Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity?

[Jerrell]

Freemasonary is a organization of human Origin, started by stone masons in the Middle Ages it grew to accept the Rich class. Bound to secretcy they kept all the things they 'knew.' FreeMasons are not nesscearily Christians, there are Muslim, Buddhist, and people of many faiths who are freemasons. The organization itself is not of any Christian origin, it was secular, and grew to include cult-like rituals and such.


To be short and simple all it is,is a cult- don't bother yourself with them.


I suggest this website made by Ex-Masons:

http://www.emfj.org/

 

[AndrewCS]

Andrew, why do you continue to post if you have nothing of substance to add to this debate?

What kind of reaction did you figure to get when you posted "blah blah blah?"

Define substance Rev ….

God is substance.

I am not responsible for your re-action to what I post – you are.

God Bless you Rev.

 

[O.F.F.]

So since when do your ideas pre-empt what Jesus says? It was Jesus, after all, who said the most important commandment was to love God with heart, soul, mind, and strength, and that the second was "like it," to love your neighbor as yourself. "On these," He said, "HANG ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS."

But Wayne the problem is, in your defense of Freemasonry, you place more emphasis on the Second than on the First and Greatest Commandment. While these both are crucial tenets of Christianity, you fail to recognize that the gospel is the heart of the First Commandment.

For without Christ there is no way one can love the Lord our God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength. And since this is the chief tenet of our faith, and ALL other religions reject Jesus as God, on that basis of "disagreement" (and incompatibility for the matter) alone a Christian should NOT want to be part of this "religion in which all men agree."

You will show your disagreement as usual, I’m sure, but your objections are all focused not on the basic pattern, but on the fleshing out of the pattern in specific Christian teaching, which is irrelevant to "the religion in which all may agree."

What is the importance for anyone, especially a Christian, being in a "religion in which all men agree?"

"Brotherly love, relief, and truth; beauty, wisdom, and truth; the importance of being able to keep a confidence; taking care of widows and orphans and keeping oneself unspotted from the world (James 1:27); loving one's neighbor as oneself; faith, hope, and love; being diligent in work and not slothful; patience, humility, and every positive virtue"--where exactly do these "conflict," or where exactly are they "incompatible" with Christian faith?

This sounds very eloquent, but the conflict and incompatibility is that, Jesus is the only Way to heaven (John 14:6), and without Christ none of this you list will get anyone into the kingdom of God.

As a pastor, isn't that what you were called to do? That is, to show people the Way to heaven. Shouldn't getting all men into heaven be more important to you than discovering common elements in all religions in order to participate in one in which they all agree?

 

[Rev Wayne]

I am not responsible for your re-action to what I post – you are.

So by the same token, I am not responsible for the "blah blah blah" that started this whole line of non-posting--you are.

Touche.

 

[Rev Wayne]

But Wayne the problem is, in your defense of Freemasonry, you place more emphasis on the Second than on the First and Greatest Commandment.

Pardon my French, but at the time I introduced this particular sub-topic, there was no first or second or greatest or any such thing, I simply introduced it as the Golden Rule, cited its importance in the Christian faith as Jesus declared it, and showed its appearance as expressed in other religions. I don’t think that has changed since I posted it, and the fact is, no matter what the “emphasis” as you put it, it is still as Jesus declared it, central to Christian teaching; and it is still, as I have shown, taught in other religions as well.

And since I got no argument to the contrary, I assume there is no challenge to my last post, so we can also add the concept of purity to the list of things taught in the Christian faith, in other religions, and in the points of religion in which all men agree.

For without Christ there is no way one can love the Lord our God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength. And since this is the chief tenet of our faith, and ALL other religions reject Jesus as God, on that basis of "disagreement" (and incompatibility for the matter) alone a Christian should NOT want to be part of this "religion in which all men agree."

It’s not a matter of anyone “wanting” to be a part of “religion in which all men agree.” If you truly understood what is being said by the phrase, you would not even make that claim, because you would understand that the “religion in which all men agree” is not a separate body of believers nor a separate system men adhere to, it is simply a central core of truths found at the heart of all religions. So even as a Christian, you are ALREADY a part of it, whether you wish to be or not, simply because it already IS a part of what you believe. All Masonry does in regard to it is point out that it is there.

