Semi-Trads hit new low…
Outrageous! Tradition in Action uses Masonic Source to implicate Pope Pius IX in Freemasonry
The web site Tradition in Action (TIA) is, for the most part, a pretty good resource exposing and refuting the errors of the Vatican II Sect. However, the editors of TIA are dyed-in-the-wool semi-traditionalists, that is, they oppose Sedevacantism and stubbornly adhere to the recognize-and-resist position instead, meaning they recognize Francis as Pope but also resist him because they realize he is an apostate who is trying to destroy Catholicism.
Thus, whenever TIA’s editors tackle anything related to the issue of Sedevacantism, all Catholicism goes out the window — and they end up spouting grave errors and scandalize their readers. For example, in the past they have outrageously attempted to draw parallels between Pope Benedict XV and the Novus Ordo Antipope Benedict XVI, and they have spread error on public heresy and Church membership (which at least they had the decency later to retract).
But now, it seems they have descended to a new low: In what must be considered a desperate attempt to keep up the legitimacy of the Argentinian apostate “Pope Francis”, Tradition in Action has now repeated an old calumny against Pope Pius IX which alleges that the great nineteenth-century Supreme Pontiff was a member of the Freemasons before his election to the Papacy in 1846. What evidence do they provide for this incredibly serious charge against the Vicar of Christ? Nothing but the say-so of the Freemasons themselves!
Have a look at their post of Oct. 29, 2016:
- Masons Consider Pius IX Had Been One of Them (Tradition in Action)
It seems too outrageous to believe, but it is true: TIA quotes the sworn enemies of Christ and His Church against the very Vicar of Christ to cast doubt on his moral and doctrinal integrity! Whose side are you on, editors of TIA?
The accusation against Pope Pius IX is not new, and it has never been proved and instead ably refuted. This makes it all the more puzzling to see TIA bring it up again. We have dealt with this calumny before and also with the charge that “Pius IX was a liberal” when he was elected, which is a half-truth needing important qualification. Find the necessary information here:
More specifically, the charge that Pius IX had been a Freemason was examined in detail and refuted by Fr. Herbert Thurston, S.J., in his book No Popery! Chapters on Anti-Papal Prejudice (1930). We have scanned the relevant chapter and make it available here:
- “The Pope who was a Freemason” by Rev. Herbert Thurston, S.J. (PDF, 2 MB)
As the author shows, the various Masonic accusers cannot even get their story straight, differing on just when and where the young Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti (the future Pius IX) supposedly entered the Lodge! Note that the title of Fr. Thurston’s article, “The Pope who was a Freemason”, is to be understood tongue-in-cheek. Pius IX, of course, was not a Freemason.
Why, then, has Pius IX been accused of it? Why are there rumors about it?
A little bit of research goes a long way. It seems that at the origin of this calumny are the Freemasons themselves (shocker!). They appear to have made up this accusation against the Holy Father precisely in revenge for his severe condemnation of Freemasonry in 1865. According to one biography of the good Pope:
In the months that followed this public condemnation of Freemasonry, several Masonic publications in France and Italy, intent on revenge, propagated the story that Pius IX himself, in his youth, had been a Freemason.
Apparently it was the Lodge of Palermo that first put out the accusation… In France, the journal Le Monde Maçonnique immediately went into print with this information [in December 1865].
(Yves Chiron, Pope Pius IX: The Man and the Myth [Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, 2005], pp. 217-218)
Pius IX had given an allocution on September 25, 1865, entitled Multiplices Inter Machinationes, in which he severely condemned Masonry and the Masons’ wicked secret scheming. We have obtained the full text of this allocution, translated it into English, and are now making it available — as an internet exclusive — here:
- Pope Pius IX, Allocution Multiplices Inter against Freemasonry (Sep. 25, 1865)
In short, the accusations against Pius IX are baseless and have in fact been demonstrated to be so.
