The Tetrahedral Freemason: 2014

Friday, October 31, 2014

The Desert Fathers and Freemasonry

The Desert Fathers were an early, monastic sect of Christianity which developed what would become the practice of monastic chanting within Christianity. They would memorize the Psalms and repeat them endlessly throughout their labors and worship in a cycle of "constant prayer." The reasons that they did this were many, but I point to a particular phenomenon with which many of us Christian or not, Freemason or not, are familiar. That is the phenomenon of semantic satiation.

This phenomenon is familiar to anyone who has repeated a phrase until it seemed to become nonsense. But there is another aspect of this phenomenon. As a phrase loses its gross semantic meaning it may also gain a more subtle and profound meaning to the person repeating it.

There are three forms of this increased meaning: enjoyment, significance and mantra.

By enjoyment, I mean that word rather literally; it is the increase in the joy that the phrase brings. Many songs, repeated often enough, become more enjoyable as they lose their semantic content and become a pure expression of emotion, for example.

By significance, I mean that successive layers of meaning are stripped away to reveal what lies beneath. This can often occur with poetry where the meter of the poetry induces a sort of context on the verse and emphasizes elements which were not obvious on first reading.

By mantra, I mean that the text becomes entirely non-semantic and takes on a resonance which is neither explicitly emotional nor intellectual. Instead, it allows the mind to wander away from the text into a different specific state and context. The classic image of rooms full of Hindu monks chanting, "Om," is the first thing that might come to mind for some when thinking of a mantra, but any phrase which elicits a change in mental state, not through its meaning or even directly its sound, but through a more profound shift in mental state can behave as a mantra.

So... what has any of this to do with Freemasonry? I assert that the ceremonial initiations of Freemasonry are designed to work on all three levels. This is certainly not true of all of the text of Masonic rituals as their voice and character have changed over the centuries, but there are definitely portions of the text which bear repetition well and some which manage to hit all three of these types of increased meaning.

So, is it the case that Freemasonry should have a monastic component—a cadre of individuals who endlessly repeat the lectures and lessons of the degrees until they achieve whatever goal these phrases were crafted to point us toward? Perhaps, but I'm more inclined to think that Freemasonry should teach these texts, not only as snippets of play or lecture to be repeated only until they "stick," but rather as a form of meditative exercise to be performed together as a group.

This is an idea that I'm exploring intellectually, for now, but might seek to form a small group to explore practically, in the future. I'm not sure if we'd use the modern text (which has the advantage of coinciding with memorization practice) or if we'd seek out ancient versions of the text in order to try to reach back to the rhythms and cadences that were originally intended...

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Everything Wrong With ... Freemasonry

The Masonic Square & Compasses
For many anti-Masons, a red flag

The title of this post is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the popular "Everything Wrong With..." movie reviews series on YouTube, but the topic could not be more serious. Often, especially online, you will see anti-Masons and conspiracy theorists bring up the same issues over and over again. They're almost all completely false, but some are confusingly close to truth and thus make it difficult for a reasonable person, even a Mason who knows better, to discern where they went awry. I'm going to clear up all of the most common examples, here, so that I can stop writing these sorts of responses over and over and over again...

One thing that I will warn of ahead of time is that I'm going to talk about general categories of concern over issues that might be believed to have some validity or basis. What I won't deal with are completely off the wall claims such as Freemasons being aliens or hiding the Holy Grail. None of that is terribly interesting to me as the general public isn't really in danger of believing those stories to be true.

Update: After some public comments by a Grand Orient de France member, I made some of the statements more specific in order to avoid some fallacies that he pointed out (thank you!) This document is not pro- or anti- any institution; only an attempt to explore the claims and realities of anti-Masonry.

Contents:

Claim: Freemasonry is just...

The All-Seeing Eye

Claim: Freemasonry is just...

The Fraternity was constituted in more or less its current form about 300 years ago in 1717 with the founding of the first Grand Lodge (I'll get into Grand Lodges later). During the time since then millions of men have been Freemasons in recognized, regular Lodges (I'll get into those terms too). In any organization that is so large and has so much history, to say that it's "just" anything is bound to be wrong. Even if you're partially right (e.g. "Freemasonry is just philosophy" or "Freemasonry is just a social club") you'll be far more wrong than right, simply by omission. Worse, however, is the fact that people often draw a tenuous line between something the Craft or a Brother has done and something else that they consider unsavory and then conclude that "Freemasonry is just" that.

Here's some of the most tired examples:

The Order of the Eastern Star uses an "upside down" five-pointed star as its symbol, which (the conspiracy theorist claims) is satanic and OES is a Masonic group so Freemasonry is just Satanism (see the discussion of symbols, below).
Albert Pike, a prominent Freemason of the 19th century, mentioned Kabbalah in one of his books, so Freemasonry is just Jewish mysticism.
The founder of the Illuminati in 1776 later became a Freemason, so Freemasonry is just a political power structure aimed at creating a New World Order.
The irregular Grand Lodge, Grand Orient de France, became very political and organizationally if not ideologically anti-Catholic during the 19th century, resulting in its no longer being recognized as Masonic, so Freemasonry is just anti-Catholicism.

As you can see, the general theme here is that something happened that was or related to something else, so Freemasonry is just that something else. It doesn't matter that over 300 years you can find an example of everything you want for your conspiracy theories. It's still the very heart and soul of Freemasonry for purposes of these conspiracy theories.

Unfortunately for the conspiracy theorist, it actually is necessary, when using logic, to provide more than a correlation in the premise and also to maintain scope when asserting such equivalencies.

There are several related logical fallacies, here:

The spotlight fallacy
The biased sample fallacy

Claim: Freemasonry is an oppressor.

This one confuses me, but it keeps coming up. Mostly, it comes from Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, it seems, who think that separation of church and state, a common element of many Enlightenment-era philosophical takes on political structures, is inherently an idea put forward in order to justify oppression of their religious institutions, and that it's inherently Masonic.

The problem is that separation of church and state isn't an oppressive concept. Here in the US Baptists and Mormons and Catholics and Eastern Orthodox and Jews and Muslims get along reasonably well, and yet we have separation of Church and state encoded into our Constitution.

Regardless, this idea did not originate with Freemasonry. The modern idea of separation of church and state originated with Martin Luther and his Doctrine of Two Kingdoms. The idea was refined and further promoted by Enlightenment era philosophers such as John Locke who there is no evidence was a Freemason, though he obviously became a source of inspiration to the founding fathers of the US, many of whom were Freemasons. They even directly quote him in the Declaration of Independence.

But again, it's just not something that came from the Fraternity, and though many Masons might agree, many might not.

