Friday, August 17, 2007

Rev. Dr. Charles G. Finney: 'Masonic oaths pledge its members to some of the most unlawful and unchristian things'

Last week I wrote about early 20th-century preacher Charles Blanchard and his anti-Masonic lecture. Another influential preacher, Dr. Charles G. Finney (1792-1875), a prolific writer and sermonizer, provided us a glimpse into 19th century Masonry in his speech "Why I Left Freemasonry."

Finney was "saved" four years after becoming a Mason. He went on to become a Presbyterian minister. He was instrumental in the 19th-century schism between Presbyterians, and eventually left that denomination to become a Congregationalist. He is said to have been the inspiration for many evangelists who followed, including Dwight D. Moody and Billy Graham.

I did get one interesting insight into early American Freemasonry from reading his speech. He wrote that shortly after finding Jesus, his upstate New York lodge's Worshipful Master asked him to conduct the opening and closing prayers. Apparently, as far back as the 1820's, lodges had cast aside non-sectarian, scripted prayers in lodge in favor of sectarian, Christian prayers, in spite of the rules against it. If, as Finney wrote, the WM asked him to pray because he was aware of his recent conversion to Christianity, and that his prayer caused "considerable excitement" among the brethren, one might assume an evangelical fervor was spreading throughout the area. At least, we can assume that, on average, his lodge brothers at the time were no more interested in Masonic enlightenment and esoterica than most Masons today.

Finney began preaching around 1821, and we can assume that is about the time he resigned from Masonry. His speech refers his leaving Masonry as being a "a few years before the revelations of Freemasonry by Captain William Morgan were published." By 1823, Finney was a licensed minister. (The events of the Morgan Affair occured in 1825 and 1826, also in upstate New York.)

He went through phases, changing his beliefs along the way and changing denominations. In the later 1820's he rejected Calvinism and began promoting "perfection theology." In 1836, he became a lecturer at Oberlin College in New York, where he remained for the rest of his life.

A Presbyterian church lady, Finney related, once refused to sit next to him, saying of Oberlin: "Our minister said he would just as soon send a son to state-prison as to Oberlin.'" Presbyterian minister and rabble-rouser Lyman Beecher once denounced Oberlin Collage as "worse than Roman Catholicism." Apparently, evangelical preachers of the early-to-mid 19th century got along about as well as Antient and Modern Freemasons did.

As Charles Blanchard did later, Dr. Charles Finney gave us a list of what, as a new Christian, he found unchristian in the Masonic fraternity that he formerly loved:
Masonic oaths pledge its members to some of the most unlawful and unchristian things:

1. To conceal each other's crimes.
2. To deliver each other from difficulty, whether right or wrong.
3. To unduly favor Masonry in political action and in business matters.
4. Its members are sworn to retaliate and persecute unto death the violators of Masonic obligations.
5. Freemasonry knows no mercy, and swears its candidates to avenge violations of Masonic obligations unto death.
6. Its oaths are profane, taking the Name of God in vain.
7. The penalties of these oaths are barbarous, even savage.
8. Its teachings are false and profane.
9. Its designs are partial and selfish.
10. Its ceremonies are a mixture of puerility and profanity.
11. Its religion is false.
12. It professes to save men on other conditions than those revealed in the Gospel of Christ.
13. It is wholly an enormous falsehood.
14. It is a swindle, obtaining money from its members under false pretenses.
15. It refuses all examinations, and veils itself under a mantle of oath-bound secrecy.
16. It is virtual conspiracy against both Church and State.

| | | | |

28 comments:

  1. Ah. One of the early members of the "Liars for Jesus" movement.

    While I dismiss the anti-Masonic rantings of the fundamentalist religious types who only repeat what they read in the konspiracy websites,; I'm always saddened by the "reformed" Masons who feel the need to denounce the Fraternity in order to assuage their guilt, or perhaps to justify their turning away from their brothers.

    Reminds me, in a way, of reformed smokers or dieters who, once enjoyers of the minor vices, now campaign tirelessly to make you see the error of your (their?) previous ways.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To be fair, a couple of these criticisms are true. Specifically #1 and #4. I have personally sworn to #1 in my obligation and I found it to be extremely distasteful. The only excuses that I have heard for it have been rationaliztions.

    #4 is not strictly 'true', but it is certainly strongly implied in the penalty portion of the obligation.

    I won't repeat the exact wording of the obligation online and I know it isn't the same in all states, but I assure you that I most certainly did swear to #1 and strongly implied #4.

    No, we do not swear to inflict the penalty of the obligation on our fellow Masons but, nevertheless, there is an implied threat in the oath that begs the question, just who is going to execute that penalty if it comes to pass? And, let us not forget, that a dramatic re-enactment of these penalties is carried out in the ceremony of the 3rd degree which is ordered by the presiding Worshipful Master and exectued by the brethren.

    ReplyDelete
  3. El W.S. I feel we have just made a breakthrough...

    S&F etc., etc.

