I Didn’t Know That (11) (Fraternities1) The 1917 Code of Canon Law declared that for a Catholic to join the Freemasons entailed automatic excommunication - I wonder how many Catholics know that - and that continued to be the case until the new Code was issued in 1983. It didn’t specifically name Freemasonry amongst the secret societies it condemned, which caused some Catholics and Freemasons to think that the ban had been lifted. However Rome then clarified the situation when it issued a declaration stating that the Church continued to judge that the principles of Masonic Associations were irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership of them remained forbidden for Catholics and that anyone who became a Freemason committed a grave (mortal) sin which excluded them from receiving holy communion. So why does the Church have a problem with Freemasonry? A condition for being accepted as a Mason is professing belief in a “Supreme Being” which wouldn’t be a specific declaration of faith in the one true God that we believe in. What it involves is “deism”: a philosophical claim that merely observing the natural world around us is sufficient to reveal the work of a creator, but based on something one experiences and rationalizes for oneself rather than through faith revealed by God. It’s like when people say they believe in a “higher power” which is a rather non-descript statement that doesn’t actually say they believe in God. The Church holds as a sin both voluntary doubt (disregard for, or refusal to hold true, what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief) and indifferentism (holding the opinion that no one religion or philosophy is superior to another) as these would be contrary to Catholic teaching and a denial of what it is we believe, and so for a Catholic to declare their belief in a “Supreme Being” as understood by Freemasonry would be wrong. [That is my personal understanding of the Church’s position in this matter and hopefully it’s fairly near the mark.] Freemasonry is one of the world’s oldest and largest non-religious, non- political fraternal and charitable organisations. It can trace its origins back to local fraternities of stonemasons that regulated various aspects of their trade and which is where its symbols and regalia came from. The first Grand Lodge opened in England in 1717. Minimum age for prospective members varies from lodge to lodge, typically they will be introduced by an existing member. Freemasonry requires high moral standards of its members, instilling in them a moral and ethical approach to life based on integrity, kindness, honesty and 1 I have used the Wikipedia website and individual organisation websites for reference purposes and any information used directly will be shown in quotes. 1 fairness. They are urged to regard the interests of the family as paramount and are taught concern for other people, care for the less fortunate, and help for those in need. The principles of masonry are taught through a series of ritual dramas that are learned by heart and performed within each Lodge (or meeting place). Whilst members are discouraged from discussing politics or religion, as we just said belief in a Supreme Being, a higher power, is a prerequisite for becoming a Mason. For some 200years membership was open only to men until the first female Lodge opened in 1908. One of the characteristics of Freemasonry which has always been problematic to outsiders is the cloak of secrecy that has traditionally shrouded what the organisation is all about and which has therefore given rise to suspicion and, at times, persecution. Similarly the closed nature of their ceremonies and the regalia masons wear, the use of secret handshakes, and all the many and mysterious Masonic symbols certainly don’t encourage an understanding of the purpose and activities of Freemasonry. There have been a number of documentaries recently that have attempted to lift the lid on the organisation, but these were clearly very carefully managed by it so as to reveal only as much as they want revealed. For many Masons it is a social network and yet they deny (almost to the point of the Hamlet quote “methinks thou does protest too much”) that membership is used for personal benefit, an accusation that is constantly levelled at the organisation. Whether as a result of the reputation that Freemasonry had acquired over time, or because of the opposition expressed by some religious denominations (and the Catholic Church isn’t the only one), various alternative secular fraternities have sprung up – in the UK, Ireland and the United States – many of them quite clearly adopting various aspects of Freemasonry, and when that included declaring belief in a “Supreme Being” then once again Catholics were forbidden to become members. In the UK there are the Odd Fellows (founded in 1730); the Royal Antediluvian Order of Buffaloes (“the Buffs”) (1822); and the Round Table (1927)2. And in United States there are the Knights of Pythias (1864); the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks (“the Elks”) (1868); the Shriners (1870); the Loyal Order of Moose3 (1888); the Rotary Club (1905); and the Lions Club International (or “the Lions”) (1917). These are the principal fraternities but I’m sure there are more. An enquiring mind might wonder why there needs to be so many secular 2 Not to be confused with the Society of Knights of the Round Table, a society of authors, actors and artists whose purpose is to perpetuate the fame of King Arthur. 3 (the plural of moose also being moose not mooses) (and what is it with all these fraternities taking animal names?) 2 fraternities basically existing for the same purposes. The principle aim is to foster brotherhood between members and especially businessmen and professional leaders. Next come support for family life; helping members and others in time of need; promoting civic and social welfare; and supporting charitable causes including (in the case of the US organisations) children’s hospitals and various areas of medical research. A number of the US fraternities also emphasize patriotism. All seem to ban any discussion of politics and religion, and all started out as male-only fraternities though one or two have since accepted women members or at least their involvement in an auxiliary capacity. If you ever have the time or the inclination to watch afternoon television, you will be amazed at the constant stream of charities appealing for financial support, but also why many of them seem to be doing the same work. For example, at one time the RSPCA and the PDSA were the major organisations caring for the needs of sick or abandoned animals. There are now at least three or more all doing the same work and all appealing for our support. Isn’t one national organisation sufficient and wouldn’t unification also be of financial benefit given that people’s generosity wouldn’t be divided between competing causes? At the other extreme, I can never understand why there are three pro- life groups all working to the same end and not only vying for financial support, but also risking their lobbying efforts being far less effective than a single organisation would be. I am not arguing in favour of any of the secular fraternities mentioned above, I am merely wondering, in passing, why so many founders felt that what they had in mind to establish would be of interest to prospective members who hadn’t been interested in joining organisations that existed already and that were basically doing the same thing and for the same reasons. And then a further thought came to mind: why were there so many fraternities and no equivalent sororities? Was it simply a matter of discrimination, or is it an example of some kind of boys’ need to be in a gang (and one with secrets and is particular about who can join) a need that girls didn’t share and still don’t? Whatever the answer might be, as we’ll see as we move on to Catholic organisations the same situation existed, and still does. When I first went to the United States I kept hearing references to the “Knights of Columbus” and for a while I assumed it was typical American shorthand for the Knights of St Columba that I was familiar with in this country. Not so. In fact, and rather amazingly, far from operating under the patronage of a saint, this US organisation had named itself after the Italian navigator Christopher Columbus! The Knights of Columbus was founded in 1882 by a Catholic priest, Fr Michael McGivney. Because Catholics were banned from becoming Freemasons, he created an alternative organisation, “a benefit society for its 3 male practicing Catholic members that would encourage them to be proud of their American-Catholic heritage.” In taking Columbus as their patron, the founders expressed their belief that not only could Catholics be full members of American society, they were instrumental in its foundation.” “Today the Knights is an advocate for Catholic causes and provides a range of philanthropic and support services to Catholic institutions worldwide.” The Knights of St Columba4 is a Catholic fraternal society founded in Glasgow in 1919 and named in honour of the Irish missionary Columba who brought Christianity to the north of Britain. “The organisation describes itself as being dedicated to the principles of Charity, Unity and Fraternity. It’s non-political, does not admit women, and exists to support the mission of the Catholic Church.” And as if that wasn’t confusing enough, there is also the Knights of Saint Columbanus5, an Irish national Catholic fraternal (therefore male only) organisation founded in Belfast in 1915 and named in honour of another Irish saint.