Claim: Freemasonry is Luciferian / Satanic

There are a few sources of this, all either misrepresentations or outright (and outrageous) hoaxes:

Poster related to
the Taxil Hoax

In the 19th century, Léo Taxil organized a rather intricate and long-running hoax where he claimed to reveal the "Luciferian secrets" of Freemasonry. He later revealed in a press conference that he was attempting to bait the Catholic Church with his gambit. The hoax, however, imprinted many aspects of the modern conspiracy theories relating to Freemasonry into the public consciousness, not the least of which was the image of the supposed idol of Masonic worship, Baphomet (see on right) which was a fictitious entity invented by the Inquisition during the torture of Knights Templar.
Albert Pike, a famous Freemason in the 19th century who was mentioned in the Taxil hoax, actually did write "Lucifer the Light bearer. Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness. Lucifer the Son of the Morning. Is it he who bears the Light and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble sensual or selfish souls? Doubt it not!" which is often misinterpreted as praise for Lucifer by anti-Masons. The actual meaning of the comment is in the penultimate sentence, however, "he who bears the Light and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble sensual or selfish souls." In this, Pike is explaining the dangers of pursuing the Light of knowledge with impure purpose and warning that simply because Freemasons have rejected darkness, that doesn't mean that there aren't pitfalls awaiting the unwary. This theme that the pursuit of truth is a dangerous path when undertaken without caution and aid is repeated over and over in Pike's and many other Freemasons' work along with that of many other philosophers and sages. One need only look at the state of modern conspiracy theorist communities to validate this caution.
Manly Hall, another prominent Freemason, writes, "... he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply energy." Again, as with Pike, Hall is referring to Lucifer not with reverence, but as a caution. Hall is much more abstract and symbolic about it, but in essence he's restating the old adage: knowledge is power. The question is, what are you going to do with that power? Freemasonry teaches a system of morality, aimed at self-discipline and a love for all mankind as a way to help the student to apply his knowledge wisely, but there is always another (seemingly) easier path... that path is what Hall is cautioning the newly enlightened Mason of by using the metaphor of Lucifer, a powerful angel blinded by his own beauty and the pride it created.
In general, Freemasonry makes many references to Light, and "Fiat Lux," Latin for "Let there be Light!" is often seen in association with Masonic organizations. Many Christian anti-Masons attempt to link this use of the word "Light" with the name, "Lucifer," which literally means light bringer. It's a very flawed and tenuous connection, though, since the concept of light is mentioned hundreds of times in the Christian Bible, including the very phrase, "Let there be Light!" and in Jesus' own statements, making it difficult to assert that references to light would be exclusive to non-Christian or anti-Christian groups.

In any case, the critical feature is that Freemasonry doesn't worship, revere or seek any association with evil in any form. From Lucifer to Shaitan to Set to generic demons, jinn and hobgoblins... we are not a religion and most especially not a religion which worships evil.

Further reading: Pike & Lucifer (masonicinfo.com)

Relevant logical fallacies:

The red herring fallacy
The appeal to fear fallacy

Claim: Masons don't learn the real secrets until the "upper levels"/33rd degree/etc.

An actual intelligence agency
patch from the United States
Government (NRO)

First, let's explore the general idea. The conspiracy theorist is positing a clandestine and elite group within Freemasonry that is so well disguised that 6 million Freemasons don't know it exists, and yet it somehow manages to continue to guide the Fraternity even given its decentralized nature (see the section on Grand Lodges, below). Let's take this as given, even though it's not actually true... what's a bit shocking is that these same conspiracy theorists are convinced that the secret, elite group is known to nearly every conspiracy theorist in possession of a YouTube account... There's a contradiction there. They not only claim that the existence of such a group is known to them (but not to "low level" Freemasons) but that they know the details of their highly secret and nefarious plans! The contradictions continue to deepen as you look into these claims. Freemasons, it seems, must have very long necks in order to be able to bury them so far in the sands of willful ignorance!

However, let me also clear up this "33rd degree" thing. Non-Freemasons think there are some fixed number of "degrees" in Freemasonry that are like ranks. This is false. Freemasonry has a profusion of degrees that might, functionally be impossible to count because many of them are specific to a jurisdiction. It is common for these degrees to either be numbered 1-3 (the first three introductory degrees almost always carried out in what is called a "Blue Lodge" of which there are several regional and historical variations) or for them to be numbered starting after the number of the degree which they have as a prerequisite.

These are not "ranks" for many reasons, but first and foremost among those reasons is the fact that all Master Masons are seen as equals. It's also a practical matter: would a 4th degree York Rite Mason be senior to or junior to a Scottish Rite 4th degree? As it turns out, there's no comparison made. In the Scottish Rite your progress in the York Rite degrees doesn't have any relevance. They're separate institutions within the body of Freemasonry.

So, whenever you hear someone talk about "higher levels" of Freemasonry, ask them exactly what they mean, and in what part of the organization. It's likely that they're simply demonstrating their ignorance of the basic structure of the Fraternity, and anyone who claims to know the best-hidden secrets of an organization that they don't even understand the structure of... is probably safe to ignore.

Further reading: The complex system of degrees as organized in Canadian Freemasonry (freemasonry.bcy.ca) and in the United States (themasonictrowel.com)

Claim: Freemasons are required to help their Brothers regardless of what crimes they commit or lies they tell.

This one is easily discarded. Freemasons are expelled from the Fraternity for failing to live up to the ideals set forth by the three degrees, one of which is a cheerful compliance with the laws of one's country. If you discard that obligation and commit a crime, then we're not obliged to help you to commit or get away with it, as that would be a violation of our own obligation.

There is a counterexample often used by conspiracy buffs from a 19th century showman and "exposer" of Freemasonry. He essentially just made up Masonic initiations on his own and "exposed" them. They were often based on the real initiation ceremonies with exciting new additions like promising to hide any crime one's Brothers committed, but these were fabrications made for audiences, not real Masonic initiations, the text of which had actually been published by that point and anyone who wanted to confirm that this huckster was lying could go visit the library and do so.

Claim: Judges give a pass to Freemasons who come before them.

Judges have a number of loyalties that they must set aside in order to serve their nation's judiciary. They must set aside their personal concerns, those of their culture and, in most nations, those of their religion. They must faithfully adjudicate the law and only the law. Do all judges live up to this lofty standard? Of course not, but I think Freemason judges are more equipped to deal with such ethical quandaries than most, and so I would certainly not expect to receive any different treatment from a Brother judge than any other. I would expect to be given the benefit of reasonable doubt and otherwise disposed of fairly.

I think that the assumption that Freemason judges aren't impartial toward Freemason defendants is an unfair accusation against all judges and their integrity. That said, I think that it would be common practice and a requirement of most civilized nations that a Judge who had direct ties to a Brother (e.g. someone from his Lodge) should recuse himself from any case involving him.

Claim: Freemasons control the [insert name here] industry.

There are some Freemasons who are successful businesspeople. However, claims that any organization controls any industry have to be backed up with more than just a demonstration that one or more successful members of that industry are members of that group.

And in every industry that I can think of, Freemasons certainly do exist, but they exist at every level, and aren't exclusively in charge of any subset of that industry.

Claim: Freemasons are part of a Jewish conspiracy.

WWII German anti-Freemasonry
poster claiming Jewish political
control of the Fraternity.

It's easy to see how this idea evolved. Freemasonry was founded in regions where it was a safe assumption that most people were some form of Christian with a few Jews and even fewer Muslims. Atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, and various other faiths and non-faiths just weren't very widely represented, and so Freemasonry's symbols and allegory are built on the common elements of those three religious traditions. Those common elements are what Christians call the Old Testament.

Particularly, the story of the Temple of Solomon figures strongly in the allegory of the degrees of Freemasonry as a metaphor for the spiritual temple that a man constructs throughout his life, regardless of what faith he might subscribe to.