    ReplyDelete
  4. John, I feel that you are missing out on alot of the SYMBOLISM of the degrees. I can't discuss the details of it on here but you never swear to inflict the penalties of the obligation.... You make a promise not to do it else you should FEEL like you should have those penalties done to you. Read how Aberham "Cut a Covenant" in Genesis. What Aberham does to make a covenant with the Lord. He halfs animals and basically states: should I break the covenant, I should be like these animals.

    For #1, you don't promise to hide the crimes of others. We all believe we should be upright, and honest in all our dealings. If there is something shady going on then something is not right...

    Morality>Masonry, but they should go hand-in-hand anyways.

    ~Ephraim

    ReplyDelete
  5. One who calls me "El W.S.":

    What breakthrough has been made?

    — W.S.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In UGLE, we specifically do not swear to #1--in fact, we specifically except crimes from the obligation to keep the secrets of other MMs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Brother Ephraim, I just love how the first thing you do is resort to 'symbolism'.

    Look, my statement was a 100% factual and literal. As I said, this is a valid critique.

    Your response is akin to those proffered by religious zealots. Let's say I point out that the 'Holy' Bible says that God was a genocidal terrorist. The religious zealot will come up with all manner of rationalizations to counteract any literal interpretation (i.e. criticism) of how 'God' is represented in that document.

    Meanwhile, these same individuals will use quite explicitly literal interpretations of scripture whenever it meets there needs!

    Make no doubt about it. I swore an oath that I would personally suffer a variety of horrific penalties were I ever to reveal the secrets of Freemasonry. I did not say anything even remotely like that is how I should 'feel'.

    Moreover, as I pointed out in my previous comment, we *act out* these penalties in the 3rd degree! And, don't forget, these penalties are executed by the Brethren on order of the Worshipful Master.

    Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, the fact of the matter is this is what our obligation says and how it is represented in our own ceremonies.

    Finally, in regards to the issue of keeping secret the crimes our of Brethren, let me make quite clear there is absolutely *NO DOUBT* on this point.

    Now, unless you are a Freemason in Missouri I cannot be sure you swore the same oath that I did. Nevertheless, let me assure you, that our oath says unequivocally that we are absolutely not to betray the secret of any Master Mason, murder and treason alone excepted *AND THEY LEFT AT OUR ELECTION*!

    Sure, in our jurisdiction someone said ahead of time that the obligation would not violate our duty to God, our nation or ourselves. However, this comes off as merely a formality and is clearly not part of the ritual itself. Also, it is patently false since the obligation *does* violate our duty to God, our nation, and ourselves.

    So, am I willing to swear an oath that I won't betray the secrets of a Brother Master Mason (murder and treason alone excepted)? Hell no. I expect the highest standard of conduct among my brethren and there are a myriad of crimes I would consider just as grave as murder or treason; child molestation not being the least.

    Let us not play games with each other. There is language in our ritual which is clearly inappropriate in our modern age.

    You might ask why I would have ever sworn the obligation or continue to be involved in the organization when I still harbor such serious reservations? (Of course, I didn't know what the obligation was even going to be before I gave it. When it got the the 'murder and treason' part, well, a part of me wanted to get up and leave on the spot.

    The reason I am still involved today is because I have done enough diligent research that I think I understand the *original* reason these penalties were included.

    My belief is that the penalties came about in a time when, to betray a trust to another man, could result in a visit from the office of the Inquisition.

    There was a time when such serious oaths were required such that enlightened men could meet in secret to plot a new world order that would bring liberty and freedom to an entire nation.

    I say the oath out of respect for the memory of those men who put their lives at risk to win the freedoms I enjoy today.

    I also say the oath because even in these modern times we must stay vigilant if we want to prevent tyranny from ruling us again.

    Finally, I support the obligation because it is part of our tradition and I have seen what happens when the ritual gets watered down to become politically correct in a modern age.

    So, clearly, I am conflicted on this topic. When I speak to potential candidates I explain these ideas to them, so they better understand the historical context behind the ritual.

    Nevertheless, we must admit that taken literally (and what man who takes a solemn oath on a Holy Bible, blind folded, with a hangman’s noose around his neck, and kneeling at an altar doesn't take the words very seriously) this obligation can be viewed as objectionable.

    Brother John

    ReplyDelete
  8. To a certain extent, Dr. Finney was the Elmer Gantry of his day. He published much work on how to pragmatically run a revival to bring the sinners to the mourners' bench.
    I suggest that his antiMasonry was motivated by this pragmatism. It was the cause celebre of his day, and would work well to motivate the congregations.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1. To conceal each other's crimes.
    2. To deliver each other from difficulty, whether right or wrong.
    3. To unduly favor Masonry in political action and in business matters.
    4. Its members are sworn to retaliate and persecute unto death the violators of Masonic obligations.
    5. Freemasonry knows no mercy, and swears its candidates to avenge violations of Masonic obligations unto death.
    6. Its oaths are profane, taking the Name of God in vain.
    7. The penalties of these oaths are barbarous, even savage.
    8. Its teachings are false and profane.
    9. Its designs are partial and selfish.
    10. Its ceremonies are a mixture of puerility and profanity.
    11. Its religion is false.
    12. It professes to save men on other conditions than those revealed in the Gospel of Christ.
    13. It is wholly an enormous falsehood.
    14. It is a swindle, obtaining money from its members under false pretenses.
    15. It refuses all examinations, and veils itself under a mantle of oath-bound secrecy.
    16. It is virtual conspiracy against both Church and State.


