Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

How the Prohibition Against Freemasonry Disappeared from Canon Law

By Fr. Paolo M. Siano

From October 20 – 29, 1981, the Plenary Congregation of the Pontifical Commission for the Revision of the Code of Canon Law met in the Vatican to discuss and vote on the renewal of canon 2335 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law which conferred excommunication on Catholics enrolled in Freemasonry or other sects which conspired against the Church and against the State. This canon was ultimately not renewed in the new 1983 Code of Canon Law.

It is interesting to note the two positions that existed within the Plenary Congregation: a minority position which favored renewing Canon 2335 (excommunicating Catholics enrolled as Freemasons), and a majority position which successfully proposed that this canon would not be renewed and thus there would be no excommunication of “Catholic Freemasons.”

I will now consider several points of the record of the Plenary Congregation translated from the Latin by Fr. Zbigniew Suchecki, OFM Conv., and published in the review “Religioni e Sette nel mondo (Religions and sects in the world)” of GRIS (Socio-Religious Research Group) of Bologna, in issue number 1 of 2008 dedicated to the theme “The Catholic Church and Freemasonry.”

The principal arguments of the majority position seem false to me and pastorally imprudent. They may be summarized as:

  • Canon 2335 should not be renewed because to do so would go against the principles of the revision of the Code of Canon Law approved by the 1967 Synod of Bishops and Pope Paul VI, which requested the reduction of the number of cases calling for the penalty of latae sententiae.
  • Because there are various degrees of adhesion to Freemasonry, it is not possible to know at which degree activity against the Church begins or if the offender, “judge of himself,” would know with certainty that he is culpable of acting against the Church and thus incurring the penalty [of latae sententiae excommunication].
  • The opinion remains valid according to which canon 2335 applied only to those who actively worked against the Church, as attested by the Notificatio of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of July 18, 1974.

Among those who held this position:

  • Esteban Gomez, OP [Dominican from Spain] (instructor at the Angelicum in Rome) asserted that “it is more grave to be a communist, and so if we have a canon excommunicating freemasons we would also have to have a canon excommunicating Communists”.
  • Cardinal Rosalio José Castillo Lara, SDB [Salesian Venezuelan, nephew of the Archbishop of Caracas] (Secretary of the Pontifical Commission for the Revision of the Code of Canon Law), was in accord with Gomez and asserted that “Freemasonry is not the same in all countries”.
  • Cardinal Franz König [Archbishop of Vienna] affirmed that “the position of the German Bishops’ Conference (see below) applies only to Masonry in that country but not for all…” König appealed to the same rescript of the CDF of 1974.
  • Bishop José Vicente Andueza Henriquez [Venezuelan bishop, also a Salesian] affirmed that “in countries like Venezuela Freemasonry coexists peacefully with the Church,” and that “there are Freemasons ‘of good faith’ who do not work against the Church but who cooperate with her…” Bishop Henriquez further maintained that “the excommunication of Freemasons is futile, it does not stop them from adopting new methods, and renewing this penalty in the new Code of Canon Law would stir up ‘needless new animosities.’” According to the Venezuelan prelate, “in Latin America the true danger is Communism, not Freemasonry.”
  • Bishop Roman Arrieta Villalobos, President of the Bishops’ Conference of Costa Rica, was convinced that “in many parts of the world Freemasonry no longer conspires against the Church, neither openly nor secretly”.