And your point about "since other religions reject Jesus" is an irrelevant point, because you are introducing the idea of salvation, which is not included in Masonry's concept of teachings on which all men are agreed. In fact, Masonry everywhere consistently tells its members that matters of salvation are not the province of Masonry, but rather, they belong to the individual and his own religion and beliefs.

It would be helpful if you would quit trying to turn the discussion to matters of salvation. No one is making any claims concerning salvation, which Masonry EXPLICITLY declares are matters of one's own religion and not of Masonry. Masonry teaches a set of moral values and virtues that are common to all faiths. If you wish to address how you feel those moral values and virtues conflict with Christian faith, by all means bring it on. But your continued insistence on bringing up objections to things Masonry is not teaching, only serves to logjam any discussion by having to point this out to you over and over.

What is the importance for anyone, especially a Christian, being in a "religion in which all men agree?"

What is the possibility, since it involves truths found in ALL religions, of anyone NOT being in it? Slim and none, and Slim already left town, that’s what. And we are well underway to showing that there indeed ARE a set of truths taught in Masonry that are found in ALL religions, Christianity included. So far we've established at least two; and so far we have eliminated none (but then, of course, no one seems to be intent on eliminating any, since those who might be so inclined have preferred to focus only on things Masonry is NOT teaching).

This sounds very eloquent, but the conflict and incompatibility is that, Jesus is the only Way to heaven (John 14:6), and without Christ none of this you list will get anyone into the kingdom of God.

I've already witnessed here many times over, that I put my trust in Jesus alone as my Savior, and that my belief is if I am to enter heaven, Jesus will be the one who gets me there. So if that’s the only place you see “conflict and incompatibility,” you can set your mind at ease, because you have shown NONE. Masonry makes no proclamation about “the way to heaven,” and everywhere declares to every Mason that such things are left up to the individual and his own religion. The list you just called “eloquent” is not a list of declarations about “how to get to heaven,” it is a list of moral principles that are a significant part of Christian beliefs, as they are in all religions, and which are also upheld by Masonry. Yet you speak of the list as “conflict and incompatibility,” which means that you think the Bible conflicts with Christian faith, since all the things on the list can be found there.

But you still didn’t answer the question:

Do brotherly love, relief, and truth conflict with the Christian faith?

Do “beauty, wisdom, and truth” conflict with the Christian faith?

Does keeping confidential matters confidential conflict with the Christian faith?

Does “taking care of widows and orphans and keeping oneself unspotted from the world” conflict with the Christian faith? (especially since I listed the biblical reference!)

Does loving one’s neighbor as oneself conflict with the Christian faith?

Does being diligent and not slothful in one’s occupation conflict with the Christian faith?

Do patience, humility, and every positive virtue conflict with the Christian faith?

A simple yes or no to each will suffice.

You needn’t think that by your reframe you have answered any of these. All you have done is to try to avoid the question by tailoring your response to address that which Masonry does NOT teach, which is a total DODGE rather than an answer.

As a pastor, isn't that what you were called to do? That is, to show people the Way to heaven. Shouldn't getting all men into heaven be more important to you than discovering common elements in all religions in order to participate in one in which they all agree?

I didn't join Freemasonry to find the way to heaven, nor to learn how to teach people to get there. The accusation is ridiculous in what it asserts. It’s not a matter of my calling, it’s not a matter of what “I” consider important, it’s a matter of a commitment I made long ago to live in obedience to the divine will in all things. Since He laid this out as a part of the personal path He has chosen for me to walk, I followed Him, and will continue to follow the course He laid out until He tells me otherwise.

What I find in Masonry is a place where positive values and morals are reinforced. Masonry is very proactive about moving beyond precept to practice, thus producing a more active faith. The positive benefit I see from that is, that since most Masons are also members of our churches as well, that reinforcement also affects what happens in our churches, and men who belong to the lodge bring that active faith to bear in what they do for the church. Also, I notice Masons seem to be more community-minded than most folks, and the church members I have met who are Masons are simply much more active in their church and in their community than the average person in the pew.