    This guy was a genius when it comes to freemasonry. Freemasonry is a religion that need to be purged and gotten rid of. Most if not all masons are complete tools of the lodge.
    Jean

    ReplyDelete
  10. Jean wrote: "Freemasonry is a religion that need to be purged and gotten rid of."

    For a moment let's say Masonry IS a religion. Again, I ask you: So what?

    Why should a religion that you don't agree with be "gotten rid of"? Who put you in charge of ridding the planet of religions? And do you object to all religions, or do you have one that is YOUR religion, and you want to get rid of all the other ones?

    — W.S.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 4. Its members are sworn to retaliate and persecute unto death the violators of Masonic obligations.

    John, I'm not going to claim to know Masonic ritual better than anyone else, but as WM of my lodge, I memorized each and every part for all three degrees, including the obligations. After parsing the obligations for meaning any number of times, there is no way that this is correct.

    I'm familiar with the obligations of several other US states, plus a couple of Australian territories, and none of them have anything remotely like this.

    A while back, I spent some time on a group in which a man who claimed to be an MM described these penalties and such. On further questioning, it seemed that he was an active member in lodge for about a year, over 20 years ago. He was not an officer, and only saw 1 or 2 degrees given. He later became convinced about these "bloody penalties" after watching a video by a fundamentalist Christian preacher.

    What I'm suggesting is that it's more likely that people who believe the obligations contain what is suggested in #4 may not be as familiar with the wording as they think. This seems to be more of a problem in jurisdictions that do not use written monitors.

    ReplyDelete
  12. For a moment let's say Masonry IS a religion. Again, I ask you: So what?

    W.S. I have been through this with you in another on of your posts. Stop the lying about it not being a religion. When you and I both know that masonry is a religion. Stop lying to new canidates about the fact that it's not a religion.

    "Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instructions in religion. ... This is the true religion revealed to the ancient patriarchs; which Masonry has taught for many centuries, and which it will continue to teach as long as time endures." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 213

    "(Masonry) is the universal, eternal, immutable religion, such as God planted it in the heart of universal humanity. ... The ministers of this religion are all Masons who comprehend it." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 219

    Albert Pike was nothing if not inconsistent, but he was real clear about the 'religion' of Masonry. It's restated even today, that Masonry is not "a religion" but "religion." You can't split that hair.
    Masonry teaches it is the purity of life and rectitude of conduct that is "essentially necessary" for gaining admission into heaven.

    According to Freemasonry, it is the purity of life and rectitude of conduct that is the very essence of what is necessary for entering heaven.

    And you ask if there is a problem with this??

    I want to make sure I understand your contention.
    Does Masonry present a 'God'?
    Yes.
    These presentations are undeniable, as they are plainly stated in Ritual.

    Does Masonry possess a liturgy?
    Yes.
    The entire Ritual is liturgy.
    Rigid following of a structured form, required (proscribed) prayers, "acceptable" and "unacceptable" responses from candidates, and a catechism are but some examples of this liturgy.

    Does Masonry practice worship?
    Yes.
    Prayer is the most intimate form of worship --- conversation with God.
    Corporate prayer bonds a gathered body as one in this worship, in unified conversation with God.
    Masonry opens Lodge (and all other Masonic ceremonies) with invocation seeking "Divine Aid, Blessing, and Guidance".
    Masonry demands prayer from its candidate at the outset of his travels through each Degree.
    Masonry directs men to prayer in its Ritual.
    Masonry prays over its dead.
    Masonry closes Lodge (and all other Masonic ceremonies) with benediction seeking "Divine Aid, Blessing, and Guidance".
    (The problem arises in that Masonry never directs Mason to The One True Living God.)

    Does Masonry possess a doctrine?
    Yes.
    Masonry very plainly presents Masons with "the immortality of the soul, and the hope of the afterlife in heaven".
    From the first lesson of "the Common Gavel", to the "sheepskin lectures", Masonry presents to Masons a striving, by their own efforts, to become acceptable before God, and to be "welcomed home" with "Well done, good and faithful servant".
    (The problem arises in that Masonry never addresses man's sinful, condemned state, the need for salvation, or the Only Way [Jesus] to that glorious immortality in Heaven.)

    Does Masonry possess a priesthood, or clerics?
    Yes.
    Masonry must be taught and learned --- passed from those that "have light" to those that "seek light".
    Though not as prevalent these days (but on the resurgence from what I hear) is the assignment of Mentors, and the focus upon "Lodges of Instruction".
    Historically, Entered Apprentices were not "Passed", nor Fellowcrafts "Raised" to the next Degree until they had demonstrated credible knowledge of their current Degree in Freemasonry, by presenting a "work", either in Lectures or Papers, proving that they were "ready" for the next Degree.
    This is the oldest form of priesthoods and clerics known to man.