Let us now consider the principal arguments of the minority position favoring the renewal of the penalty prescribed by canon 2335:

  • The German Bishops’ Conference observed that the Church has the right to indicate clearly to the faithful whatever is dangerous for their faith, and “the adherence of a Catholic to Freemasonry shakes the very foundations of the faith.” After about six years of dialogues with the official leadership of Freemasonry of Germany (expressly favorable in its attitude towards the Church), the German bishops had nevertheless concluded that the essence of Freemasonry was the same, and so they asked for the renewal of canon 2335 in the new Code of Canon Law. Other bishops’ conferences, in contrast to the German conference, had perhaps not been familiar with authentic Masonic facts, documents and rituals. It was noted that anti-Church activity is one of the very principles of Freemasonry.  Moreover, German Freemasonry had made a “categorical refusal” to the bishops who asked to examine the rituals of the other degrees beyond the first three. If judgment about Freemasonry in each country were left to the individual bishops’ conferences, “one can well imagine how many and how great would be the pressures brought to bear upon bishops by influential persons of power or social influence, as well as the pressure of public opinion formed by thinking that is not alien to Freemasonry.” The German bishops observed still further that “for almost the entirety of the faithful it is impossible to form an exact judgment on this question. The right of the Church is properly this: to indicate to the faithful where dangers are hiding for their faith and for their Christian life.”
  • Cardinal Giuseppe Siri [Italian, from Genoa] observed: 1) Nothing has practically changed in the procedures of the Masonic sect. 2) If one objects that the authority of the Church (Paul VI) has said that the penalty ought to be reduced, I respond: ‘In taking counsel we must do those things that are fit for this time.”
  • Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger [German, Prefect of the CDF] noted that the different positions of the bishops’ Conferences do not signify that Freemasonry is different in different places, but that other Bishops were not as well-informed as the German Bishops, who had found that the essence of Freemasonry affirms relativism between truth and falsehood, between good and evil, the same relativism that feeds the contemporary moral crisis. For this reason Freemasonry constitutes “an extraordinary danger” and one that is much “more subtle” as compared to communism. In the first 3 degrees German Freemasons were open to dialogue, but in the 30 higher degrees they held to “an arcane discipline that became ever more severe.” Ratzinger maintained that the “opinion” of Fr. Gomez was “made with a certain lenience, which does not correspond to the gravity of the question and to the work [of research] which we have done.”
  • Cardinal Pietro Palazzini [Italian, Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints] replied thus to the “unanimous” objection of the Consultors of the Pontifical Commission for the Revision of the Code of Canon Law: “the renewal of Canon 2335 does not violate the principles approved by the Pope and the 1967 Synod of Bishops; the reduction of penalties does not imply the elimination of all penalties; among the German bishops who asked for the renewal of Canon 2335 were some who took part in the [1967] Synod but who, having learned from experience, understood the necessity of maintaining the penalty of excommunication for Freemasons because their “creed” is “apostasy, at least implicitly”; that is, it eliminates truth and revealed religion while welcoming Catholics as “useful idiots”. In pastoral practice there is a need to avoid equivocating and to clearly show the sure way to salvation. Freemasonry is more dangerous than Communism, because while Communism is the explicit enemy of the Church, Freemasonry is is more subtle.

* * * * *

In the wake of the position of Cardinal König, Bishop Henriquez, etc., it seems one can also add the “Commentary on the Code of Canon Law” published in 1985 by the Pontifical University Urbaniana (PUU), then republished in 2001 by Libreria Editrice Vaticana (LEV) with the presentation of Cardinal Mario Francesco Pompedda, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. In both editions (PUU, pp. 806-807; LEV, p. 814), edited by Monsignor Pio Vito Pinto [appointed in 2014 by Pope Francis to chair the pontifical commission for the reform of the marriage nullity process], on the topic of “Freemasonry” it is understood that “it is not easy to apply canon 1374 (which calls for a just punishment for anyone who enrolls in an association which works against the Church) unless the competent universal and local ecclesiastical authority clearly indicate which organizations fall under the authority of that canon…” [Editor’s note: as we have reported in the past, Msgr. Pinto himself has held a spot on one of the most well-known lists of suspected ecclesiastical Freemasons for decades.]

I ask myself: why does this commentary not cite the 1983 Declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which reaffirmed the incompatibility between being a Mason (of any sort whatsoever) and being a Catholic?

In short, I am of the opinion that the crisis of the Church, yesterday as also today, results among other things from the differing attitudes of the Prelates of the Church towards Freemasonry.

Translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino

A version of this article originally appeared at the website, Amici del Timone di Ferrara. It has been translated, edited, and reprinted with permission.

81 thoughts on “How the Prohibition Against Freemasonry Disappeared from Canon Law”

  1. I would say the one line from then Cardinal Ratzinger’s comments broadly applies to all interactions between Catholics and secular organizations today: we’re useful idiots. Whether it’s donations or volunteerism, our time, money and talents are fungible.

    CRS works with organizations that support and work to provide abortion and contraception. CRS may comfort themselves–or worse, may not care–by claiming that they don’t participate on “THAT” stuff. Well, I know from first hand sources that these organizations work exactly like this:
    Donations will be allocated as follows: 50% to food for the poor; 50% for abortion. If in one day we receive $1,000 from somebody who says “absolutely only for the poor–no abortion” and $1,000 from somebody who doesn’t specify, they will do the following: put $1,000 toward food, $1,000 toward abortion because, to them, that’s 50/50. They tell person A who specified that it was his $1,000 that went to the food. What you would expect is $1,500 to food; $500 toward abortion. But that is not what happens!

    Our time, money and talents put toward Catholic friendly “activity A” simply allows these organizations to direct other resources to “activity B”.

    Yet we kid ourselves about this stuff. It’s the same with the Masons: even if one only participates in the Catholic friendly activities it just frees up somebody else for the other activities. Perhaps not in gravity but in simple logical terms, it would be like a “faithful” Catholic working as a janitor or accountant at an abortion facility: sure, such a person is not providing abortions directly and may even oppose the concept but their work enables it.

    Truly, we’re too stupid to understand what indirect means now days.

    • Right on.

      ROTARY is surely one of the most diabolical associations ever established.

      It takes the time and finances of many Catholics and dispenses them IN THE NAME OF MANKIND, service and honor that should be going to Jesus Christ.

      Each and every day I marvel at what has happened to the Catholic Church.

      • Some “prominent” members of my parish were just publicly praised for their work with Rotary; apparently ends-justify-means and squishy principles are acceptable here locally. And the one has stopped active participation in the KofC (though still pays dues) citing “not enough time”. We’ve all got a little hypocrisy in us, but land-o-lakes its running wild where I’m at.

    • Spot on Brian W, the same line struck me but it’s not only secular organizations it’s the Catholic Church itself , this is the frustrating situation, Catholics as “useful idiots”. They laugh in our faces because they know we try to be loyal sons of the church, but they take our money ( we pay church tax deducted directly from our taxes) and use this money to push an Anti Catholic agenda in our Catholic churches, parishes and schools . As the “Catholic “ priest shakes hands with us as we leave the church on Sunday and smiles his big smug smile, you can’t help thinking he saying “ Thankyou useful idiot”. What do you think can be done Brian? As long as we do nothing we really are useful idiots.

    • We constantly get mail from CRS asking for money. We send back the little slip every time without money and my wife writes something like “Stop requesting money because we won’t send any until you start following church teaching and stop enabling or committing the murder of murder of unborn children.”

  2. This article needs an addendum;

    I’ll post it in its entirety:


    It has been asked whether there has been any change in the Church’s decision in regard to Masonic associations since the new Code of Canon Law does not mention them expressly, unlike the previous Code.

    This Sacred Congregation is in a position to reply that this circumstance in due to an editorial criterion which was followed also in the case of other associations likewise unmentioned inasmuch as they are contained in wider categories.

    Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

    It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 1981 pp. 240-241; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9 March 1981).

    In an audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II approved and ordered the publication of this Declaration which had been decided in an ordinary meeting of this Sacred Congregation.

    Rome, from the Office of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 26 November 1983.

    Joseph Card. RATZINGER

    Freemasonry is no more acceptable by the Church today than it ever has been. REGARDLESS what heretic bishops and individual laymen say.