All the men who were most influential on my Christian faith when I grew up, I later found out were Masons. I see that as neither accidental nor circumstantial.

 

[George the 3rd]

http://www.startribune.com/10204/story/1345695.html

Hundreds of people flocked to an interfaith service in downtown Minneapolis on Sunday night to mourn the dead, honor the rescuers and simply to share as a community in grief.

Among the more than 1,400 somber people who packed the interfaith service were family members and friends of the dead and missing and uniformed rescue personnel.
Those gathered, from Pentecostal Christians to Buddhist monks, sang "O God Our Help in Ages Past" with solemn fervor and bowed their heads to prayers voiced by Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and American Indian clergy. Their faces reflected both the gravity of the occasion and the diversity of their city -- and of the victims.
Some of the most haunting moments -- and the ones in which tears seemed most spontaneously to flow -- came during prayers sung and chanted by Muslim and Hindu clerics.
The rich and mournful voice of Hamdy El-Sawaf of the Islamic Jurisprudence Council of Minnesota rose into the cathedral's neo-Gothic arches as he offered up lament and words of hope from the Qur'an.
"If a bridge made of iron, steel and concrete can fall down, then a human bridge of faith, trust, confidence and hope must be established," he added.
Shashikant Sane of the Hindu Society of Minnesota said prayer has been underway at the Hindu temple in Maple Grove since dawn Thursday, and fervently wished "peace, peace, peace" upon those assembled.
Rabbi Sim Glaser of Temple Israel and the Rev. Marlene White- rabbit Helgemo of All Nations Indian Church, both in Minneapolis, also led prayers for healing.

Also present were many state and city leaders, including Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Mayor R.T. Rybak.
"Through this horrific tragedy shines Minnesota's goodness ... the courage of those who ran toward danger," Pawlenty said.
Collective prayer and mourning "binds us to each other" like "spiritual mortar," Rybak said. He urged people to cultivate not just a deeper relationship with God in the face of sorrow, "but with each other, a bond that will endure in the days to come" and make Minneapolis a closer, kinder city.

Mike,

Was the service mentioned above incompatible with Christianity?

Should the Christians have stayed away from this "blasphemy"?

I'm sure you get my point!

George (MOA-2)

 

[Rev Wayne]

I think what struck me in the post more than anything else was this:

"If a bridge made of iron, steel and concrete can fall down, then a human bridge of faith, trust, confidence and hope must be established," he added.

I think it would be an even greater human tragedy if every Christian who looked upon this gathering were to turn their backs and walk away in condemnation.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Rev. Marlene White- rabbit Helgemo

I couldn't help but wonder: if we were to attend services led by her, would everyone be frantically checking their watches?

 

[George the 3rd]

I couldn't help but wonder: if we were to attend services led by her, would everyone be frantically checking their watches?

Maybe, but I'm sure all the hymns are sung to Jefferson Airplane melodies! (Apologies to the Rev. Marlene)

 

[Jerrell]

I guess my post was ignored....

 

[George the 3rd]

To be short and simple all it is,is a cult- don't bother yourself with them.

What kind of response is possible when such a definitive statement like that is made?

 

[Jerrell]

What kind of response is possible when such a definitive statement like that is made?

If it's true it's true.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Likewise, if it's not, it's not.

 

[AndrewCS]

MASONS CONNECTED TO OTO

About the OTO

http://www.lvx-oto.org/node/7

External Links

• OTO Grand lodge site
• Grand Lodge Online Library

Ordo Templi Orientis is the first of the great Old Æon orders to accept The Book of the Law, received by Aleister Crowley in 1904 EV. This book proclaims a New Æon in human thought, culture and religion. The Æon arises from a single supreme injunction: the Law of Thelema, which is Do what thou wilt.