    These points, from the definition of religion, present a clear picture.
    Is Masonry a religion?
    Let the honest man answer.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lambskin Apron stuff.
    Main Entry: 1es·sen·tial
    Pronunciation: i-'sen(t)-sh&l
    Function: adjective
    1 : of, relating to, or constituting essence : INHERENT
    2 : of the utmost importance : BASIC, INDISPENSABLE, NECESSARY {essential foods} {an essential requirement for admission to college}
    3 : IDIOPATHIC {essential disease} {essential hypertension}
    - es·sen·tial·ly /-'sench-lE, -'sen-ch&-/ adverb
    - es·sen·tial·ness /-'sen-ch&l-n&s/ noun
    synonyms ESSENTIAL, FUNDAMENTAL, VITAL, CARDINAL mean so important as to be indispensable. ESSENTIAL implies belonging to the very nature of a thing and therefore being incapable of removal without destroying the thing itself or its character {conflict is essential in drama}. FUNDAMENTAL applies to something that is a foundation without which an entire system or complex whole would collapse {fundamental principles of algebra}. VITAL suggests something that is necessary to a thing's continued existence or operation {cut off from vital supplies}. CARDINAL suggests something on which an outcome turns or depends {a cardinal rule in buying a home}.

    Main Entry: 1nec·es·sary
    Pronunciation: 'ne-s&-"ser-E
    Function: adjective
    Etymology: Middle English necessarie, from Latin necessarius, from necesse necessary, probably from ne- not + cedere to withdraw -- more at NO
    1 a : of an inevitable nature : INESCAPABLE b (1) : logically unavoidable (2) : that cannot be denied without contradiction c : determined or produced by the previous condition of things d : COMPULSORY
    2 : absolutely needed : REQUIRED

    No semantics... just plain English.
    "essentially necessary" means exactly that.

    Now, to the passage from Ritual we have in question:
    What does it matter if you see "living in Christ" or you see "living by the golden rule" ??? Not one bit...right?
    The only thing that matters is what that Ritual Passage says in plain English.
    If some fellow says "Living in Christ", he gets proven wrong immediately by the facts that this same address is given to ALL Masons, Christian & Anti-Christian.
    The "golden rule" fellow is dead-wrong of the bat, because "golden rule" IS NOT how to get to heaven, is it?

    That passage very inescapably says:
    1. "Here is the Masons' presentation of Heaven,
    2. Purity of life and conduct is essentially necessary to get into this heaven,
    3. And here is a Lambskin Apron to remind you of this essentially necessary ticket to heaven."
    God
    Heaven
    How to Get There
    The Reminder

    That is as plain as it gets, and W.S. and Tom, I outright DEFY you to make it say anything else than what it DOES say.

    Since you can NOT change what it DOES say, then you are flat stuck with "Purity of life and conduct is the way to heaven", and you are flat stuck YOU HAVE A LIE STARING YOU DEAD IN THE FACE, STRAIGHT OUT OF MASONIC RITUAL.

    Stop LYING.

    Jean.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Lambskin Apron stuff.
    Main Entry: 1es·sen·tial
    Pronunciation: i-'sen(t)-sh&l
    Function: adjective
    1 : of, relating to, or constituting essence : INHERENT
    2 : of the utmost importance : BASIC, INDISPENSABLE, NECESSARY {essential foods} {an essential requirement for admission to college}
    3 : IDIOPATHIC {essential disease} {essential hypertension}
    - es·sen·tial·ly /-'sench-lE, -'sen-ch&-/ adverb
    - es·sen·tial·ness /-'sen-ch&l-n&s/ noun
    synonyms ESSENTIAL, FUNDAMENTAL, VITAL, CARDINAL mean so important as to be indispensable. ESSENTIAL implies belonging to the very nature of a thing and therefore being incapable of removal without destroying the thing itself or its character {conflict is essential in drama}. FUNDAMENTAL applies to something that is a foundation without which an entire system or complex whole would collapse {fundamental principles of algebra}. VITAL suggests something that is necessary to a thing's continued existence or operation {cut off from vital supplies}. CARDINAL suggests something on which an outcome turns or depends {a cardinal rule in buying a home}.

    Main Entry: 1nec·es·sary
    Pronunciation: 'ne-s&-"ser-E
    Function: adjective
    Etymology: Middle English necessarie, from Latin necessarius, from necesse necessary, probably from ne- not + cedere to withdraw -- more at NO
    1 a : of an inevitable nature : INESCAPABLE b (1) : logically unavoidable (2) : that cannot be denied without contradiction c : determined or produced by the previous condition of things d : COMPULSORY
    2 : absolutely needed : REQUIRED

    No semantics... just plain English.
    "essentially necessary" means exactly that.