The Germans, during WWII, for example, took this to be sufficient evidence to herd tens of thousands (some estimates suggest over 100,000) Freemasons (both regular and irregular; as the enemies of Freemasonry don't particularly care about that distinction) into concentration camps and eventually murder them, but it's simply untrue that there's some sort of Jewish agenda in Freemasonry. Freemasonry is independent of and a complement to every religion. It is a set of moral, philosophical and social lessons which do not promote or conflict with any religious world view.

To quote Angel Millar, author of "The Crescent and the Compass,"

Belief that the Freemasons [secretly] control the world goes back through a line of conspiracy theories, all of which have been debunked, though it owes its popularity to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic fake ... the current fixation with “the Illuminati” emerged after the “Satanic Panic” of the 1980s, when claims, by various Christian groups, that there was a global criminal network of Satanists was discredited.

And on that note...

Claim: Freemasonry is anti-[insert religion here]

The only religions that Freemasonry would be opposed to would be those founded on hate and intolerance. In practice, almost every religion has the potential to fall into these traps when practiced by those unwilling to let go of those qualities in themselves, but are not defined by them.

Many religions view Freemasonry with suspicion because we do not explicitly promote their dogma. This is true, but we also don't refute it or require (or even suggest) that our members do. Faith in any particular religion is a choice made by an individual (except in the presence of extreme fanaticism) and Freemasons do not tell other Freemasons how to make that choice. If a Freemason wants to preach their religion to a Brother, they are free to do so outside of the Lodge, but inside the Lodge or at official functions, there is no mention of sectarian religion because it's divisive. This isn't anti-religious.

Claim: Freemasonry is a religion.

There are many definitions of religion, but the most basic is a system of belief, acted on through ritual or observance, usually focusing on supernatural worship. Freemasonry does not have a system of belief. We have a system of morality that is predicated on the individual Brother's system of belief. That's absolutely key in understanding the difference. If you believe in the divinity of Jesus then no one in Freemasonry will ever tell you that you must discard or modify that belief. Instead, the moral principles of Freemasonry will fit into that belief. The same is true for members of any religion.

Claim: Freemasons Worship The Great Architect, which is a false/deistic God.

Masonic allegory refers to
but does not define the
Great Architect of the
Universe

The "Great (or Grand) Architect of the Universe," is a metaphorical phrase used by Freemasons, however, it does not refer to any specific deity. Instead, it refers to a common element of many faiths, and the core and only requirement of the Fraternity with respect to religion: you must believe in a Supreme Being. To a Jewish Freemason The Great Architect refers to the G-d of the Torah. To the Trinitarian Christian Freemason The Great Architect refers to the Holy Trinity. To the Hindu Freemason The Great Architect refers to Brahman.

Each Mason has their own beliefs and cultural context, but there is no "Masonic deity."

This claim also ties into many related claims such as Freemasonry being a deist organization or a syncretic organization. Both are subtly untrue. While some Freemasons (including this author) are deists, we are in the minority and our views are not that of any official body. We just have a belief system that happens to be among the many that are held by individual Freemasons.

As for syncretism, that's a subtler issue. The difference between, "you must be willing to sit in Lodge with and respectfully discuss elements of religious ideas with those of other faiths," and the syncretic idea that "all faiths are fundamentally equivalent and compatible," can be difficult for some people to see, but it's a very important line. The majority of Freemasons would not be comfortable at all with the latter statement, but are clearly willing to abide by the first.

See also, the "Freemasons aren't or cannot be Christians" section, below.

Claim: The First Freemason to reveal the secrets of the Fraternity was murdered.

William Morgan,
an anti-Masonic author who
was kidnapped and possibly
killed.

This is a reference to the William Morgan Affair. Morgan was a Freemason in New York State who decided to publish an expose on the inner workings of the Fraternity. After doing so, he was treated very poorly by his fellow Masons and eventually was whisked away from the jail where he was being held for an unpaid debt and allegedly either killed or forced to leave the country.

That said, here are some interesting facts that are often left out:

Morgan was far from the first to publish such details. The first was over a century prior in the 18th century, and there had been many in between. The only reason we remember Morgan so acutely was the fact that he was treated so badly and possibly killed after doing so, not because he was the first. From this, we can reason that this was a highly unusual case and that the Masons who attacked Morgan were not behaving like the majority of Masons would and did act in similar cases.
Morgan's assailants were denounced and their actions rejected as non-Masonic. While the Fraternity must take responsibility for having welcomed these wrongdoers into its midst, it is also not reasonable to paint the entire Fraternity of millions of men over hundreds of years with the brush of the actions of a handful of men in one incident.
The Morgan affair happened nearly 200 years ago. It's very telling that in order to find such an egregious case of Masonic wrongdoing, we can't even rely on the past century, but must dip into the early days of US history to find an event universally decried by the vast majority of Masons.
There are reports that Morgan was simply paid $500 and told to go back to his native Canada and never return. While I find this only mildly plausible and it doesn't excuse the other behavior, I refuse to convict anyone without evidence that is beyond the shadow of a doubt.

The last point that I should bring up is that the Morgan affair is most acutely remembered not because of the crime itself, but because it was the event which the Anti-Masonic Party (a national US political party) used to launch itself into the public eye and fuel outrage against any candidate not willing to renounce the Fraternity regardless of how vehemently they renounced the Morgan Affair itself. This kind of political witch hunt is unsavory at best, and certainly is not a useful basis for civilized discourse.

Update: Note that sometimes this story gets confused with the death of Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism. Joseph Smith is said to have given some Masonic signs of recognition on his death, but those stories are entirely unsubstantiated. Whether he did or did not, however, it's important not to conflate that with Morgan. Smith was killed by a mob that was reacting to the destruction of a local newspaper and his declaration of martial law in the town, not over some Masonic dispute.

Further reading: The history of exposés of Masonic ritual (freemasonry.bcy.ca)

Claim: Freemasonry is made of up of the elite.

This is mostly untrue. It is true that some Freemasons are rich. It's true that some Freemasons are powerful people in their own rights. But it's also true that such people are a dramatic minority, as they are in every other walk of life, who rarely have the time in their busy lives to do a great deal with the Fraternity.

What's more, the Fraternity is made up of millions of men from every walk of life, socio-economic status, political affiliation and so on, so if you want to talk about some elite cabal of control then you'd be headed back to the above "Masons don't find out the evil/world-controlling secrets..." myth.

Now, let's head on to some true, but perhaps misleading items:

Claim: Freemasonry isn't and Masons can't be Christian.

George Washington Truett,
Baptist and Freemason

The first half of this is true in that the Fraternity is not a Christian organization and Freemasons can be from any religion that meets our basic "Supreme Being" and moral criteria. However, this is often said with the implication that Freemasonry doesn't fall in line with Christian ethics or that you cannot be both a Christian and a Freemason. This is, of course, absurd, and is easily discounted by looking back at the long list of exemplary Christians who have been Freemasons.

As stated previously, Freemasonry is not a religion and does not seek to restrict or modify its members religious beliefs. It is a system of moral philosophy that can be employed in the lives of any good man, regardless of their faith, ethnicity, culture, age, etc.