This Law is not to be interpreted as a license to indulge every passing whim, but rather as the mandate to discover one's True Will and accomplish it; leaving others to do the same in their own unique ways. "Every man and every woman is a star." The Law of Thelema can ultimately be fulfilled only through the individual efforts of each person. Nevertheless, many worthy aspirants to the Great Work of Thelema have a genuine need for information, guidance, fellowship, or the opportunity to assist their fellow aspirants and serve humanity. Such aspirants will find welcome in OTO.


OTO was originally affiliated with European Masonry but is no longer a Masonic organization, though it shares some terminology and traditions with Masonry. The complex but intriguing history of OTO may be of interest for the light it sheds on the origins of our current organization and goals.


The OTO operates local bodies throughout the world; most members participate directly in one or more of them. There are three levels of local bodies within the OTO: Camps, Oases, and Lodges, in order of increasing importance and services available. Most local bodies offer classes on magick, ritual, cabala, and other topics of interest to practicing Thelemites.


Many bodies perform the EGC Gnostic Mass on a regular basis. Other common local activities include performance of group rituals (for example, the Rites of Eleusis), publication of a newsletter or journal, and cooperative activities with other local alternative-religious groups. To find a local body near you, see the US local bodies or international contacts listings.
US Grand Lodge is not a Lodge in the above sense, but is instead the governing body of the Order in the United States. Grand Lodge coordinates and monitors the operation of local bodies, sets policies, maintains records and finances, and in general performs administrative and leadership functions. Our program synopsis and mission statement provide a summary of the purpose and activities of US Grand Lodge. Most members of lower degrees have few direct dealings with Grand Lodge, as almost all services to members are delivered by the local bodies.
If you wish to become a member of OTO, many resources are available to assist you in locating and contacting a local body to apply for initiation. See the membership page (and the pages to which it refers) for details. It should be clearly understood that initiate membership in OTO requires a physical ceremony, and that we offer no formal correspondence courses or other remote services, though informal correspondence with members is welcome.
OTO is a California charitable corporation and a federally recognized tax-exempt religious entity under IRS section 501c(3). We have proven ourselves to be the genuine O.T.O. of Aleister Crowley, both in the U.S. Federal Courts, and more importantly by our demonstrated success in faithfully promulgating practical Thelemic philosophy through a careful implementation of Crowley's (Aleister Crowley) vision of the mission of the Order.

Interesting ??

 

[Rev Wayne]

Since much has been said, and much accused, about the "religion in which all men agree," it might be helpful to take a look at the sources and the understanding of the phrase as it appears in Masonry.

But does Masonry flesh that out anywhere at all? The main place it seems to be found is in the “Old Charges” of Freemasonry, and there are some interesting variations depending on where it is found. Most of them, however, may be traced to a small handful of originals. One of those forms reads like this:

Although in ancient times, the Christian Masons were charged to comply with the Christian usages of the countries where they sojourned or worked, (being found in all nations, and of divers religions and persuasions ), yet it is now thought most expedient, that the brethren in general should only be charged to adhere to the essentials of religion, in which all men agree; leaving each brother to his own private judgment, as to particular modes and forms. Whence it follows, that all masons are to be good men and true—men of honour and honesty, by whatever religious names or persuasions distinguished; always following that golden precept, of “doing unto all men as (upon a change of conditions) they would that all men should do unto them." (Laurence Dermott, The True Ahiman Rezon: Or a Help to All That Are or Would Be Free and Accepted Masons, New York: Southwick & Hardcastle, 1805, p. 5-6)

A second variation of the statement:

In ancient times, masons were charged to comply with the religious opinions and usages of the country or nation where they sojourned or worked, yet it is now thought most expedient that the brethren in general should only be charged to adhere to the essentials of religion, in which all men agree; leaving each brother to his own judgment as to particular forms.—Whence being good men and true, of unsullied honour and unfailing honesty, the order becomes the centre of union, and the means of conciliating true friendship. (Samuel Cole, The Freemasons’ Library and General Ahiman Rezon, Baltimore: Benjamin Edes, 1817, p. 65-66.).