    Now, to the passage from Ritual we have in question:
    What does it matter if you see "living in Christ" or you see "living by the golden rule" ??? Not one bit...right?
    The only thing that matters is what that Ritual Passage says in plain English.
    If some fellow says "Living in Christ", he gets proven wrong immediately by the facts that this same address is given to ALL Masons, Christian & Anti-Christian.
    The "golden rule" fellow is dead-wrong of the bat, because "golden rule" IS NOT how to get to heaven, is it?

    That passage very inescapably says:
    1. "Here is the Masons' presentation of Heaven,
    2. Purity of life and conduct is essentially necessary to get into this heaven,
    3. And here is a Lambskin Apron to remind you of this essentially necessary ticket to heaven."
    God
    Heaven
    How to Get There
    The Reminder

    That is as plain as it gets, and W.S. and Tom, I outright DEFY you to make it say anything else than what it DOES say.

    Since you can NOT change what it DOES say, then you are flat stuck with "Purity of life and conduct is the way to heaven", and you are flat stuck YOU HAVE A LIE STARING YOU DEAD IN THE FACE, STRAIGHT OUT OF MASONIC RITUAL.

    Stop LYING.

    Jean.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous:

    Ah, we're finally getting to the bottom of it. You don't like Masonry because it doesn't follow YOUR religion, which, from your references to Jesus and the "one living God," I take to be a form of Christianity.

    Are you trolling on the Buddhist and Roman Catholic and Scientology sites, too, or is the Taper the only blog that gets your "ban other religions" blather?


    — W.S.

    ReplyDelete
  16. HEY JEAN
    A PARCULIAR SYSTEM OF MORALITY, VEILLED BY ALLEGORY, ILLUSTRATED BY SYMBOLS.



    HENCE ALLEGORY....
    LOOK IT UP AND TELL US WHAT ALLEGORY MEANS.

    IT WAS THE CHURCH THAT TOOK THE STORIES LITERALLY AND KEPT HUMANITY IN THE DARK FOR CENTURIES OVER IT...


    ALLEGORY VS. LITERAL

    ReplyDelete
  17. Bro. Tom,

    Your last couple of posts here have been excellent, clearly written explanations. Too bad the anti-Masons won't comprehend them.

    Why does every new Jesus-loving anti-Mason who comes down the "pike" copy and paste the same tired arguments? Manly Hall this, Albert Pike that, apron, Lucifer, yadda yah blah.... Do they really think Jesus gives a ratatouille one way or the other?

    Great point, that the literalists and the esoterics will never meet. Two different worlds, indeed.

    As Joseph Campbell said, on how to understand myths: "Read between the lines! Literalism kills; imagination quickens."


    — W.S.

    ReplyDelete
  18. One things seems certain; the BurningTaper isn't concealing any Masonic crimes. Let the Light shine in and set us free!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Its the fundalmentalist that always gets me. Obviously, Jean is one of those. I find that most masons tend to be very tolorant and understandning (Sorry if its not that way for you W.S.)

    Again from the EA lecture: "You are not to suffer from the ignorance of others." I believe they put that in the EA for a reason. That even in the beginning, you are to learn tolorance... even for those intolorant. Yes, inlcuding Jean.

    Jean, if you are the "True Christian" as you say you are, I might ask, would Christ be persecuting all who did wrong to him? Heck! We arn't even bothering in your affairs, you're in here reading W.S. blog! Anyways, Christ was treated poorly by the Romans, I didn't see him strike the guards with lightning... Maybe you can really learn a lesson or two from actaully READING and PONDERING the bible.

    Thanks for playing, try again.

    ~Ephraim

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jean should read the blog below this, for her Messiah has come back. I bet he's looking for her.

    Fraternally yours,
    The Libertarian

    ReplyDelete
  21. That's the best comments you can come up with. I have a problem with masons who say it's not a religion which we all know it is. I could care less what religion anyone person is. It's the fact that all you masons indeed lie when it comes to the religious, yes religious teachings masonry has.
    So lets do this again.

    Anonymous said...
    For a moment let's say Masonry IS a religion. Again, I ask you: So what?

    W.S. I have been through this with you in another on of your posts. Stop the lying about it not being a religion. When you and I both know that masonry is a religion. Stop lying to new canidates about the fact that it's not a religion.

    "Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instructions in religion. ... This is the true religion revealed to the ancient patriarchs; which Masonry has taught for many centuries, and which it will continue to teach as long as time endures." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 213

    "(Masonry) is the universal, eternal, immutable religion, such as God planted it in the heart of universal humanity. ... The ministers of this religion are all Masons who comprehend it." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 219

    Albert Pike was nothing if not inconsistent, but he was real clear about the 'religion' of Masonry. It's restated even today, that Masonry is not "a religion" but "religion." You can't split that hair.
    Masonry teaches it is the purity of life and rectitude of conduct that is "essentially necessary" for gaining admission into heaven.

    According to Freemasonry, it is the purity of life and rectitude of conduct that is the very essence of what is necessary for entering heaven.

    And you ask if there is a problem with this??