There are many examples of men from all of the major denominations of Christianity who were Freemasons. Even Catholicism which officially rejects the Fraternity has had devout and active men join its ranks, including at least one young Bishop who would one day be Pope and for whom reasonably conclusive documentation is available (Pius IX Pope from 1846-1878, initiated 1839, expelled 1874).

Update: One spin on this claim that you might hear is that Masonic initiation is equivalent to the Christian concept of being "born again" and thus is heretical. This is ... at best, silly. Masonic initiation is a rite of passage like any of the thousands of others in our culture. As such, it can be compared to every other rite of passage, and that includes being born again. But I would not suggest that someone cannot be both Christian and have Sweet Sixteen party or a college graduation ceremony. Taking part in rites of passage does not make one less Christian, even when they also contain religious allegory.

Further reading: Conscience and the Craft, Ill. Dr. James Tresner. (mit.edu)

Claim: You have to be a Christian or you can't advance in the Fraternity.

Symbol of the
Masonic Knights Templar

This is highly misleading, but is based on a kernel of truth: there are two organizations you can't join if you're not a Christian: the Swedish Rite, which is Sweden's local, generic form of Freemasonry, but Christian-themed; and the Knights Templar, a group within the York Rite (mostly in US Masonry) that only allows Christians by default, though exceptions are made in some areas if you are willing to take a Christian-themed oath.

Neither of these two are in any way necessary for advancement in the Fraternity (you can be Grand Master of Masons in your jurisdiction without being either.) The former is just a local oddity and the latter is a kind of a special-interest group for Christians in the Fraternity.

In general, the Fraternity stresses universality. That is, its principles must apply equally to all of its members. We cannot be a purely Christian organization because not all of our Brothers are Christians and it is as important that the Fraternity be relevant to them as it is for any member.

Further reading: The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts' decision to allow Buddhist and Confucianist applicants (masonicdictionary.com; note: the stilted, archaic language here might seem very off-putting... we don't use words like "Chinaman" any more, but they were not considered prejudicial in 1915)

Claim: Freemasons use a symbol that's associated with evil.

Grand Chapter of Massachusetts,

Order of the Eastern Star

via oestar.org

This is quite true. Many symbols of the Fraternity have come to be associated with evil at one point or another. For example, the five-pointed star, which appears in many older Masonic contexts and in the primary symbol of the Masonic-related Order of the Eastern Star, is many times associated in modern contexts with the occult and/or evil. However, these symbols trace their lineage back much further and have individual interpretations in every major religion, philosophy and initiatic tradition. That is why, for example, the five-pointed star was chosen in the late 19th century, well after the founding of the Fraternity and the Order, by an occult group to be a major symbol of their work and was, from there, chosen by Anton LaVey for his Satanic Bible.

But just as the Hindus were using the swastika (or svasti sign) since the Iron Age, which wasn't associated with evil until the mid-20th century when Germany's National Socialist Party took up its use, the various symbols of the Fraternity have, in some cases, been re-appropriated by nefarious groups as symbols of their own. This doesn't make their use historically or even in the modern day "evil." I think it's unreasonable to try to assert that a group somehow loses the privilege of using their own symbols as soon as some other group misuses them.

Freemasonry has used and continues to use many symbols which seem obscure or even frightening to those not aware of their historical significance and allegorical meanings, but they are in no way used to represent evil or wrongdoing within the Fraternity.

Claim: Many of the Presidents of the US were/are Freemasons and the Masonic All Seeing Eye appears in the Great Seal of the US

While these are both at least partly true, they're used to insinuate that there's some sort of Masonic control over the government in the US. This is not borne out from these details, as you will soon see...

The answer to this one is in three parts:

First, the Fraternity does not control the US government. There are Freemasons in politics, certainly, but I think the influence tends to go in the other direction, in such cases. Powerful people with powerful personalities tend to have a profound impact on the organizations that they join, and Freemasonry is no different. The Federal Government of the US, on the other hand, is a massive bureaucracy that it would be hard for any small group of people (even the million+ US Freemasons) to have more than a passing influence on.

Second, there have been 14 US Presidents who were Freemasons, which is not even close to half of them. There are also some outliers who we don't usually count, but if you want to go up to 16, you can include LBJ (initiated into the first degree, but never had time to follow up) and Bill Clinton who is not a Mason, but was in the Masonic youth organization, DeMolay. There have been claims of every President, except for the one or two overtly anti-Masonic ones, being Freemasons, but this is just fantasy, unsupported by even the most casual documentation. Usually, these assertions are based on association with a college frat that isn't Masonic (Freemasonry exists on many college campuses, and does not need crypto-Masonic stand-ins) or on some clumsy handshake (I've seen every kind of odd grip "exposed" as a Masonic handshake on conspiracy sites but none of them are terribly convincing evidence).

Further reading: United States Presidents (mastermason.com)

The All-Seeing Eye or Eye of Providence

Third, the use of common symbols in US seals and symbolism within Freemasonry is not a clear indication of a direct connection and the All Seeing Eye or Eye of Providence is an excellent example of this. The Eye was a common symbol, prior to the 19th century, of the divine protection and guidance that the Declaration of Independence claims that people exercising self-rule are afforded. As such, it was a very common symbol in secular and religious contexts at the time. For context, it is useful to compare to the peace symbol in use today. That symbol came to represent many different movements from the counter-cultural hippies to the anti-Vietnam War movement to the nuclear disarmament movement and so on. But any group that uses that symbol is not revealing a system of hidden influence; they are simply taking advantage of a common cultural symbol which people will recognize.

Further reading: Eye in the Pyramid (msana.com)

Claim: Freemasons are Illuminati

Adam Weishaupt, the
founder of the Illuminati

As mentioned above, the Illuminati were a briefly lived organization of men, some of whom were also Freemasons. This was not accidental. Adam Weishaupt joined the Freemasons one year after founding the Illuminati and used his membership in the Fraternity to attempt to recruit new members. Their ideas were certainly radical for the time: the people should run the government democratically; oppression is never right, even when there is a claimed divine mandate; etc. However, such a group formed today would be considered uninteresting except for the fact that he felt such developments must be forced on those who do not desire them. That said, the connection between the Fraternity and the Illuminati was tenuous at best, and when the Illuminati failed, that connection ended. Any other claim has nothing to do with Freemasonry.

However the phrase as used today most often refers to any powerful group with its own, hidden agenda, and not specifically to the Bavarian Illuminati of 1776. In that light, the Fraternity isn't really correctly identified by this term either. Freemasonry has, at its heart, one goal and that goal is clearly and publicly articulated: to aid the good men who come to its doors to make of themselves better men through a system of morality and philosophy.

The Meta-Claims

Looking back over this list of claims, one new claim might emerge: Freemasonry seems to attract an awful lot of negative attention. There must be something there, reasons the anti-Mason, which generates such claims. There must be some evil afoot which causes Freemasonry to elicit such fears!

Further reading: The burden of proof

It's true that there are many claims, here, and that Freemasonry has evoked much fear from some quarters, but it is relatively easy to dismiss this fear by simply asking: what good and what ill has the Fraternity done? Obviously, Freemasonry was a central theme among many of those good men who helped to found the United States of America and was a driving force in the establishment of individual liberty as a necessary human right. These are unquestionably (in my view) good things. However, there have been darker aspects. The Morgan Affair, mentioned above, is one of our darkest moments.