A third, and perhaps the most familiar, as well as being the most commonly used even today:

A Mason is obliged, by his tenure, to obey the moral law, and if he rightly understands the art, he will never become a stupid Atheist nor an irreligious Libertine. But though in ancient times, Masons were charged in every country to he of the Religion of that country or nation, whatever it was, yet it is now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that Religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves; that is, to be good and true, or men of honor and honesty, by whatever denominations or persuasions they may be distinguished : whereby Masonry becomes the center of union, and the means of conciliating true friendship among persons that must have remained at a perpetual distance. (Thomas Webb, The Freemason’s Monitor: Or, Illustrations of Masonry, Cincinnati: Moore, Wilstach, Keys, & Co., 1859, p. 31).

Mackey and others have provided much material in historical accounts such as this:

The Mason was required to be of "that religion in which all men agree." Consequently atheists only were precluded from admission to the Brotherhood. In Speculative Masonry every member is permitted to enjoy his own peculiar views on religious matters, provided that he does not deny the existence of a personal God and of a future life. (Mackey, History of Freemasonry, p. 863-64)

Mackey, then, seems to define “that religion in which all men agree” as simply (1) the existence of a personal God and (2) life after death.

The source, of course, for this statement from the “Old Charges,” is Anderson’s Constitutions of Freemasonry, from 1723. Anderson later revised the Constitutions in another edition, in 1738. The 1723 version is the one after which most others are modeled. But in the 1738 version, there were some noticeable changes:

In ancient times the Christian Masons were charged to comply with the Christian usages of each country where they travelled or worked; but Masonry being
found in all nations, even of divers religions, they are now only charged to adhere to that religion in which all men agree, (leaving each Brother to his own
particular opinions,) that is, to be good men and true, men of honour and honesty, by whatever names, religions or persuasions, they may be distinguished: for they all agree in the three great articles of Noah, enough to preserve the cement of the Lodge. Thus Masonry is the centre of their union and the happy means of conciliating persons that otherwise must have remained at a perpetual distance.

This is apparently the version after which Dermott modeled his own version as quoted from his Ahiman Rezon above.

I noticed a peculiar quotation of these in an article denunciating Freemasonry in the Catholic Encyclopedia. They actually cite both the 1723 and 1738 versions back to back for comparison. I read the Catholic account only after reading through several versions and comparing them all, and I found myself thinking as I read their quotation of the 1738 version, “They left out the reference about ‘doing unto others.’” But in looking at Anderson’s version again, I saw that the Catholic Encyclopedia had it right, for it was not there. That had me puzzled, so I searched again and found that someone somewhere along the line, apparently Dermott, had added the phrase as they cited from the 1738 revision.

Naturally, that brought to mind some of the old accusations from both inside and outside of Masonry, of a “Christianizing” process that supposedly took place sometime after the 1717 birth of modern Freemasonry. Since this looked like an apparent corroboration of the claim, it piqued my curiosity, since I have held for some time that the process was actually one of “DE-Christianizing.” As I began to search further, I came across a compilation in The World’s Masonic Register, of practically every version you could imagine of the Old Charges, in chronological order. Included among these is one said to have dated from the reign of James the Second. Robert Gould mentions the same document in his History of Freemasonry, and dates it at 1686. In this version, the specific phrase “religion in which all men agree” does not appear; but the following does:

The first charge is, That yee shall be true men to God and the holy church,
and to use no error or heresie by your understanding and by wise men's teaching. Also, "Secondly, That yee shall be true liege men to the King of England, without treason or any falsehood, and that yee know no treason or treachery, but yee shall give knowledge thereof to the King, or to his counsell; also yee shall be true one to another, (that is to say) every Mason of the craft that is Mason allowed, yee shall doe to him as yee would be done unto yourselfe."

That makes Anderson’s revision even more curious, for he adds in the 1738 version, “in former times, the Christian Masons were charged to be. . .” It stands to reason, I figured, that if Anderson were going to add “Christian Mason,” he would also have gone back and inserted this reference to the Golden Rule as well, if he were truly interested in “Christianizing” the charges. This suggests that Dermott possibly had a copy of the earlier version or had seen a copy at some point, and that the inclusion may be attributable to him. But rather than being a “Christianizing” phenomenon, it would be more fitly described as someone has suggested, as “RE”-Christianization, since there is a Christian reference pre-dating all but the very oldest manuscripts of Masonry.