    Freemasonry denies the Trinity. Specifically, the unique status of Jesus Christ AS GOD and in affirming the value of other religions that deny that unique status, denies the ONE Way to God through Jesus Christ His Son.

    That this position has tacitly been approved by Popes in recent years {through the medium of ecumenism} stands in stark contrast to the Church’s past, clear teaching.

    As a convert, I get exhausted with the continuous capitulation Catholic leaders demonstrate to the forces of secularism, deism and political opportunism. It is disgusting, and it is diabolical.

    • Speaking of decrees and bans, the Jesuit magazine America is speculating as to whether or not Pope Francis will lift the ban on the writings of Teilhard de Chardin.

      Let’s hope that history doesn’t repeat itself.

      • Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleCashPowerCareerPartTimeJobs/get/hourly ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!da10uuu

      • In any discussion of a change to Canon law in this regard, this addendum is the most essential part to state clearly. I’ve found that many people do NOT know anything about the 1983 statement. Not stating it clearly gives the impression that no strictures exist now, when that is simply not the case.

        Unfortunately, this pattern has now become embedded in modern {-ist} Church culture. The most liberal and anti-Catholic interpretations of weakened and vapid statements in documents become operative even tho the relevant doctrine has not changed.

        We see this occur with so many issues;

        …EENS, homosexuals, indissolubility of marriage, suicide, Limbo, presumption of God’s mercy, adultery, “remarriage”, just war, contraception, Real Presence, responsibility of the prelature/Pope to defend the faith, religious indifferentism, Islam, Protestantism, Luther, Communism, death penalty, relationship of husband and wife in marriage, unity of the Faith/”synodalism”, inerrancy of Scripture, etc….

        • I’m aware of this statement because Fr. Dollinger worked on it with Ratzinger. It was one of the formative moments of their friendship (which Ratzinger treated with contempt when he acted as though Dollinger was a senile old liar for his recounting of their Fatima conversation.)

          What I am not aware of is whether this statement carries the force of law. Does the latae sententiae excommunication still exist? I don’t see it specifically mentioned. Saying that the Church’s negative judgment of Freemasonry has not changed is not equivalent to saying that membership in it is still an excommunicable offense.

          • You make a good point about the technical aspects of the LAW. But let me try to say something that I’m not sure will come out right.

            Let’s look at this:

            “Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

            It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above…”

            This is not unclear and it is not weak. It carries with it both instruction and expectation of adherence. It even says that local ordinary can’t change it. So it bears force.


            It is effectively worthless if not enforced, and…it isn’t.

            How many parishes do you think police their “faithful” and bar the Freemasons among them from communion?

            Yet it is, LIKE SO MANY OTHER STATEMENTS, now part and parcel of a rotten culture. Personally, I consider the culture of the institutional Catholic Church to be rotten; duplicitous even, effeminate, pathetic. We have statement after statement, rubric after rubric, rule after rule, all of which I love and consider tools of the good…THAT NOBODY CARES ABOUT NOR WILL ANYONE ENFORCE.

            Words get written down on paper and before the hand leaves the pen they are effectively round filed. We all know what I am talking about; liturgy, discipline of all sorts.

            One can hardly blame a non-Catholic for not taking the claims of the Church seriously…if the Church itself doesn’t take its claims seriously.

            And right now…it doesn’t.

          • Worrying point you make about the latae sententiae not being reconfirmed in the statement. Cardinal Ratzinger obviously made this statement because he thought it was necessary but his style of writing was ever so polite and perhaps THAT was all he wanted to say…..”it is forbidden” but there are no punishments (which would accord with Pope John XXIII’s ‘mercy’ edict at the time of the Council). The Bishops and Cardinals must reclaim their voices or they will perish.

          • The statement from CDF makes it rathet clear that the penalty of excommunication has been withdrawn (due to the non-renewal of the applicable canon), but a state if grave (and continuous) sin remains abd, thys, communion may not be received or administered — a state similar to that of those who are sexually involved outside of a licit marriage (at least up to AL).

