PART IV ACTION OF STATE AND CHURCH AUTHORITIES AGAINST FREEMASONRY

FROM THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

CURIOUSLY enough, the first sovereign to join and protect
Freemasonry was the Catholic German Emperor Frances I, the founder
of the actually reigning line of Austria, while the first measures
against Freemasonry were taken by Protestant Governments: Holland,
1735; Sweden and Geneva, 1738; Zurich, 1740; Berne, 1745. In Spain,
Portugal and Italy, measures against Masonry were taken after 1738.
In Bavaria Freemasonry was prohibited 1784 and 1785; in Austria,
1795; in Baden, 1813; in Russia, 1822. Since 1847 it has been
tolerated in Baden, since 1850 in Bavaria, since 1868 in Hungary
and Spain. In Austria Freemasonry is still prohibited because as
the Superior Court of Administration 23 January, 1905, rightly
declared, a Masonic association, even though established in
accordance with law, "would be a member of a large (international)
organization (in reality ruled by the 'Old Charges,' etc.,
according to general Masonic principles and aims), the true
regulations of which would be kept secret from the civil
authorities, so that the activity of the members could not be
controlled" (Bauhutte, 1905, 60). It is indeed to be presumed that
Austro-Hungarian Masons, whatever statutes they might present to
the Austrian Government in order to secure their authorization,
would in fact continue to regard the French Grand Orient as their
true pattern, and the Brothers Kossuth, Garibaldi, and Mazzini as
the heroes, whom they would strive to imitate. The Prussian edict
of 1798 interdicted Freemasonry in general, excepting the three old
Prussian Grand Lodges which the protectorate subjected to severe
control by the Government. this edict, though juridically abrogated
by the edict of 6 April, 1848, practically, according to a decision
of the Supreme Court of Administration of 22 April, 1893, by an
erroneous interpretation of the organs of adminstration, remained
in force till 1893. Similarly, in Gngland an Act of Parliament was
passed on 12 July, 798, for the "more effectual suppression of
societies stablished for seditions and treasonable purposes and or
preventing treasonable and seditious practices." By this Act
Masonic associations and meetings in general were interdicted, and
only the lodges existing on 2 July, 1798, and ruled according to
the old regulations of the Masonry of the kingdom were tolerated,
on condition that two representatives of the lodge should make oath
before the magistrates, that the lodge existed and was ruled as the
Act enjoined (Preston, "Illustrations of Masonry," 251 sqq.).
During the period 1827-34, measures were taken against Freemasonry
in some of the United States of America. As to European countries
it may be stated, that all those Governments, which had not
originated in the revolutionary movement, strove to protect
themselves against Masonic secret societies.

The action of the Church is summed up in the papal pronouncements
against Freemasonry since 1738, the most important of which are:

Clement XII, Const. "In Eminenti," 28 April, 1738; Benedict XIV,
"Providas," 18 May, 1751; Pius VII, "Ecclesiam," 13 September,
1821; Leo XII, "Quo graviora," 13 March, 1825; Pius VIII, Encycl.
"Traditi," 21 May, 1829; Gregory XVI, "Mirari," 15 August, 1832;
Pius IX, Encycl. "Qui pluribus," 9 November, 1846; Alloc. "Quibus
quantisque malis," 20 April, 1849; Encycl. "Quanta cura," 8
December, 1864; Alloc. "Multiplices inter," 25 September, 1865;
Const. "Apostolicae Sedis," 12 October, 1869; Encycl. "Etsi multa,"
21 November, 1873; Leo XIII, Encycl. "Humanum genus," 20 April,
1884; "Praeclara," 20 June, 1894; "Annum ingressi," 18 March, 1902
(against Italian Freemasonry); Encycl. "Etsi nos." 15 February,
1882; "Ab Apostolici," 15 October, 1890. These pontifical
utterances from first to last are in complete accord, the latter
reiterating the earlier with such developments as were called for
by the growth of Freemasonry and other secret societies.