Someone may ask, “Just where is all this going?” Well, there has been considerable discussion recently on the appearance of the Golden Rule in many faith traditions, and even more recently some interest in what constitutes the “religion in which all men agree.” Now we find within the context of the “religion in which all men agree,” i.e., the “Old Charges,” there is reference to the Golden Rule, and the earliest such reference pre-dates even the founding of the modern lodge in 1717.

Since, therefore, it has been established, and assent given from both sides of this issue, that the Golden Rule does indeed appear in writings revered by those of other religions; since the Golden Rule also appears within the context of the Old Charges of Freemasonry; and since, more specifically, the Golden Rule in its appearance there is right in the center of a discussion of the “religion in which all men agree”; arguably, the Golden Rule could very well be, in part or in full, what Freemasonry intends by the expression “religion in which all men agree.” After all, we certainly have reached this one point of agreement, that religions DO agree when it comes to the Golden Rule. Now we find as an additional support, a fair amount of evidence within Masonry that at least SOME comparison or equating of the two in Masonry is indeed the case.

But another place to which we might turn for answers, would be Masonic sources where this would be more likely to be fleshed out in discussion ABOUT the Old Charges, rather than in monitorial citing of the Old Charges themselves.

He is charged to adhere to those grand essentials of religion, in which all men agree; leaving each Brother to his own private judgment, as to particular modes and forms. Whence it follows, that all Freemasons are to be GOOD MEN AND TRUE,—men of honor and honesty,— by whatever religious names or persuasions distinguished,—always following the golden precept, " of doing unto all men as they would that all men should do unto them," and of worshipping God after that manner and form which they conscientiously believe to be most acceptable in his sight." (Charles Whitlock Moore, The Masonic Trestle-Board, Boston: Charles W. Moore, 1846, p. 21-22)

Notice the parallel “a-b” construction of the first two sentences here: the first sentence has a. religion in which all men agree, b. specifics of worship left up to the individual. The second sentence actually falls into an “a-b-a-b” construction. The first half of the sentence has, after “Whence it follows”: a. good men and true, men of honor and honesty; b. by whatever religious names or persuasions distinguished; and the second half is: a. the “golden precept” as he terms it; and b. worshipping God in the way they see acceptable. If the parallels are intended, and that certainly appears to be the case, then grouping all the “a’s” together, we get a closer look at Moore’s depiction: “religion in which all men agree” à good men and true, of honor and honesty à “doing unto all men as they would that all men should do unto them.” But who on earth is Charles W. Moore? He is Charles Whitlock Moore, former Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, and the founder and editor of The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine, a long-running Masonic publication in the 1800’s.

In an anonymous article in that magazine, we find a similar example of the same thing in regard to the “religion in which all men agree.”

Masonry is but another name for that Brotherly love which should unite all men under God's heavens, who are all children of the same Almighty parent, wheresoever dispersed ; and this love will teach men, first of all, to desire the welfare of mankind—of all mankind—and to promote that welfare by thought, word, and deed. By and through this love alone can the citizen acquire true patriotism, the religious man true religion. Masonry can and will educate man to the higher morality of a citizen of the world, which indeed includes the lower morality of a citizen of a state, but in its perfected and ennobled form, purified from the prejudices, the disadvantages to which we have alluded. It can and will educate the religious man to that higher religion—to that "religion in which all men agree," which indeed embraces the lower religion of creeds and sects, but divested of all intolerant, uncharitable views and prejudices. Such is the mission of Masonry; and he who does not find his heart warmed with love toward all mankind should never strive to be made a Freemason, for he cannot exercise Brotherly love.—Anon. (Anonymous, “What is Freemasonry,” The Freemasons’ Monthly Magazine, ed. Charles W. Moore, Vol. XXI (1862), p. 77-78).