    I want to make sure I understand your contention.
    Does Masonry present a 'God'?
    Yes.
    These presentations are undeniable, as they are plainly stated in Ritual.

    Does Masonry possess a liturgy?
    Yes.
    The entire Ritual is liturgy.
    Rigid following of a structured form, required (proscribed) prayers, "acceptable" and "unacceptable" responses from candidates, and a catechism are but some examples of this liturgy.

    Does Masonry practice worship?
    Yes.
    Prayer is the most intimate form of worship --- conversation with God.
    Corporate prayer bonds a gathered body as one in this worship, in unified conversation with God.
    Masonry opens Lodge (and all other Masonic ceremonies) with invocation seeking "Divine Aid, Blessing, and Guidance".
    Masonry demands prayer from its candidate at the outset of his travels through each Degree.
    Masonry directs men to prayer in its Ritual.
    Masonry prays over its dead.
    Masonry closes Lodge (and all other Masonic ceremonies) with benediction seeking "Divine Aid, Blessing, and Guidance".
    (The problem arises in that Masonry never directs Mason to The One True Living God.)

    Does Masonry possess a doctrine?
    Yes.
    Masonry very plainly presents Masons with "the immortality of the soul, and the hope of the afterlife in heaven".
    From the first lesson of "the Common Gavel", to the "sheepskin lectures", Masonry presents to Masons a striving, by their own efforts, to become acceptable before God, and to be "welcomed home" with "Well done, good and faithful servant".
    (The problem arises in that Masonry never addresses man's sinful, condemned state, the need for salvation, or the Only Way [Jesus] to that glorious immortality in Heaven.)

    Does Masonry possess a priesthood, or clerics?
    Yes.
    Masonry must be taught and learned --- passed from those that "have light" to those that "seek light".
    Though not as prevalent these days (but on the resurgence from what I hear) is the assignment of Mentors, and the focus upon "Lodges of Instruction".
    Historically, Entered Apprentices were not "Passed", nor Fellowcrafts "Raised" to the next Degree until they had demonstrated credible knowledge of their current Degree in Freemasonry, by presenting a "work", either in Lectures or Papers, proving that they were "ready" for the next Degree.
    This is the oldest form of priesthoods and clerics known to man.

    These points, from the definition of religion, present a clear picture.
    Is Masonry a religion?
    Let the honest man answer.

    Sunday, August 19, 2007 11:06:00 AM


    Anonymous said...
    Lambskin Apron stuff.
    Main Entry: 1es·sen·tial
    Pronunciation: i-'sen(t)-sh&l
    Function: adjective
    1 : of, relating to, or constituting essence : INHERENT
    2 : of the utmost importance : BASIC, INDISPENSABLE, NECESSARY {essential foods} {an essential requirement for admission to college}
    3 : IDIOPATHIC {essential disease} {essential hypertension}
    - es·sen·tial·ly /-'sench-lE, -'sen-ch&-/ adverb
    - es·sen·tial·ness /-'sen-ch&l-n&s/ noun
    synonyms ESSENTIAL, FUNDAMENTAL, VITAL, CARDINAL mean so important as to be indispensable. ESSENTIAL implies belonging to the very nature of a thing and therefore being incapable of removal without destroying the thing itself or its character {conflict is essential in drama}. FUNDAMENTAL applies to something that is a foundation without which an entire system or complex whole would collapse {fundamental principles of algebra}. VITAL suggests something that is necessary to a thing's continued existence or operation {cut off from vital supplies}. CARDINAL suggests something on which an outcome turns or depends {a cardinal rule in buying a home}.

    Main Entry: 1nec·es·sary
    Pronunciation: 'ne-s&-"ser-E
    Function: adjective
    Etymology: Middle English necessarie, from Latin necessarius, from necesse necessary, probably from ne- not + cedere to withdraw -- more at NO
    1 a : of an inevitable nature : INESCAPABLE b (1) : logically unavoidable (2) : that cannot be denied without contradiction c : determined or produced by the previous condition of things d : COMPULSORY
    2 : absolutely needed : REQUIRED

    No semantics... just plain English.
    "essentially necessary" means exactly that.

    Now, to the passage from Ritual we have in question:
    What does it matter if you see "living in Christ" or you see "living by the golden rule" ??? Not one bit...right?
    The only thing that matters is what that Ritual Passage says in plain English.
    If some fellow says "Living in Christ", he gets proven wrong immediately by the facts that this same address is given to ALL Masons, Christian & Anti-Christian.
    The "golden rule" fellow is dead-wrong of the bat, because "golden rule" IS NOT how to get to heaven, is it?

    That passage very inescapably says:
    1. "Here is the Masons' presentation of Heaven,
    2. Purity of life and conduct is essentially necessary to get into this heaven,
    3. And here is a Lambskin Apron to remind you of this essentially necessary ticket to heaven."
    God
    Heaven
    How to Get There
    The Reminder

    That is as plain as it gets, and W.S. and Tom, I outright DEFY you to make it say anything else than what it DOES say.