But we must remember that one cannot simply point out that good men sometimes do bad things or that bad men sometimes join good organizations. One must actually demonstrate, in order to validate the anti-Masons' claims, that Freemasonry is endemically tainted by these ills. This is a claim which I see no validation for within the Fraternity or without.

The other meta-claim is that none of the dire claims of the anti-Masons may be exactly true, but that that is not a valid defense of the Fraternity. This is most assuredly true, and a positive defense of the Fraternity is a project that I intend to take up in the future. I think many Freemasons have taken this on in the past, though, so if you want to look into that, I suggest the following sources:

Freemasons for Dummies by Ill. Christopher L. Hodapp (I cringe when I suggest this book only because of the title, but it's just part of the popular "for Dummies" series and is very much worth reading!)
The history and the persecutions of Spanish Freemasonry by V.W.Bro. Martin I.McGregor
What's Your Answer from the Short Talk Bulletin

On a side topic:

The Grand Orient de France, Continental Freemasonry and Irregular Lodges

You will often hear the claim that "Freemasonry thinks..." some particular thing or "Freemasons are trying to..." do whatever nefarious thing some anti-Mason wants to ascribe to us. The fact is that we're just not that monolithic. In fact, we're so non-monolithic that we're a model of semi-autonomous, democratic processes. So, first let me cover the structure of the Fraternity and then move on to some specifics that you'll often hear about from anti-Masons.

Grand Lodges

Coat of arms of the
United Grand Lodge
of England

In 1717, several Masonic Lodges which had been operating independently formed the United Grand Lodge of England. That Grand Lodge still exists today and is the central governing body of Freemasonry in England, Wales and the Channel Islands.

Further Reading: United Grand Lodge of England

The UGLE is still a very prominent body in modern Freemasonry, but that's all it is. It's not the seat of government of Freemasonry. So where is that? Well, it turns out there's no such thing. Instead, every Grand Lodge is autonomous. My Grand Lodge, The Grand Lodge of Masons in Massachusetts, was the third Grand Lodge in the world and the first in the American Colonies. In the US, because of the colonial history, we have a Grand Lodge for every state and Washington D.C. But in most parts of the world, Grand Lodges are organized on the level of nation.

Each Grand Lodge's member Lodges elect a suite of officers including a Grand Master (who usually serves for 1-3 years depending on the jurisdiction) and they run the show.

Ah, but what if they decide that Freemasonry isn't really a philosophical and moral Fraternity, but a sports betting club or a knitting circle? That's where recognition comes in. Every Grand Lodge recognizes the "regularity" of every other Grand Lodge as long as they continue to keep to the traditions and history of the organization. If they don't then some or all Grand Lodges will stop recognizing them. This can mean many things, but most importantly, it will mean that their members can't travel to Lodges in other jurisdictions, join those Lodges if they move, or take part in any event that happens outside of their jurisdiction. In practice, this is almost always sufficient to keep Freemasonry on an even keel and prevents any kind of central bureaucracy from forming.

There is one problem, however, and it's a problem that can never really be fixed: Anyone can call themselves a Freemason. More importantly, a Lodge or Grand Lodge that is or becomes "irregular" (i.e. stops being recognized by other Lodges or Grand Lodges) can't be stopped from continuing to attract members and claim to be Masonic.

Such is the case in France where the Grand Orient de France broke away from the rest of the Fraternity in the 19th century. They began being much more political (backing individual candidates and agendas in open Lodges and as a matter of policy; something Freemasons cannot do elsewhere) and they began admitting atheists and women as members. After over 100 years of not being recognized, however, they still exist and they have grown distinctly anti-Catholic (in terms of politics and institutional opposition, though many Catholics are Grand Orient members). This reflects very poorly on Freemasonry, but we have no power to change the situation other than by recognizing another French Masonic Grand Lodge such as the Grande Loge Nationale Française (GLNF) which, in fact, is currently becoming the case.

Meanwhile many anti-Masonic claims stem from the actions of the Grand Orient de France. It's difficult to explain how these claims do not apply to the Fraternity as a whole when, as described above, there is no Fraternity as a whole. The most that can be said is that the Grand Orient de France's activities and views are not supported by or endorsed by the majority of Freemasonry.

Even more confusingly, there are a network of Masonic and Masonic-like bodies that recognize and, in some cases, are recognized by the Grand Orient de France. These are collectively referred to as "Continental Freemasonry," and as the name implies, are mostly located in continental Europe. Such organizations include Co-Masonry, Le Droit Humain and other, smaller groups. If you hear these names, just be aware that they're not what I would call "mainstream Freemasonry."

Additional sources and references

Anti-Masonry, Wikipedia
Anti-Masonic claims refuted, Grand Lodge of British Columbia
Anti-Masonry Frequently Asked Questions, J.J. Crowder, mastermason.com
Anti-Masonry heating up, a list of articles on MSA's site about Anti-Masonry
History of the Anti-Masonic Party, Paul M. Bessel on the MIT Freemasonry site
Is it True What They Say About Freemasonry? Arturo de Hoyos and S Brent Morris, 2012
Conscience and the Craft, Ill. Dr. James Tresner, 33°

The Google shortened URL for this post: goo.gl/0pI3bA

Saturday, February 22, 2014

The Lutheran view of Freemasonry and a response

There's a lengthy evaluation of Freemasonry on the "Lutheran Church Missouri Synod" web site that I thought I should respond to because it has some very inaccurate ideas about what Freemasonry is and what it communicates. I don't mean to insult or impugn Lutheranism. This isn't an issue that I see as a conflict of any sort. It's possible to be wrong about Freemasonry and still be good, honest and truly pious people. Given that, let's proceed to the details:

... most Christians in the United States (at least 90 million, including Roman Catholics, the Orthodox, the LCMS and other Lutherans, as well as Evangelical churches) belong to churches that forbid membership in Freemasonry because they regard it as incompatible with Christianity.

I don't want to spend too much time on demographics because I don't think this is a matter of a vote. There was a time when the vast majority of religious bodies were opposed to many things that they now accept, ranging from democratic governance to public musical performances. However, I should point out that Wikipedia has a somewhat more objective view of these statistics. It's also the case that Catholicism officially opposes membership in the Fraternity, but many devout and pious Catholics continue to be members and that the Church has been softening the edges of the relationship with Freemasonry for decades, though there are still many in the Holy See who are adamantly opposed to open endorsement of the Fraternity. My point, here, being that it is a more complex picture than is being presented.

Why is it incompatible? Because the Masonic Lodge is held to be a deistic religious organization that requires belief (members must swear an oath) in a god that is not the triune God,

This is simply inaccurate. Freemasons are required by our Constitutions and Landmarks to accept as our Brothers only those who have a belief in a Supreme Being, but we make no representation about what those individual beliefs might be. If you are a Lutheran who believes in the triune God, then you are welcome to join and we will never ask you to modify your beliefs, nor will we discuss those beliefs or the beliefs of any member in open Lodge. Members are free to discuss religion with each other in informal settings, but we use religious text only for purposes of allegory in the Lodge. We do not discuss politics or religion otherwise. The Holy Bible (always present in a Lodge of Masons) is there to illustrate our moral lessons. Preaching a specific faith from it or any other religious text is outside of the scope of Freemasonry.