Clement XII accurately indicates the principal reasons why Masonic
associations from the Catholic, Christian, moral, political, and
social points of view, should be condemned. These reasons are: (1)
The peculiar, "unsectarian" (in truth, anti-Catholic and anti-
Christian) naturalistic character of Freemasonry, by which
theoretically and practically it undermines the Catholic and
Christian faith, first in its members and through them in the rest
of society, creating religious indifferentism and contempt for
orthodoxy and ecclesiastical authority. (2) The inscrutable secrecy
and fallacious ever-changing disguise of the Masonic association
and of its "work," by which "men of this sort break as thieves into
the house and like foxes endeavour to root up the vineyard,"
"perverting the hearts of the simple," ruining their spiritual and
temporal welfare. (3) The oaths of secrecy and of fidelity to
Masonry and Masonic work, which cannot be justified in their scope,
their object, or their form, and cannot, therefore, induce any
obligation. The oaths are condemnable, because the scope and object
of Masonrv are "wicked" and condemnable, and the candidate in most
cases is ignorant of the import or extent of the obligation which
he takes upon himself. Moreover the ritualistic and doctrinal
"secrets" which are the principal object of the obligation,
according to the highest Masonic authorities, are either trifles or
no longer exist (Handbuch, 3rd ed., I, 219). In either case the
oath is a condemnable abuse. Even the Masonic modes of recognition,
which are represented as the principal and only essential "secret"
of Masonry, are published in many printed books. Hence the real
"secrets" of Masonry, if such there be, could only be political or
antireligious conspiracies like the plots of the Grand Lodges in
Latin countries. But such secrets, condemned, at least
theoretically, by Anglo-American Masons themselves, would render
the oath or obligation only the more immoral and therefore null and
void. Thus in every respect the Masonic oaths are not only
sacrilegious but also an abuse contrary to public order which
requires that solemn oaths and obligations as the principal means
to maintain veracity and faithfulness in the State and in human
society, should not be vilified or caricatured. In Masonry the oath
is further degraded by its form which includes the most atrocious
penalties, for the "violation of obligations" which do not even
exist; a "violation" which, in truth may be and in many cases is an
imperative duty. (4) The danger which such societies involve for
the security and "tranquility of the State" and for "the spiritual
health of souls," and consequently their incompatibility with civil
and canonical law. For even admitting that some Masonic
associations pursued for themselves no purposes contrary to
religion and to public order, they would be nevertheless contrary
to public order, because by their very existence as secret
societies based on the Masonic principles, they encourage and
promote the foundation- of other really dangerous secret societies
and render difficult, if not impossible, efficacious action of the
civil and ecclesiastical authorities against them.

Of the other papal edicts only some characteristic utterances need
be mentioned. Benedict XIV appeals more urgently to Catholic
princes and civil powers to obtain their assistance in the struggle
against Freemasonry. Pius VII condemns the secret society of the
Carbonari which, if not an off-shoot, is "certainly an imitation of
the Masonic society" and, as such, already comprised in the
condemnation issued against it. Leo XII deplores the fact, that the
civil powers had not heeded the earlier papal decrees, and in
consequence out of the old Masonic societies even more dangerous
sects had sprung. Among them the "Universitarian" is mentioned as
most pernicious. "It is to be deemed certain," says the pope, "that
these secret societies are linked together by the bond of the same
criminal purposes." Gregory XVI similarly declares that the
calamities of the age were due principally to the conspiracy of
secret societies, and like Leo XII, deplores the religious
indifferentism and the false ideas of tolerance propagated by
secret societies. Pius IX (Allocution, 1865) characterizes
Freemasonry as an insidious, fraudulent and perverse organization
injurious both to religion and to society; and condemns anew "this
Masonic and other similar societies, which differing only in
appearance coalesce constantly and openly or secretly plot against
the Church or lawful authority." Leo XIII (1884) says: "There are
various sects, which although differing in name, rite, form, and
origin, are nevertheless so united by community of purposes and by
similarity of their main principles as to be really one with the
Masonic sect, which is a kind of centre, whence they all proceed
and whither they all return." The ultimate purpose of Freemasonry
is "the overthrow of the whole religious, political, and social
order based on Christian institutions and the establishment of a
new state of things according to their own ideas and based in its
principles and laws on pure Naturalism."