Similar accusations against the Novus Ordo “popes”, on the other hand, are not at all baseless, for they (1) act like Masons; (2) speak like Masons; (3) embrace Masonic doctrine, something that cannot at all be said of Pius IX. In addition to that, the false popes of the Vatican II Sect sometimes even shake hands like Freemasons. See for yourself:
To be clear, however: It ultimately doesn’t matter whether any of the Vatican II “popes” were Masons or not. What matters is that they publicly behaved like Masons and not like Catholics — openly professing the doctrines of Freemasonry about human dignity, freedom, equality, indifferentism, etc. — for it is that which essentially makes one unable to be a legitimate Pope or even a member of the Catholic Church.
It is truly a tragedy to see Tradition in Action stoop so low as to recklessly throw Pope Pius IX under the bus in order to recoup some semblance of legitimacy for their apostate “Pope” Francis, scoring some cheap points against Sedevacantism. It is irresponsible to do something like that. How many souls will be confused and bewildered now! And for what? For Bergoglio!
On their web site TIA claims that we sedevacantists are “blind-devotees of the Papacy” for refusing to believe Pius IX was a Mason before becoming Pope! Actually, the TIA editors are the ones who are blind in this, because their entire “case” against Pius IX consists of the testimony of Freemasons, whereas we have actually consulted historical sources dealing with the issue, as explained in this post. It is history that disproves the charges against Pius IX, not some “blind devotion”, and it is Catholic dogma that prevents us from accepting a public non-Catholic as Pope.
As far as “blind devotion” goes, by the way, we hark back to the following words of St. Pius X, which presumably we will never see on the TIA web site:
When one loves the pope one does not stop to debate about what he advises or demands, to ask how far the rigorous duty of obedience extends and to mark the limit of this obligation. When one loves the pope, one does not object that he has not spoken clearly enough, as if he were obliged to repeat into the ear of each individual his will, so often clearly expressed, not only viva voce, but also by letters and other public documents; one does not call his orders into doubt on the pretext – easily advanced by whoever does not wish to obey – that they emanate not directly from him, but from his entourage; one does not limit the field in which he can and should exercise his will; one does not oppose to the authority of the pope that of other persons, however learned, who differ in opinion from the pope. Besides, however great their knowledge, their holiness is wanting, for there can be no holiness where there is disagreement with the pope.
(Pope St. Pius X, Address to the Priests of the Apostolic Union, Nov. 18, 1912; in Acta Apostolicae Sedis 4 , p. 695)
In addition, here are two excellent audios — both available free — explaining the importance of Catholic devotion to the Pope:
- The Ordinary Magisterium and Devotion to the Pope by Fr. Gabriel Lavery, CMRI
- Devotion to the Pope by Fr. Benedict Hughes, CMRI
Under the cover of providing “a contribution to the historical-theological-canonical debate”, TIA is spreading the calumnies of the Freemasons against one of the most glorious Popes the Catholic Church has ever had, apparently to put a dent into the credibility of Sedevacantism and to help keep Bergoglio illegitimately seated on the Throne of St. Peter. That’s what this is all about, and it shows a colossal lack of Catholic sense and judgment, to put it mildly. What TIA has done here is beyond outrageous and utterly reprehensible. They have betrayed the Vicar of Christ, the Papacy, and Holy Mother Church!
No, editors of TIA, there is no “deep malaise among sede-vacantists” about this, at least not among those who are informed enough to know that the whole story about the “Masonic” Pius IX is bogus.
Yes, it is true that we “do not admit that a Freemason can be elected a Pope” — at least not a public one, because the religion of Freemasonry is obviously heretical and not compatible with Catholicism. Public heretics, we recall, are not members of the Church and thus cannot be elected Pope:
Ah, there we go again — we’ve come full circle with Tradition in Action. Their fundamental error is that they do not understand or believe in the nature of the Papacy or the Catholic Church. That is the reason why they can defend the absurd idea that Jorge Bergoglio is the Pope of the Catholic Church — and why they think nothing of accusing Pope Pius IX of having been a Freemason.
- Freemasons and the Conciliar Church by John K. Weiskittel [PDF download]
- Nikita Roncalli: Counterlife of a Pope by Franco Bellegrandi [PDF download]
- Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked by Mgr. George E. Dillon
Image source: Wikimedia Commons
License: public domain
Am I missing some finer theological point? You said that TIA believes Bergoglio is an apostate. But they also believe he is THE pope. My understanding is that baptism into the Catholic faith makes you a Catholic forever, in heaven or hell.