          • Steve:

            Mulling it over, it would seem that this passage would indicate that all previous provisions of the 1917 code apply.

            “This Sacred Congregation is in a position to reply that this circumstance in due to an editorial criterion which was followed also in the case of other associations likewise unmentioned inasmuch as they are contained in wider categories.”

            Tho I agree it would be helpful to have a good Canon lawyer give us the current take.

        • tell me please how many Catholics there are in Limbo. It is a Jewish Place. Since Christ perhaps emptied it why doe it still exist. It may for the Hebrews but I would consider that those Hebrews of today would still be going there. That is why it is important that the Jews convert and then enter Purgatory to be cleansed of Original sin. Anyone except Jews since Christ are faced with entry into heaven through the Church suffering including aborted babies. The is why Bl Mary has asked for us some time ago to pray for hose in purgatory who have no one to pray for them. All the rascals who want to be loved by their friends and not by Christ should wake up and see the results of their wanting to and do defy the first great commandment Love Me above all things. this is the Bishop’s problem today with so many of the new curial announcements from Rome

  3. I want to found a new political party. I am looking for bishops to sign a statement that a Catholic may be a member of this party in good conscience.


    MURDER: We support taxpayer-funded abortion from conception until birth–even a little bit after.

    SODOMY: We support same-sex marriage. We oppose the freedom not to participate in same-sex weddings.

    TREASON: We support Open Borders, admitting unlimited numbers of people who will rob, rape, and murder Americans, AND vote overwhelmingly for our party.

    DEFRAUDING WORKERS OF THEIR WAGES: We support levels of taxation that make it impossible for women to be “stay-at-home moms.” We support collecting taxes from all workers, to be paid out when they reach a certain age–but those who die before that age get nothing back. We support fiat money, enabling private bankers to steal the savings of everybody.

  4. If people choose to wander to satisfy their itching ears, they may silence the truth if they are in a position of authority, but the truth will be no less binding. The Church and its moral teachings existed long before the Code of Canon Law. The Code of Canon Law is a convenient resource that puts the Church’s laws in one place, but those laws weren’t made up out of nothing. Over the centuries, the Church determined by study and experience what is good and what is evil, of how good may flourish and evil may be overcome. The Church has given us laws to be an additional help to bring about conversion in the hearts of men. When those laws are not followed, evil flourishes and goodness is stifled. Women wearing veils in church is an ancient tradition that was required under the 1917 Code of Canon Law and was not mentioned in the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Technically, it is no longer a requirement- meaning, NOT doing it would no longer be a sin of disobedience. That does not, however, excuse the desacralization of women or of childbearing that our culture has embraced over the last several decades. That precious gift was sanctified in a particular way at the incarnation: “Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est.” The incarnation is honored in all women by their veiling, like the vessels of the altar are veiled. It is no less noble now for women to cover their heads in church than it was when it was formally required. The Code of Canon Law, much like the catechism, encyclicals, and other magisterial documents does not create truth or make what was once noble into something that doesn’t matter anymore. These documents merely express the reality of already-existing truth.

    Freemasonry is no less evil now than it was when it was invented. It just isn’t talked about as explicitly or as often now as it used to be. Personally, I think that’s just one of many examples of the naiveness of the Vatican II/John Paul II era. There has been such a push to engage the culture, to find and celebrate the things of the world that are good that Catholic elites downplay the reality of evil. That’s how the diabolical Nouvelle Theologie has been allowed to flourish. That’s how Bp. Robert Barron’s Catholicism series was able to showcase all sorts of fascinating trinkets of Church history, theology, and culture, crumble on what is, practically-speaking, the most important aspect of the Faith- where we go when we die, and yet practically everyone in the Church who cares enough to have an opinion thinks it was wonderful. Evidently, things are just going to have to keep crumbling until there’s apparently nothing left. When Judas rebuked Mary Magdalene for the anointing at Bethany, using the poor as an excuse, Jesus had yet to undergo His Passion and death. Only after all of that was there a resurrection- and Mary Magdalene was one of the first to witness it. As it was for Jesus, perhaps it will also be so for the Church. The passion will be bitter, but the resurrection will be magnificent beyond all expectation and imagination.