In view of these several reasons Catholics since 1738 are, under
penalty of excommunication, incurred ipso facto, and reserved to
the pope, strictly forbidden to enter or promote in any way Masonic
societies. The law now in force (Const. "Apostolicae Sedis," 1869
Cap. ii, n.24) pronounces excommunication upon "those who enter
Masonic or Carbonarian or other sects of the same kind, which,
openly or secretly, plot against the Church or lawful authority and
those who in any wny favour these sects or do not denounce their
leaders and principal members." Under this head mention must also
be made of the "Practical Instruction of the Congreg. of the
Inquisition, 7 May, 1884, 'de Secta Massonum' " (Acta Sanctae
Sedis, XVIII, 43-47) and of the decrees of the Provincial Councils
of Baltimore, 1840: New Orleans, 1856; Quebec, 1851, 1868; of the
first Councils of the English Colonies, 1854; and particularly of
the Plenary Councils of Baltimore, 1866 and 1884 (see "Collect.
Lacensis," III, 1875 and "Acta et decr. Concil. plen. Balt. III,"
1884). These documents refer mainly to the application of the papal
decrees according to the peculiar conditions of the respective
ecclesiastical provinces. The Third Council of Baltimore, n. 254
sq., states the method of ascertaining whether or not a society is
to be regarded as comprised in the papal condemnation of
Freemasonry. It reserves the final decision thereon to a commission
consisting of all the archbishops of the ecclesiastical provinces
represented in the council, and if they cannot reach a unanimous
conclusion, refers to the Holy See.

These papal edicts and censures against Freemasonry have often been
the occasion of erroneous and unjust charges. The excommunication
was interpreted as an "imprecation" that cursed all Freemasons and
doomed them to perdition. In truth an excommunication is simply an
ecclesiastical penalty, by which members of the Church should be
deterred from acts fhst are criminal according to ecclesiastical
law. The pope and the bishops, therefore, as faithful pastors of
Christ's flock, cannot but condemn Freemasonry. They would betray,
as Clement XII stated, their most sacred duties, if they did not
oppose with all their power the insidious propagation and activity
of such societies in Catholic countries or with respect to
Catholics in mixed and Protestant countries. Freemasonry
systematically promotes religious indifFerentism and undermines
true, i.e., orthodox Christian and Catholic Faith and life.
Freemasonry is essentially Naturalism and hence opposed to all
supernaturalism. As to some particular charges of Leo XIII (1884)
challenged by Freemasons, e.g., the atheistical character of
Freemasonry, it must be remarked, that the pope considers the
activity of Masonic and similar societies as a whole, applying to
it the term which designates the most of these societies and among
the Masonic groups those, which push the so-called "anti-clerical,"
in reality irreligious and revolutionary, principles of Freemasonry
logically to their ultimate consequences and thus, in truth, are,
as it were, the advanced outposts and standard-bearers of the whole
immense anti-Catholic and anti-papal army in the world-wide
spiritual warfare of our age. In this sense also the pope, in
accordance with a fundamental biblical and evangelical view
developed by St. Augustine in his "De civitate Dei," like the
Masonic poet Carducci in his "Hymn to Satan," considers Satan as
the supreme spiritual chief of this hostile army. Thus Leo XIII
(1884) expressly states: "What we say, must be understood of the
Masonic sect in the universal acceptation of the term, as it
comprises all kindred and associated societies, but not of their
single members. There may be persons amongst these, and not a few,
who, although not free from the guilt of having entangled
themselves in such associations, yet are neither themselves
partners in their criminal acts nor aware of the ultimate object
which these associations are endeavouring to attain. Similarly some
of the several bodies of the association may perhaps by no means
approve of certain extreme conclusions, which they would
consistently accept as necessarily following from the general
principles common to all, were they not deterred by the vicious
character of the conclusions." "The Masonic federation is to be
judged not so much by the acts and things it has accomplished, as
by the whole of its principles and purposes."


A MEANS

Masonry is a means, not an end; and the reception of a degree,
whether it be the first or last of a Rite, does not in itself make
the recipient any better than he was before. It simply is the
medium for broadening his knowledge of his duties, and the
application of those duties in his daily walk and conduct.

To put it in another way, the degrees in Masonry are but working
tools whereby the man who receives them may shape his course in
life, and he is to be judged by the manner in which he has made
those tools Serviceable and profitable in his own betterment and in
assisting those around him to he better and more useful.
-The Junior Warden.

Be cheerful always. There is no path but will be easier traveled,
no load but will be lighter, no shadow on heart and brain but will
lift sooner for a person of determined cheerfulness.
-Willittz


Example is the School of mankind, and they will learn at no other.
-Burke.