    Since you can NOT change what it DOES say, then you are flat stuck with "Purity of life and conduct is the way to heaven", and you are flat stuck YOU HAVE A LIE STARING YOU DEAD IN THE FACE, STRAIGHT OUT OF MASONIC RITUAL.

    Stop LYING.

    Jean.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instructions in religion. ... This is the true religion revealed to the ancient patriarchs; which Masonry has taught for many centuries, and which it will continue to teach as long as time endures." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 213

    Jean, Jean, Jean. What *are* we to do with you?

    This is exactly the point I was trying to make at 3:00 am, and you've completely glossed right over it and called me, WS, and all of the other Masons "liars", as if you have some kind of way to know what evils lurk in the hearts of men.

    Pike, Hall, Mackey, and all the other old-time Mason dudes had a tendency to write (as was the custom of the day) in a flowery, and (credit to the other Anonymous) allegorical manner. Pike especially was fond of the sound of his own voice because all of his works, even the non-Masonic ones, were like this.

    It's worth mentioning at this point that Pike himself writes that M&D is his own interpretation, and that he used source materials which he did not cite, in part because he believed that they were commonly known (and they might have been in the esoteric circles at the time), but also because he was re-interpreting them according to his own ideas of what Masonry was and what it should be.

    Pike is the favorite of Mason-haters because he wrote so boldly about his own beliefs. M&D, if it weren't quite so biased in some areas, would have made a great textbook volume on comparative religions; Pike dragged out just about every myth you could imagine in order to relate them to his ideals of Freemasonry.

    That said, yes, you are correct that Pike wrote several times about Masonry being "religion" or "a religion." But again, you completely miss the metaphor: He compares Masonry to the great religions in history precisely because some of the ideals of the fraternity touch upon those actions and characteristics which are considered virtues by them - temperance, bravery, fortitude, charity. He was passionate about the Craft, and believed very strongly in the positive aspects of the fraternity, and in the ability for men of good character to become even more virtuous by studying the great philosophies.

    At this point, we should note the irony of his views on mixing with negroes, but for now, let's chalk that up to being a factor of his culture.

    But back to the allegory and metaphor of Pike (and other authors), in some respects, what they wrote is comparable to WS writing "Golf is my religion and Tiger Woods is my God." It's meant to show a passionate belief in something, and not to be taken (and I'm going to use this word on purpose) literally.

    Likewise, the speeches about the white aprons and the part about standing before the great white throne (symbolizing purity, get it?) are not to be taken literally; they are metaphorically referencing the ideals that Masons emulate. There is an underlying assumption (which you overlook) that Christian Masons will already be aware of the requirements for heaven as outlined by their own theology, just as our Jewish, Muslim, and Hindu brethren are already aware of their own underlying requirements. The part about (In Connecticut) "purity of life, and rectitude of conduct" are understood to be additional virtues that Masons of any religion should strive to emulate.

    And seriously, Jean, can you think of any religion that would proscribe (and BTW, you need to look that word up, it means the opposite of how you used it) its adherents from being pure and honest? I'm sure that even fundamentalist Christians could agree on that point.

    Heh heh - I just noticed your comment about the Masonic "priesthood" and the "Mentors." That's good, you're learning to make analogies; the next step is to get you to be less literal-minded and use a metaphor.

    Of course, the funny part is that I'm now, by your definition, a member of that Masonic priestly class. Excuse me while I stand on the balcony and wave at the throng of people on my lawn.

    Okay, I've explained the bit about metaphor, symbolism and allegory several times, and you can not possibly fail to understand my meaning, even if you don't agree with it. I'm going to leave that and head right to what I believe is the real issue here.

    (The problem arises in that Masonry never addresses man's sinful, condemned state, the need for salvation, or the Only Way [Jesus] to that glorious immortality in Heaven.)

    I see the problem. You, for whatever reason, seem to have less of a problem with Freemasonry being "a religion" (which is incorrect), and more of a problem that Freemasonry is not Christian, and more specifically, not your definition of Christianity.

    Jean, I don't think I can offer up any decent counter-argument for this because, as Freemasonry is not a religion in the first place, I can't "prove" that it's compatible with your own theology. My sister is a fundamentalist Christian, and she believes that the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches aren't quite Christian. If you're anything like her then it's hard enough to get you to agree that hundreds of millions of people who believe that they are Christian, are actually in a state of sin; I have little hope that you'll come around to my own way of thinking.

    But how can you explain the millions of Masons who believe themselves to be good Christians without resorting to the "They don't know what they're doing" argument? And I'm precluding that because, frankly, I don't - I can't - believe that out of the several million Masons around the globe, none of them have hipped to the fact that they are actually and mistakenly practicing some other religion of which they were previously unaware. Sorry, Jean, but the numbers just don't add up.

    If this is your argument, then I suggest a more fruitful approach would be to leave the Freemasons alone and start working on converting Muslims, Hindus, and Roman Catholics, because the sheer numbers alone mean a statistical advantage for you. Not only that, you won't have to do the extra work of convincing them that, say, Catholicism is a religion; Catholics will already agree with you on that point. Why beat your head against the wall, right?