    • I’m actually reading Archbishop Chaput’s “Render Unto Caesar” and just completed reading the chapter which describes–in glowing terms– VII and the documents that arose from it. I’m now a few pages into the next chapter in which he describes what he think went wrong so he’s not naive or effusive–he knows things went wrong.

      With that lengthy qualifier stated, I have to say that I like and respect Chaput (I know many here do not). Yet I am troubled in that one of the things he praised about VII was the move toward appreciation of other view points. What’s lost on me is why a Church that contains and teaches the fullness of truth needs to recognize the truth and goodness in other things while disregarding the inherent lies and evils also contained therein. Or more to the point, why that Church felt the need to encourage its adherents to take up this position. It’s precisely this idea that has dragged so many Catholics into the muck and mire of the world, that’s gotten so many entangled with organizations who do things antithetical to the Church and, dare I say, why so many have abandoned the Church.

      Frankly, I have days in which I wonder why I bother trying to live the hard teachings of the Church when, evidently, I could hop on board the SS Church of the Risen Christ November 2017 edition (of course jumping off that ship onto the decks of the December 2017 edition when the November edition closes after three weeks) whereby my wife and I can contracept, hoard money, be on the majority side on social issues and be treated to a laser and rock show for 45 minutes every week.

      • Satan has always mixed his own errors with some truth to introduce a hesitation to condemn. And we really need that issue to be explained but it is unlikely to happen anytime soon. Ecumenism was launched as a political project. That is not acknowledged. Because this political project came out of v2, it is assumed that it is Jesus Himself who wants this. But that would mean believing that Jesus leads all His people into error.

        • Haha! As a follow-up, Archbishop Chaput ends Chapter Seven with a stinging comment about how VII seems to have inspired among many Catholics an evangelical fervor: unfortunately, Chaput states correctly, it’s a zeal to evangelize the world to the Church.

  5. My father, after twenty years in the Navy, was told that if he did not join the Masons, he would never be promoted again. He refused. And he was never promoted again. He was a convert and had a very strong faith. His decision was courageous and it taught me to stand fast for my beliefs.

    • This is how it is in the military and many other fields. So Freemasonry is evil in it’s action on it’s own. This behavior is Satanic on a ‘grand’ scale. It’s where the power comes from. It is a network whose primary purpose is to ‘make’ careers. The ‘made’ men. They’ll tell you whatever they think you want to hear if there is a risk is exposure.

      • And presumably, the accepted expectation amongst masonic brethren is one of gratitude for having their careers ‘made’ so when they get that tap on the shoulder by another mason indicating that they need to ‘repay’, then they do it.

  6. “In short, I am of the opinion that the crisis of the Church, yesterday
    as also today, results among other things from the differing attitudes
    of the Prelates of the Church towards Freemasonry.” And herein lies the entire problem that the Church suffers from today – DIFFERING ATTITUDES of the Prelates. Matt. 22:29, “[29] And Jesus answering, said to them: You err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” They differ, therefore they err. Too many Prelates and priests DO NOT follow Jesus’ teachings, and so are not united. They allow themselves to be caught up in worldly thinking and secular reasoning, giving authority to the world by submitting to it. They are unwilling to stand up for the Truth, unwilling to sacrifice themselves in martyrdom if necessary. They have compromised in all things. Those Prelates and priests who do witness to the Truth are ostracized by their own brother priests and bishops. For the Pope and many of Church’s Prelates, CELEBRATING the Reformation (in truth, the Revolution), is a great tragedy and nothing to be celebrated, yet they have bowed to it. No, the Pope is not a Freemason, but the smoke of Satan has indeed infiltrated the Church.