... and a god who is accessible apart from Jesus Christ through any religion that believes in god as Creator.

I think that this is the source of the misunderstanding. We Freemasons embrace the diversity of the beliefs that our members have. We do not, however, tell them how to practice those religions. We teach a system of morality which we believe to be compatible with every religion, but we do not modify or alter the way in which a man interacts with his God. If you believe that access to the divine is always practiced through Jesus Christ, then Freemasonry does not contradict that. We don't tell you that your religion is right or wrong, and we don't assert that any other faith is right or wrong. If you do, that's fine, just don't bring it into the Lodge where, once again, we don't talk about politics or religion.

In addition, they teach that entrance to the life to come is gained by following the precepts and morality of Freemasonry, that God will let them into heaven merely because they have been faithful Masons.

This is not a teaching of Freemasonry. Our "degrees" which we use to initiate candidates are allegory. Any attempt to take any of that allegory literally is not a part of Freemasonry.

Lutherans view Masons as belonging to a religious organization that practices idolatry ... The LCMS holds that membership in the Masonic Lodge (a) breaks the First Commandment because the God believed in and worshiped by the Masons is not the true God

as covered, above, this is not true.

and (b) denies the Gospel of justification by grace through faith in Jesus Christ by teaching that entrance into heaven does not depend on Jesus, but instead depends on being a Mason.

as covered, above, this is also not true.

Masonic ritual claims that Freemasonry descended from the events surrounding the building of Solomon’s Temple. Other authorities have asserted that Masonry began at the time of the Tower of Babel, or even with Adam himself. Most informed Masons reject such assertions, however, and hold that Freemasonry, as we have it today, dates from 1717 when four Craft lodges met in a London tavern and established a constitution for “Free” and non-working Masons.

This is somewhat misleading on two points:

First, the origins of Freemasonry dating back to ancient times are, for the most part, a symbolic notion. We do not assert that there were Lodges of modern Freemasons at the building of King Solomon's Temple. We use the building of that temple as a symbol of our teachings and as such date the origins of our Craft to that time.

Second, the date of 1717 is, as stated, the founding date of the United Grand Lodge of England, but Freemasonry did not begin there, only the first national body to govern Lodges of Freemasons. "Speculative Masonry" as differentiated from the operative science of stonework, has been tied to practices which extend back at least 100-200 years prior to that date.

Masonic scholars also recognize that the teaching and practice of Freemasonry comes from a variety of sources. These would include the Bible, the Knights Templars, Jewish Cabbalists, Rosicrucians, ancient mystery cults, gnosticism and Middle Age stonemasons.

This isn't entirely accurate. While it is certainly true that many of these groups were actively involved in Enlightenment era philosophy, and so any philosophical and moral endeavor of the time would necessarily share views with many of these groups, if it was well informed, the assertion that "Freemasonry comes from" these groups is misleading. Freemasonry comes from the craft guilds of England and Scotland, in so far as we can trace its origins directly. That is as much as we can clearly assert. Obviously, Christianity has been a strong influence on the Fraternity and obviously the moral philosophies of the Enlightenment were a strong influence on the Fraternity. These things we know with reasonable certitude, in some cases backed up by significant historical documentation. Anything else is speculation.

Whereas the (operative) working stonemasons were Christian, the new nonworking (speculative) masons decided to be more inclusive in their membership requirements. In their constitution of 1723 the nonworking masons held that masons only were required to believe “that Religion to which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves” (Whalen: 37). In other words, only faith in a Creator God was now required, and specific religious beliefs (such as faith in Jesus Christ or the triune God) were no longer necessary. Any person who believed in God was welcome to join. Only atheists, women, children, the insane, or the physically deformed were disallowed membership.

While this is strictly correct, I want to point out that there are some weighted terms, here. "No longer necessary," could be taken to mean that Freemasons do not view those beliefs to be a religious requisite, and while some Freemasons will doubtless feel that way, there is no universal religious view among Freemasons. We are a body where men of different faiths regularly meet and shake hands as Brothers. They may disagree in particulars of their religions, but they do not disagree as men, in the particulars of being moral and upright.

Freemasonry has had a storied history in the United States. Many early patriots were Masons, including George Washington, Ben Franklin, Paul Revere, and eight or nine signers of the Declaration of Independence. As many as 14 Presidents have been masons: Washington, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Garfield, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, Taft, Harding, Franklin Roosevelt, Truman, and Ford. In 1923, about 300 out 435 U.S. Representatives were Masons, as were 30 out of 48 U.S. Senators. Between 1949-1956, eight of nine Supreme Court Justices were Masons. By 1981 only one Justice was a Mason. The Senate Congressional Record of September 9, 1987 revealed the following belonged to the Masonic Lodge: 41 members of the Federal Judiciary; half of the membership of the Senate Judiciary Committee; 18 Senators; 76 Representatives.

All true, as far as I am aware, though the modern demographics are not, as far as I know, available, so I cannot say whether there are more or fewer Freemasons in each category. I can say that Freemasonry has risen and fallen in membership in a relatively distinct pattern related to the prevailing views of society on the establishment and that pattern varies from country to country. A Google Books Ngram search reveals that the pattern of interest in the Fraternity is more or less similar to that of Lutheranism, which is not terribly surprising. As interest in religious practices ebbs, it ebbs more or less universally and as it grows it also does so broadly.

What do Masons themselves say are the official authorities for their beliefs and practices? All Masons consider their ancient ritual to be a chief authority, as well as the Grand Lodge in each region. In addition, almost all Masons consider the following three books to be authoritative interpreters of official Masonry: (1) Coils Masonic Encyclopedia by Henry Wilson Coil; (2) The Builders by Joseph Fort Newton; (3) Mackey’s Revised Encyclopedia of Freemasonry by Albert G. Mackey. The secondary literature that I have used as some of the sources of this study, quote extensively from these authors to prove their case.

Different groups of Freemasons will definitely assert the usefulness of different texts, but those are certainly ones that are referenced.

At the heart of the Masonic Lodge is the Blue Lodge, to which all masons must belong. The Blue Lodge consists of the first three degrees of Freemasonry: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason. Each of these degrees includes elaborate ritual and extensive memorization that candidates are required to perform at three different meetings of the Lodge. A candidate must be accepted by all members of a Lodge.

This is correct, but somewhat misleading. There are no "first" degrees of Freemasonry. There are the three Blue Lodge Degrees and upon completion of those degrees, one is a Master Mason, recognized around the world as such. There are appendant bodies, but to describe the Blue Lodge as the "first three" degrees might lead some to think that later degrees constitute further rank or status in the organization. This is not so. The only "level above" the Master Mason is that of the officer line in which any Master Mason may take part and that of the Grand Lodge of their jurisdiction.

Those who have completed the three degrees of the Blue Lodge may choose to go on to either the Scottish Rite (which has an additional 29 degrees) or the York Rite (which has an additional 7 degrees).