You said apostates are “not members of the church” which I take to mean, Bergoglio is a Catholic by virtue of baptism. However, he has rejected the faith, making him an apostate. Thus, he cannot be pope. How does TIA reconcile this contradiction?
Hello. You said: “My understanding is that baptism into the Catholic faith makes you a Catholic forever, in heaven or hell.”
No, that is not correct. A baptized person above the age of reason can leave the Church (and thus cease to be a Catholic) through public heresy, schism, apostasy, or an excommunication of the “vitandus” type.
I cannot answer on behalf of TIA – you would have to ask them. All I can tell you is that strict adherence to Catholic teaching is not their strong suit when it comes to the papacy and ecclesiology.
I agree with you, NOW, though with this caveat. A fallen away Catholic, though having lost membership in the Church, still possesses the indelible mark on his or her soul forever, just as a priest who, God forbid, dies in mortal sin, is still a priest in Hell, which makes the pains even greater.
Is that in line with your understanding of Church teaching? Perhaps it’s in this sense that Mr. Healey is also thinking & he was just a bit imprecise with his phrasing.
Yes, that is correct. The indelible mark of baptism remains, although it alone does not make one a member of the Church. It is a necessary but not sufficient condition for membership.
As for Pius IX, just yesterday I read that the allegation caused him grief, which implies it is false.
Disgusting! They try to “save” Francis and the “conciliar Popes”.
Tradition in Action have completely lost the plot. But then if you support error, to any degree, you always end up losing the plot/faith – mingling it with poison and feeding it to the clueless sheeple. With this messed up approach to the Pertine Office, Tradition in Action would probably call THE antichrist ‘Holy Father’ if Novus Ordo Cardinals elected him – even if there were horns and hooves, it would just be more fuel for ‘recognise’ (not the horns and hooves but their mad ‘sense’ of a what a pope is) and resist.
It seems that people of the intellectual caliber of those at TIA should be capable of grasping the main nuance regarding Sedevacantism-the Papal Authority exists in spite of the lack of a true possessor of Our Lord’s Divinely rendered Authority. Having utilized it as a resource for current happenings in the Catholic world, perhaps it is time to delete TIA from my bookmarks. To calumniate such an august figure as Pope Pius IX is an affront to all Catholics of all time.
NOW, if you’re scandalized by this article of TIA, it’s because you surely don’t know much about the man behind the site (Mr. Átila Sinke), back in Brazil and his connections with the Brazilian TFP…
Could you elaborate, please?
In short, he was a member of the Brazilian TFP and it’s founder (Mr. Plínio Correa de Oliveira) had a kind of gnostic secret society inside TFP and Atila one of it’s members. The members of that society (Sempre Viva) swore a slavery oath to Plinio becoming something like an alter-Plinio. It’s very well documented in the work of Prof. Orlando Fedeli (deceased in 2010): No país das maravilhas: a Gnose burlesca da TFP e dos Arautos do Evangelho (something like At the Wonderland: The burlesque gnosis of TFP and Heralds of the Gospel). The work is available online but it’s in Portuguese (you can use this google url to search: https://www.google.com.br/#q=atila+sinke+guimar%C3%A3es+a+gnose+burlesca)
Very interesting indeed.
Bp de Castro Mayer (for those who are not familiar, a sedevacantist but collaborator of Abp. Lefebvre, co-consecrator in 1988) broke with TFP in 1982 and two years later he wrote a private letter, published in 1991 in the Campos journal “La Folha de Manhá” (and later also in French in the Avrille Dominican’s “Sel de la Terre” no. 28, Spring 1999) in which he calls TFP a “heretical sect” and explains its “anticlerical” spirit. Bp. Williamson seems to be familiar with this letter since he touches precisely on that point here: http://williamsonletters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-books-analyzing-disaster-of.html.
I am sure you can find an English translation of Bp. de Castro Mayer’s letter somewhere.