  7. Yes, the Freemasons had a hand in drafting the 1983 code, which means we can take it with a grain of salt and even use it as political leverage to get good things done, but we can’t really take it seriously.

    It’s good to point out, too, that it was the Masonically influenced cardinals and not Pope Paul VI that reduced the penalty to Freemasons. They did a lot of things in the name of “Pope Paul VI,” much which he never even heard about. Cardinal Villot censored all his mail and forged many a letter in his name, including the one to Cardinal Mindszenty which had the cardinal sacked. Paul VI was actually very close to him.

  8. Why did a committee have to discuss whether to maintain the ban on the masons? Were “committees”‘ one of the v2 plans to share decision making? Those comments by the latino bishops were either deceitful, naive or irresponsibly ignorant. Freemasonry and communism are from the same stable: just different strokes for different folks but always feeding into tyranny. Ratzinger could have quashed that discussion but the committee’s eexistence suggests highly placed masons amongst the cardinals bringing this committee about.

  9. Whatever the intentions, whatever the reasoning of the Church in the matter of the censures reserved to Freemasonry, the overall effect of these decisions is the perpetuation of the idea among the faithful and, even worse, the Church’s enemies that, “we got it wrong in the past”. This is pure poison to the Church’s overall mission since it has effects far beyond the issue of Freemasonry.

    If the Church can change its mind about Freemasonry, what else is there about which it should change its mind? How about Communion for those living in irregular relationships? How about sodomy? Yes, the Church has been harsh on homosexuality in the past, hasn’t it? Let’s remove some of that harsh language from the Catechism…..let’s “bless” same-sex relationships……

    There’s no limit to the destruction which this virus can bring. It has infected the entire Church and is the cause of the constant agitation for change, the constant agitation for the Church to “get with it”.

    Couldn’t these bozos see that it is simply not possible to say one day…“this behavior is so bad that it incurs automatic excommunication” and then to say the next day…“oops we got it wrong….no it doesn’t”?? This wreaks havoc with the Church’s ability to speak with authority on moral issues.

  10. To think that the German Bishops once stood firmly against Freemasonry… while today, most of them are enthusiastic promoters of relativism.
    Wonder how the American Bishops voted, and how they justified their votes.

  11. “It all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”. Freemasonry s no longer against the Church because it is part of the “new inclusive Church” and the new world order. It appears very certain that John XXIII was a Mason. There is now a “new spiritual belief system based on world unity”. That is why Francis is dissolving the Catholic Church and why he is espousing the “dissolution of organized religion”.

  12. The problem with canon law is simple. It is a law written by mankind and will be changed by mankind without a thought for the results which will at this time be always be for the worse. It is like the rapid hell bent chase to rid us of the Council of Trent. It is the same when the priest is a presider it is a short cut to erasing the priesthood so then any one can be a form of priest since the ordained sacrificial minister is sat there (in a clown suit maybe) as a overseer. Do not write canon law is inspired by The Holy Spirit, it is not at this time. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the strength.. depth of how much It inspires is governed by the State of Grace of those involved and like the sense of the faithful without many sacramental confessions it is completely discountable

    There was a time when Canon Law was a viable action but since the end of the Vat 2 and its Spirit of Janus (the god of double speak). This must be so since the Council of Trent is counter to the Sacramental teaching on the teachings of AL which so many claim is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Pick sides folks which of the two The Tridentine council or AL are actively the movement of the Holy Ghost, the Divine Eternal Spirit of Supernatural Love and Sanctifying Grace.

  13. “it is more grave to be a communist, and so if we have a canon excommunicating freemasons we would also have to have a canon excommunicating Communists”.

    Sounds like a plan to me!

  14. I’d be interested to know what John Paul II thought regarding renewing that particular Canon?? The opinions of the bishops is mostly worthless; it’s the opinion of the Roman Pontiff that truly matters. Without further evidence I would have to conclude that JPII was not in favour of renewing Canon 2335. If JPII was all for renewing it then, guess what, it would have been renewed!


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...