the past.
Although it is weaker than in the past, Freemasonry still seems to have some influence in the Church of England. A study written by Caroline Windsor, Freemasonry and the Ministry (Concilium publications 2005), has shown that it is still quite strong in cathedrals (a big Masonic service was held in St Paul's Cathedral in 2002, with the Dean preaching) - and also that many parishes where Freemasons are active are weak in terms of Christian witness. If we are serious about ecumenical dialogue, the issue of Freemasonry has to be addressed; the same is true of interfaith relations, as Freemasons are sometimes involved in interfaith organisations - if they are there, we are talking about dialogue which is three-way, not two-way.
The overriding problem is that in spite of what Freemasons claim, their way of life is a religion, with all of religion's hallmarks. You can no more be a Freemason and a Christian than you can be a Muslim and a Christian. Catholics are committed to inter-faith dialogue and mutual respect, but this requires Freemasons to be honest about what they are. For Catholics, thinking about the reasons for the gulf between us can deepen our understanding of the Christian faith.
I get that religion, or politics, is verboten in the lodge.
However, the distribution of “Morals and Dogma” or “A Bridge to Light” to all members does constitute a religious aspect of the lodge. I am very aware that neither of these are required or were part of all masonry, and that they do not purport to teach a specific religion.
I would contend that they are part of masonry (where they occur), and do include topics and discussions that are religious in nature.
Where they occur, I think it would be a safe conclusion that religious instruction, or comparative religion if you will, *is* an acceptable activity as part of freemasonry.
Again, not that it’s required, not that it’s discussed in the lodge or that the distribution is or ever has been universal.
"Since 1988, a copy of A Bridge to Light has been given to candidates for the Degrees of the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite."
I would contend that they are part of masonry (where they occur), and do include topics and discussions that are religious in nature. Where they occur, I think it would be a safe conclusion that religious instruction, or comparative religion if you will, *is* an acceptable activity as part of freemasonry. Again, not that it’s required, not that it’s discussed in the lodge or that the distribution is or ever has been universal.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding with the structure of the lodges and appendant bodies of freemasonry.
As an illustration, if the Church gave me a book when I applied for confirmation, I wouldn’t expect them to give it to me in Church. However, I would logically assume it was part of my instruction, or at the very least helpful to my membership in the Church.
I am no doubt ignorant of the great deal of it. I'm trying to be quite transparent about my ignorance.
But the Scottish Rite in the article is part of Freemasonry, right? They share some structure, some organization, part of one something, yes? The something that was capable of distributing material to "candidates for the Degrees of the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite."
Here’s where I’m confused on the specific point of the book distribution.
I understand that craft lodges are distinct from the appendant bodies. But both are part of Freemasonry, I believe.
Again, not that they are required for all or that all participate in both. I know that’s not the case.
The extreme that I’m arguing against at this point is: Religion or religious study is forbidden in Freemasonry for everyone at all times and all places.
For this to be true, in the example discussed, we’d have to establish that the York Rite and Scottish rite are not Freemasonry.
Is my error that there are two separate types of Freemasonry, unconnected, and you are describing one and I am describing the other? If so then “appendant” is not used in the normal use.
Do you see what I’m getting at here at least?
It’s hard for me to really comment on those appendant bodies because I’m not a member of them. I do know members of the Scottish Rite and and they’ve never indicated to me that there was any in sort of religious instruction. I think the York Rite would be much more likely to have that kind of content than the Scottish Rite.
Thanks. I am confident in taking you at your word and believe that for you religion plays absolutely no part in it. It also seems clear that religious discussion is verboten in the lodge.
I’m having trouble with a broader statement that it is prohibited throughout Freemasonry for all at all times. There seems to me to be evidence that at least some religious study is or has been part of Freemasonry for some people at some times.
I also see religious parallels and symbology in many places. Again, this doesn’t mean the candidate has to see them or pay attention to them or pursue their significance, if any, from a religious perspective. Neither does it mean they can’t or won’t. There are those who have and written about it.
So the extreme of “none, never, no one” seems to be not correct. However, I believe the other extreme statement that: “Freemasonry is a definite and unique religion that is taught to, and acceptance required by, all members at all times in all places.” is also not true.
It’s a matter of degree between two extremes that, I believe at this point, the truth lies.
I recently read a couple of articles on the York Rite and was soon lost in all the variations. To me, even as ignorant as I am, it seems obvious that generalizing about Freemasonry is a tricky path.
“What about altar?”
Well, it’s not for worshipping, sacriments, or sacrificing or anything like a religious altar.
More like a place of “honor,” as in, where the Holy Bible is placed, as it is to be the center of all decisions a mason makes and in unobstructed view at all times.
I suppose one could call it a table, if one was inclined.
“On altar, is it from (Solomons ?) Temple also?”
Not really. That was a place of sacrifice.
It’s not agnostic in the sense that it is indifferent to religion.
The fraternity expects the mason to be faithful and true to his particular religion (really, denomination of Christianity most of the Grand Lodges in the USA), and thus a fit companion in the fraternity.
“Religion or religious study is forbidden in Freemasonry for everyone at all times and all places.”
That’s not true, but it is true that the religion or religious study would not be a fraternal practice.
For example, a clerk at Wal-Mart probably should be busy being a clerk at Wal-Mart while at work. What said clerk does on his free time is his business.
There is only one York Rite.
It is expressly Christian, albeit non-denominational.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.