    Jean, most Freemasons consider themselves to be some form of Christian, while a sizable minority of Freemasons - myself included - have completely different beliefs. However, most Freemasons will respect the religious beliefs of their brothers, and will make efforts to meet them on the "levels" most common to all religions by practicing honesty, courtesy, tolerance, and extending brotherly love and friendship. Most Masons take some pride in being able to sit in a lodge with brothers of other religions without getting into arguments about how to practice their faith.

    Maybe you can explain to me why this attitude generates so much hatred and ill-will among the more literal-minded religious sects? I'd be interested in understanding why.

    Hey, WS - I've taken up a lot of real estate on your blog lately; maybe you should make me a co-author?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well, I don't know how they do it in Missouri, but I didn't take any oaths that tell me to conceal anyone's crimes.

    I am learning, however, that there really are fake lodges out there. A couple of brothers from our lodge came from a "store front" lodge that was getting a few things bassakwards. It's not unreasonable to think that a lodge giving out oaths which sound so far off from what I read in the little blue book might be a fake lodge.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Also, in all the times I've assisted in delivering the various degrees, I've never seen anyone wear a hangman's noose around their neck.

    There's a rope involved but its origin is purely about carrying stuff .

    ReplyDelete
  25. I see the problem. You, for whatever reason, seem to have less of a problem with Freemasonry being "a religion" (which is incorrect), and more of a problem that Freemasonry is not Christian, and more specifically, not your definition of Christianity.

    Tom that's not the case at all. Freemasonry is a religion and has a plan of salvation in it. I could careless who's a christian and who isn't that's not my point. So stop stuffing your face with clam chowder.

    Masonry is a religion. And if these books that I have qouted mean nothing and you are telling me that these guys don't know what they are talking about then I know you are lying. If these books are not a representation of masonry then all the lodges across the world must stop recommending them for reading. Until then I and many others will take these for what they are. And that's proof that masonry is a religion.

    Jean.

    ReplyDelete
  26. at this point in the argument, the best thing to do is the following:

    jean - fine. believe what you want. we don't care.

    sorry for speaking for everyone in the "religion" of freemasonry, but this lunacy has gone on just long enough. it was time to call it quits when jean copied-and-pasted the exact same comment as a rebuttal to two arguments.

    absolute lunacy.

    believe what you want, jean - whatever makes you happy.

    peace and blessed be,

    c.z

    ReplyDelete
  27. Tom that's not the case at all. Freemasonry is a religion and has a plan of salvation in it. I could careless who's a christian and who isn't that's not my point. So stop stuffing your face with clam chowder.

    Clam chowder? C'mon, Jean, I am in New England, after all.

    I dont' believe your statement about not caring who's a Christian or not. It doesn't jibe with your obvious hatred and mistrust of the fraternity, and with your concern that Masons might actually be practicing something.

    You also don't explain how the members can not know that they're practicing a religion. Even if I lied to a candidate ("Naw, don't worry about it, Brother Gene. One little puff ain't gonna hurt ya.") don't you think that any half-way intelligent person who is studying his ritual and reading the books would figure it out?

    You know, kinda like you did?

    This is an especially good question when you consider that in the US, the overwhelming majority of members are Christian, and a good portion of those men are also active in their various churches. One would think that they, if anyone, would soon figure it out that I've been lying to them.

    I also think it's worth looking at your concept, or at least, definition of a "religion." I understand that you can misconstrue the apron speech as having something to do with getting into Heaven (which you are calling "salvation"). But we don't have any of the other things in common with religion which would seem (to me, anyhow) to be a significant lack.

    We don't qualify "sin."

    We don't have people who are inherently imbued with sacerdotal authority. It's worth noting that "Worshipful Masters", the men who run the lodge, are elected by the members and only serve for a year.

    We don't give "blessings" or invoke any specific deity (we do encourage members to invoke their own blessings from their own deity).

    We do not have a "holy book". Each member uses his own version of his own book of sacred law. While US lodges have a copy of the Christian KJV Bible, this is not universal. I, in fact, used another book entirely for my own EA degree.

    We do not have a mythology. Yes, we have a contrived "backstory" about Hiram Abiff, but even in this we pull some of it from the Old Testament, and then deviate from the OT story. We present some other OT tales, or use some OT characters as parables to assist in reinforcing the moral lessons that we try to teach.

    BTW, the Hiram story is contrived in the sense that it did not seem to exist prior to the early 1700s. Before that, we only had 2 degrees, met in taverns and inns, had dinner and drinks, and did not even have a standard ritual; lodges would invent their own, often changing them as different members took on different roles.

    I don't know, Jean. None of this sounds like any religion I've ever heard of. None so deaf as them that don't want to hear.

    ReplyDelete
  28. there is such overwhelming evidence supporting the FACT that freemasonry is NOT religion - and yet we still have people like "jean" running around with blinders on.

    i don't find it amusing - i actually think it's a cause for concern.

    it's almost pathological.

    c.z

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.