That is true in the US except for the fact that York Rite has 11 core degrees, and this list left out the Shriners International and several invitational bodies. You also only counted the 29 core degrees (4th through 32nd degrees) of Scottish Rite, leaving out the one "33rd degree" which is bestowed upon members of the Scottish Rite who are deemed to have contributed substantially to that body.

Members are not required to attend meetings, but they are required to pay annual dues. Meetings are held weekly.

These details vary by jurisdiction, but it is much more common for meetings to be monthly and attendance is typically required, though the penalties for non-attendance are essentially non-existent in most jurisdictions. The regular meetings or "stated communications" are an essential part of the governance and stability of the Blue Lodge system, and so are not viewed lightly by Freemasons.

Meetings must be held in a room without windows,

Most Lodge rooms that I have been in have had windows, though during meetings, they are often shuttered. The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts to which I belong does not have windows in its meeting rooms. There is no requirement that I know of, here, only common practice. We do seek to keep the room private as our business meetings and rituals are considered our private business.

At the heart of the Christian critique of Freemasonry is the allegation that Freemasonry is a religious organization that requires certain beliefs about God. Many Masons stridently disagree, claiming that they are merely a secular organization. But is this true?

Neither of these claims are strictly true. Freemasonry is a religious organization in the sense that we present religious material as allegory and require a belief in a Supreme Being, but we are not a religion and, as discussed previously, we do not require any beliefs about God beyond the fact of that belief.

And what do authorities of the Masonic Lodge say? Webster’s New World Dictionary defines religion as “(1) belief in a divine or super human power . . . to be obeyed and worshipped as the Creator and ruler of the universe; (2) expression of . . . belief in conduct and ritual.” Masonry involves all facets of this definition.

Masonry requires a religious belief, but so does being a chaplain in the military. The military is certainly not a religion even though they have an office which requires religious belief and ritual. Instead, it invites members of many religions in to act upon their own faith and the requirements of the organization in order to meet the obligations of both.

Freemasonry can be seen in much the same terms.

The author then quotes Albert Mackey, a Masonic author:

On the contrary, we contend, without any sort of hesitation, that Freemasonry is, in every sense of the word except one, and that its least philosophical, an eminently religious institution

And who could deny this? Of course, we are a religious institution. But at the same time, not having our own unique belief in a deity, but that of our members, we cannot be a religion.

... questions must be asked, “Who is the God that is worshiped in the universal religion of the Masons? Is it the God of the Bible?” Mackey favorably quotes Higgins: “Be assured, that God is equally present with the pious Hindoo in the temple, the Jew in the synagogue, the Mohammedan in the mosque, and the Christian in the church”

This is being misinterpreted, and I think it is the central mistake made by the document.

The word, "God," has two meanings, here. One is the symbolic term that we use in Freemasonry to encompass the beliefs of our members and of the allegories of our rituals. One is a very concrete term used to refer to the deity of specific religions. Freemasonry is not making assertions about Jewish faith, for example, and what it must or must not accept about other faiths. It is not asserting that the Jewish God is the Christian God, but that the Masonic notion of "God" or "Supreme Being" is equally both of these. This is a very important point which, if mistaken, can lead the otherwise intelligent reader to vastly misinterpret what Freemasonry is attempting to accomplish. It is a common tongue for men of all faiths to use to communicate (even when translated into other languages) but it is not a common religion, nor an attempt to merge those religious beliefs.

This confusion is why, when speaking to the public, we typically try to use the term, "Supreme Being," as it makes it clear that we are not trying to make assertions about what any member's personal concept of "God" is or is not. Within the Lodge, we tend to use the world "God" more freely as we all understand what is meant and, more importantly, what is not meant by the use of the term.

Some religions are monotheistic and believe in a personal God (Christianity, Judaism, Islam), others are polytheistic (some traditions within Hinduism), or believe in an impersonal God (Brahman in Hinduism), Christians teach that the only true God is the triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

While Catholics and Lutherans and some others believe this to be true, not all Christians do. However, Freemasons welcome them all and serve them equally from our dinner table as well as from our hearts and minds.

Moreover, in its rituals, its meetings, and even in casual conversation within the Lodge, Masonry forbids its members to confess that the triune God is the only true God or to mention the name of Jesus.

This is a misleading statement. As I've said previously, we don't discuss religion directly within the Lodge except for the purpose of an opening and closing, non-denominational (in most jurisdictions) prayer. We also don't discuss politics, but we don't, by avoiding that topic, endorse or reject any political parties (with the possible exception of the 19th century US "Anti-Masonic Party" which I presume most or all Freemasons did reject, but still would not have been appropriate for conversation within the Lodge).

However, there is another, subtler problem with the above. The statement, "in its rituals, its meetings, and even in casual conversation within the Lodge," implies a misunderstanding of what a "Lodge" is. The meetings in question are the Lodge. The Lodge is not a building, but the gathering of Freemasons for official business of the Fraternity. It begins when the Lodge is "opened" and it ends when the Lodge is "closed". There might be side conversations during a lull in activity at such a meeting, but for the most part, such events are either a business meeting (for dealing with expenses, balloting new members, etc.) a lecture on some Masonic topic, or initiation of candidates, so the restriction on religious and political chatter is not extended to truly "casual conversations." Indeed, I have taken part in many discussions about religion with my Christian, Jewish, Muslim, non-dogmatic or otherwise affiliated Brothers after those meetings. I enjoy these conversations as do they, but they are not a part of Freemasonry in any official capacity.

It rejects the deity of Christ and teaches that he was only a man on the same level as other “great” religious teachers such as Mohammed, Confucius, Zoroaster, or Buddha. Additionally, it claims that its God is superior to all sectarian gods, such as the Christian triune God.

These claims are absolutely false, and they are antithetical to the beliefs of the majority of our members of many faiths. I find this bald assertion to be quite upsetting as it is made on behalf of a religion to which many of my Brothers belong!

Therefore, can a Christian in good conscience worship and pray to this god of Masonry which they claim is all gods, behind all gods, in all gods, and above all gods? Masonry worships a god that can be worshiped apart from Jesus Christ, and therefore its god is a false god.

As there is no God of Masonry and there is no worship of a God of Masonry, this section proceeds from multiple false assumptions.

... in the ritual [non-Masons are described as being] in darkness (including Christian candidates). Only those who become Masons are brought to the light. This totally repudiates the teaching of Jesus, the Light of the World (John 1:4-9; 8:12; 12:46), who says that all those who believe in him dwell in light and are the light of the world (Matthew 5:14-16; Eph 5:8; Col 1:12-13; 1 Peter 2:9), and all those who don't are in darkness.

In both Masonic and Christian tradition, the term "darkness" is used metaphorically to refer to being in a state of ignorance of the teachings of each body, respectively. There is no contradiction, here, nor any "repudiation," endorsement or commentary on Christian dogma. In general, I'm going to avoid commenting on the details of the rituals, but I can honestly say that I have never seen any Christian or, for that matter, a member of any faith, balk at the ritual as presented in context. I would warn people away from reading online documents which claim to be the rituals of Freemasonry for many reasons: they are not always accurate; when they are, they are often not current; and when they are current, they lack a great deal of context required to understand their allegorical and symbolic significance.

