Friday, 1 April 2011

The one with the Freemasons.



By Vee8

Now Government cover up conspiracy theories are all well and good, but they are a bit on the common side. It is easy for everyone to blame their particular elected body for each and every mystery that they can think of, which leaves YOUR theory struggling to be heard above the others. What you need is something to make YOUR theory stand out, make it eye catching. So what better way than to wrap one conspiracy in another? And who better to drag kicking and screaming into your otherwise anodyne scheme than that most mysterious of all groups, the Freemasons? The masons probably have more stories and myths surrounding them than King Arthur and all his knights. Legends about satanic rituals, child sacrifice and the ushering in of a new world order. All complete rubbish, of course, and none has ever even come close to being substantiated, but that matters not to the anti-Madeleines, they know a good conspiracy theory when they see one. (In fact I’m surprised they haven’t yet claimed the Apollo Moon landings were shot in a film studio in Rothley!)

And so, once again with not a shred of proof in sight, they claim that Gerry is a Freemason, as is Gordon Brown, Richard Branson, Brian Kennedy and everyone else who ever came within their sphere of influence. Now I have no idea if Messrs Brown, Branson or Kennedy are masons, and it makes little difference if they are. But, is Gerry? Not so far as I know. Not that Gerry would need to be secretive about it, any mason is free to tell anyone who asks that he is a member. They hold regular meetings in buildings known as lodges, which are known within their locality as such, and anyone can observe them coming and going. One contestant in the Big Brother TV series was quite open about it, and was happy to answer questions from the other contestants about what being a Freemason was about. So if Gerry were a mason he would quite freely acknowledge it if asked. So far though, he has never commented on the subject, so quite how he became so obviously a member is a mystery to me.

But why are the anti-Madeleines so determined to forge this connection between Gerry and the masons? Well they claim that if he were, and if Mr Brown was also a mason, then Gordon would be duty bound, by some sort of mysterious, unspoken masonic code, to protect a fellow mason, even one who may have sexually abused and murdered his own daughter. Using our old friend logic, and a little research, we ask, is there any basis in fact for this reasoning? Categorically no. If you care to Google Freemasons, you will find the following sites, and I include the following extracts.

http://www.aboutfreemasons.com/Freemasons

Do Freemasons give other Masons advantages?

No. Freemasons are not allowed to achieve material gain or any preferment from membership. The Mason Book of Constitutions clearly defines giving other Masons advantages as a misuse of membership, which is punishable by expulsion from Freemasonry or suspension. Therefore, members are not allowed to give other Masons advantages when it comes to job offers, contracts, promotions, and other such items. Masons are also not allowed to lie to authorities to protect a Mason who has committed a crime or misdemeanours.

http://www.warringtonfreemasons.org.uk/what_is_freemasonry.htm

CONDUCT

On his entry into Freemasonry each candidate states unequivocally that he expects no material gain from his membership. At various stages during the three ceremonies of his admission he is forcefully reminded that attempts to gain preferment or material gain for himself or others is a misuse of membership which will not be tolerated. Abuse of membership can result in penalties varying from temporary suspension to expulsion. Nor may Freemasonry ever be used to protect a fellow Freemason, or anyone else, who has behaved dishonestly or unlawfully.


But the real question is CAN Gerry even BE a Freemason? The answer is again, quite unequivocally, no. Though the Freemasons themselves openly welcome members from any faith, race or background, as a practising Catholic Gerry is barred by his church from entering Freemasonry, as again the following website extracts show.

http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/Articles/Our_Lady_and_Christian_Culture/can-a-catholic-be-a-freemason.html

Furthermore, local ecclesiastical authorities have not remained silent on masonry either. On April 19, 1985, Cardinal Bernard Law released a report to the United States Catholic bishops that "shows that the principles of masonry are incompatible with Christian faith and practice whether or not a specific masonic organization happens to be engaging in activity against the church." Even as recently as March 1, 2007, Bishop Gianfranco Girotti, the regent of the Apostolic Penitentiary, reaffirmed the Church's position at a conference on freemasonry at the St. Bonaventure Pontifical Theology

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/freemasonry.htm

Therefore, the Church's negative judgment in regard to Masonic associations 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 enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=115585

Q. I have a friend who is a Freemason who wants to become Catholic but is under the impression he can't because of his status as a Freemason. Is this true? I have heard it both ways and can't find a definitive answer on the Internet.

A. It depends on whether or not your friend still intends to remain a member of Freemasonry after he enters the Church. If he plans to abandon Freemasonry for Catholicism, yes, of course, he can become Catholic. But if he intends to remain a Freemason after becoming a Catholic, to my knowledge, no, he cannot enter the Church. The Church has long stated that Catholics are prohibited from involvement in Freemasonry.

Now before the anti-Madeleines start jumping up and down with excitement, yes, I did find one blog that appeared to contradict these findings, with the author claiming to be both a Freemason and a minister in the Catholic church. But I can find no independent verification of this authors claims, and one swallow does not a summer make, therefore I will stick to what is quite clearly the church’s official stance.

So, though no doubt the con theorists will stick doggedly to their beliefs I hope that the casual reader will be more enlightened to the facts here. Unless and until proof is provided to the contrary, and by that I mean something that could stand up in a court of law, I can state that Gerry is NOT a Freemason, cannot BE a Freemason and there are NO non-existent, ritualistic masonic codes protecting him.