FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Thread on Freemasonry
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Here I will post links and passages about Freemasonry

Arthur Preuss's A Study in American Freemasonry:

http://books.google.com/books?id=kCflifoXePAC

Monsignor George F. Dillon's War of Anti-Christ Against the Church and Christian Civilization:

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=gh0AAAAAQAAJ

[Image: pope_clement_xii.jpg]

Pope Clement XII 1730-1740
Founded in 1717, modern speculative Masonry took on its actual form following the publication by Anderson, a clergyman, of the "Constitutions" in 1723. Fifteen years later, on April 28, 1738, Pope Clement XII in his Pontifical Constitution "In Eminenti" condemned Freemasonry as being Counter-Church and Counter-State. It was the Pontifical reply. Failure to heed it, whether partial or general, by the Church and the State of those days, seems to us as the primordial cause of all our political and religious present day turmoil.
Thus said Pope Clement XII:
"Let us meditate upon the serious evils which are usually the result of those kinds of Societies or centers, not only concerning the peace of temporal States, but still more as regards the salvation of souls. Those Societies are not in agreement with the civil and economic laws of the States."

"In order to close the widely open road to iniquities which might be committed with impunity and also for other reasons, just and reasonable, that have come to our knowledge . . . We have resolved and decreed to condemn and forbid such Societies, assemblies, reunions, conventions, aggregations or meetings called either Freemasonic or known under some other denomination. We condemn and forbid them by this, our present constitution, which is to be considered valid for ever."
However, not only is the condemnation by Pope Clement XII extended to Masonic Sects, but it applies also to all the laymen who, although they are not members of Societies called Freemasonic, favor them, in any manner, thus: "We command to the faithful to abstain from intercourse with those societies . . . in order to avoid excommunication, which will be the penalty imposed upon all those contravening to this, our order. None, except at the point of death, could be absolved of this sin except by us or the then existing Roman Pontiff."
The Constitution "In Eminenti" was extended throughout all the Papal States by Cardinal Ferrao's Edict of January 14th, 1739.

LaRoza Wrote:http://www.scripturecatholic.com/freemasonry_qa.html

I  made an incorrect statement here and have overwritten lest anyone else get the wrong idea about John Salza, he seems to be pretty good if you get past the first couple of sentences.


Sorry.
Papacy and Freemasonry, a Speech by Monseigneur Jouin, December 8, 1930
Papacy and Freemasonry, those are the two powers active throughout the world and each is seeking to dominate it. The solution of the struggle taking place between them is, at the present moment of the utmost importance; for we are face to face not only with the crossroads of history but also with a radical transformation of humanity itself. Either Roman Catholicism will lift us up again to the level of Christian civilization or else Judeo-Masonry will drag us down the path of barbarism and decadent paganism. The whole world oscillates between the two: Christianism and Paganism. On December 8th, 1892, Pope Leo XIII wrote to the Italian Episcopal Hierarchy: "It is necessary to fight Freemasonry with those weapons of divine faith which in past ages vanquished paganism."
Moreover the Papacy and Judeo-Masonry are both so fully conscious of the diametrically opposed parts that they are playing that they assume that from it must issue the political, economic, intellectual and religious future of individuals as well as of nations. It is a fact and the better proof of it is their irreducible antagonism toward each other.
What is, indeed, Judeo-Masonry today if not the concentration and mobilization of all evil forces? This Sect with its threefold claim of being Counter-Church (against the Church), Counter-State (against the State) and Counter-Morality (against traditional morality) takes pride in being above all and for all times the enemy of the Catholic Church; one of its rallying calls is that of Tigrotto, one of the Alta Vendita chiefs who, in 1822, proclaimed: "Catholicism must be destroyed throughout the whole world." With Tigrotto also the anti-Catholic plan is expressed thus: "Let us conspire only against Rome." Is this not expressed in an identical manner in the German "Los Von Rom" or in the English: "No Popery?"
Monseigneur Gay, having been assigned by the Council of the Vatican the duty of writing "A Memorandum on Secret Societies," gave the following striking definition of Freemasonry: "It is evident that in a general way, this doctrine of Freemasonry is not only a heresy, nor even the totality of all heresies, which find in it a haven; it is a fact that Masonry goes beyond the limits of what constitutes what is generally ascribed to the word 'heresy,' for it allows full play to the commission of outrageous perversion. Freemasonry is indeed the abyss of all errors, the well of perdition."
Scipio_a Wrote:
LaRoza Wrote:http://www.scripturecatholic.com/freemasonry_qa.html

This guy John Salza "was" a Freemason, now he's a member (apologist for) the Concilliar religion.  What's the difference?  That's a rhetorical question for those of you that thought there was an answer.

The guy is most decidedly against Tradition as outlined in his New! section on Tradition

Did you read it? He is a good apologist and he is very traditional, as outlined in the New! section on Tradition.

Could you explain your objections more? I only heard Catholics criticise him on the heliocentric thing.
 There is no such thing as a 'Conciliar Religion' unless you are a Sede. Learn to be more respectful.

John Salza is very much a Trad but is also aware that we must still respect and submit to the current pope, even if we don't like him.
didishroom Wrote: There is no such thing as a 'Conciliar Religion' unless you are a Sede. Learn to be more respectful.

John Salza is very much a Trad but is also aware that we must still respect and submit to the current pope, even if we don't like him.

What religion do the liberals theologians and some in the hierarchy have?

There is a "conciliar religion." It doesn't mean the Pope has that religion.

But we would not be hearing all these non-Christians and anti-Christians demanding the "Pope stand by Vatican II" unless there were a "conciliar religion" they believe in, that most certainly does not seem to be the Catholic religion, but rather the "One World Church" religion that Pius X warns against in his letter on the Sillon.
Telemaque Wrote:What religion do the liberals theologians and some in the hierarchy have?

There is a "conciliar religion." It doesn't mean the Pope has that religion.

But we would not be hearing all these non-Christians and anti-Christians demanding the "Pope stand by Vatican II" unless there were a "conciliar religion" they believe in, that most certainly does not seem to be the Catholic religion, but rather the "One World Church" religion that Pius X warns against in his letter on the Sillon.

Those demands are false, as they rely on misinterpretations and outright false statements they believe are in VII. You see people thinking VII lets people use the venacular, face the people, communion in hand, female altar servers but none of that is in there. People often say VII recognized the validity of other religions, when it does not. DH is a bit vague, but it is not dogmatic anyway (so it can be ignored mostly).

Just because Salza does not say VII was invalid, indeed, that may be schismatic, but does not misinterpret it according to the "One World Religion" but in line with the Catholic Church. Also, this subject is not really important, as the arguments against Freemasonary are in that link, and his opinion on other matters has nothing to do with this subject. That is a logical fallacy.
What about when high members of the hierarchy are promoting heresy?

The problem exists in the Church because these false ideas of "Vatican II" are not being clearly and unambiguously condemned.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7