The Masons also explicitly declare that entrance into the life to come is earned by their Masonic good works and purity of life.

We teach a system of morality and that system connects both to this life and to the one to come, but we do not teach that strictures of a specific faith either are or are not required along that journey. That is for the individual and their faith to determine. Again, this is important context which is not easy to understand when simply reading leaked versions of our rituals online.

According to their ritual, ...

I find it strange that an abridged and somewhat disjoint version of the Third Degree of Freemasonry is presented in the document without commentary or critique. Why bother to disclose such information if not to make a point?

At every Lodge meeting the Bible sits open upon the altar. This gives the impression that the Masonic Lodge is a Christian organization.

It does not give that impression to any Freemason, however, and even simply touring a Grand Lodge in any state of the US would clear up that misconception.

As has been shown above, this is anything but true. Actually, the Masons teach that the Bible is only a symbol of the Will of God, and that the contents of the Bible are not the Word of God.

This is absolutely and categorically untrue. Freemasons teach an allegorical lesson, in part using the text of the Holy Bible, but we do not assert the nature of the Holy Bible any more than the we assert the nature of the working tools of operative stonemasons, which we also use symbolically. It would be as foolish of a Freemason to assume that he had learned about Christianity or any other faith from the Lodge as it would be to assume that he had learned to lay bricks!

Moreover, according to Coil, Masons are not required to believe any part of the Bible (Quoted in Ankerberg 1989:48).

As we've already covered, Freemasons are not required to be of any particular faith, so I cannot see why Coil's statement is a shock at this point.

In addition, any holy book of any religion can be placed on the altar, depending on the religion of the majority of the members. The Koran is placed on the altar of Muslim Lodges, for example.

The Holy Bible is unique in Freemasonry, but certainly in other Grand Lodges, it might not be the primary symbol of Holy Law. Like our use of the word "God" to encompass the beliefs of our members, so too does the book on our alter encompass the books of Sacred Law that are unique to each of them.

In each of the first three degree ceremonies, the candidate is asked to make an oath ... In each oath, the candidate calls upon himself [the "ancient penalties" such as] a violent death, if he ever [violates that oath] ... It is sinful to invoke God’s name or take an oath in unnecessary or frivolous matters and is a violation of the Commandment, “You shall not take God’s name in vain.” Jesus speaks against this in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5. Those who have sworn such oaths should repent of them, and are not sinning if they break them.

I've abridged this a bit because I have, in fact, taken an oath (which I will not repeat here) but suffice to say that the "ancient penalties" are yet another symbol of Freemasonry. One of those symbols which you will see if you tour a Lodge is the rough and smooth ashlars. These are blocks of stone which are used to symbolize the cutting away of the imperfect and of striving for the perfect. However, we most certainly do not propose to go around hacking off the edges of our members! So too, do we see the "ancient penalties" of our obligations; they are a symbol of the great meaning and import of our oath, which is undertaken in anything but an "unnecessary or frivolous" way. I do not see any contradiction, therefore, between that most solemn oath and the admonitions of the Commandments and Jesus Christ.

In conclusion, I believe that Freemasons who are Lutherans are every bit as entitled to their beliefs as any other, and if that is ever challenged, then my Lutheran Brothers can know that I will speak out on their behalf! May God be with you and may we all strive for our respective, more perfect selves.

Sunday, January 12, 2014

Themes of Freemasonry in film

Since becoming a Freemason, one of the things that has truly struck me is how often I see elements of the Fraternity and its ideas in everything around me. Sometimes these are deliberate nods. Sometimes they're not. But no matter how intentional, it's always fascinating. Below, I'm going to analyze some of the films that I think hold the most Masonic "flavor" and why I think that's important.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

Spielberg's masterful take on the alien influence / abduction craze of the late 1970s was ground-breaking in many ways, but there's one underlying theme that I think many people who watch the film miss: the idea that the connection between symbolism in art and otherworldly forces is part of our everyday experience. This is certainly an important theme in Freemasonry where the idea that we can discuss the divine through symbolism is central to everything we do, and it goes back to traditions that pre-date the Fraternity as far as recorded history can trace.

The iconic moment in the film where our hero carves a mountain into his mashed potatoes and says, "this means something," should be a moment familiar to any Freemason who has reached that point in his studies where he realizes that the most innocuous phrase or image has deeper and profound meaning. I specifically enjoy the fact that the film points out that each person expresses this message through their own gifts. A painter uses that medium, but a sculptor uses stone. It's only a matter of the lens through which you see the world and communicate with it.

Ferris Bueller's Day Off

Okay, I'm sure you didn't see that coming, but I mean it sincerely when I say that this is one of the most heavily Masonic of the 1980s films. True, it's not religiously or mystically themed in an outward fashion, but what are its themes? Understand that the character of Ferris is not a literal one. He is aware of the audience and seems to suffer no consequences of his actions. Ferris is Puck in a way. He's part narrator and partly pure story. It is his friends who receive from him the lessons that each requires that the story is truly about. To Cameron, the gift of brotherly love is given. He is lost in his own fear and self-doubt at the start of the film, but Ferris pulls him out of it, and in one of the film's most symbolic moments, Cameron plunges into a swimming pool, emerging a new, aware man after appearing to die.

Ferris's sister is similarly influenced. Her jealousy and envy are overcome by her love for and desire to protect her brother. The simple act of charity that she performs frees her from the cycle of self-loathing that she's spiraled into and allows her to re-connect with her life and family.

Overall, the movie is about hope, and what value cold be more Masonic?

The Matrix

Much has been said about the spiritual and metaphysical themes of The Matrix, and I won't belabor those, here. What I do want to point out, however, is the relationship between Neo and Morpheus.

Morpheus explains to Neo that he has always been searching for something that he can't explain. The experience of waking up from The Matrix is very much the experience of becoming a Freemason. You awake to new possibilities, the comradeship of your fellow Freemasons and the hope for the perfection of the individual, rather than the acceptance of the rough and imperfect person that you are. Morpheus literally re-builds Neo's body and trains him through a series of three ritualized events that everyone else who watches has already undergone. In fact, if you watch the scenes after Neo wakes up very carefully, you can see many of what I feel are deliberate references to the rituals of Freemasonry, some of which are somewhat archaic, but pertinent none the less. For example, before being brought in to his first lesson with Morpheus, Neo is left alone in a small room where he contemplates his situation. Other examples are perhaps less appropriate for me to go into in this venue, but consider what each of the three lessons Neo undergoes teach him and what happens to him. Consider the final lesson and what happens in it, especially. I think you will come to the conclusion, as I did, that the similarities could not be wholly accidental.

The Man From Earth

A somewhat obscure direct-to-Netflix indie film; I won't spoil the idea that the movie revolves around, but here's how I see it: the main character is a metaphor for something very primal in humanity. It is that same primal element of ourselves that Freemasonry manifests from. With that in mind, see the film. There are obvious elements of the teachings of the Fraternity in the discussions the characters have and in the history of one of the characters, but I think it's the larger themes of where these insights come from and how old they are that truly makes the movie special.

That should do it for now. I might do another list of films another time or just go into one of these in more depth, but we'll see. I have a lot of things that I want to write up.