The author of this article ties together the exhortation to brotherly love with “the religion in which all men agree.” And what could be more true? When Jesus dealt with the answer to someone’s challenging question, “Who is my neighbor?” after He had just uttered the Golden Rule, He did so by telling them about the Good Samaritan—a man who went against the grain of his fellows, and helped the man rather than pass him by. Thus it was the man who showed compassion for someone the most UNLIKE him in person and outlook, who most exemplified love of neighbor—which is exactly what the article urges, a love “purified from prejudices.”

 

[O.F.F.]

All that talk about the "religion in which all men agree" to ultimately say this:

. . .which is exactly what the article urges, a love “purified from prejudices.”

Yet to this very day Freemasonry is the ONLY racially segregated fraternity in the world. Click on the following link to learn about the hypocrisy of what Wayne a.k.a. MOA has just presented.

Freemasonry's History of Racism

In it you'll see an interest segment from the Grand Lodge of Alabama entitled "ADMITTING NEGROES TO MASONRY." While there are African-American Masons, mostly of Prince Hall Affiliation (PHA), they represent in Masonry what amounts to nothing more than those that use the "separate drinking fountains" of the fraternity.

So much for “purified from prejudices.” But then you can always ask Wayne what his Grand Lodge of South Carolina has to say on the matter. You'll find that their position is no different than Alabama.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Check the following article addressing the same issue as it has affected our churches, which still have this stigma even after all these years.

The Most Segregated Hour of the Week?

Since we are addressing issues of compatibility here, and since you suggest that the racism in our churches finds a parallel in the lodge as well, it looks like the two are perfectly compatible.

They both have work to do, so what else is new? It doesn't mean we abandon either one, some of the best work in overcoming such obstacles is done from the inside.

While there are African-American Masons, mostly of Prince Hall Affiliation (PHA), they represent in Masonry what amounts to nothing more than those that use the "separate drinking fountains" of the fraternity.

Congratulations, you've just ignored centuries of African-American history and tradition, in which African-American lodges and pulpits were the center of both religious and political activism--not to mention a place of preservation of rituals and forms used in worship that were, and for the most part still are, decidedly different from just about any other kind of church you can name. The result has been, there is such a differentiation in music, in liturgy, in preaching, or in other words, in practically every aspect of worship, that most efforts to blend the two would meet with disapproval on either side. What has been achieved in our churches, and hopefully it's not ALL that we can expect, is a much greater openness to joining together for unity services and community projects. As for the lodges, I do know there is an increasing desire here to address issues of recognition. As for personal prejudice of any lodge members, I have not seen this at all, in fact the lodge members I have had contact with exhibit fewer signs of being racially prejudiced than either the general population in our area, or the churches.
When I attended a charity golf tournament sponsored by the lodge, there were a significant number of African-American players who showed up, some were PH, others were invited by members. Not surprising to me, but probably news to you.

Some of my special friends:

And my daughter with her best friend:

 

[George the 3rd]

The author of this article ties together the exhortation to brotherly love with “the religion in which all men agree.” And what could be more true? When Jesus dealt with the answer to someone’s challenging question, “Who is my neighbor?” after He had just uttered the Golden Rule, He did so by telling them about the Good Samaritan—a man who went against the grain of his fellows, and helped the man rather than pass him by. Thus it was the man who showed compassion for someone the most UNLIKE him in person and outlook, who most exemplified love of neighbor—which is exactly what the article urges, a love “purified from prejudices.”

The Common Gavel is used by operative masons to prepare rough stones for the builder's use; but we, as Free and Accepted Masons, are taught to use it for the more noble and glorious purpose of divesting our hearts and consciences of the vices and superfluities of life; thereby fitting our minds as living stones for that spiritual building, that house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

When Masonry expresses the truth that we are in need of removing those human characteristics that are flawed and immoral, it is accused of promoting a system that teaches salvation through works. Then when those human characteristics manifest themselves in institutionalized discrimination, it is accused of not being "perfect"! The fact of the matter is the vast majority of mainstream Grand Lodges and Masons around the world reject any notion of institutionalized segregation and discrimination. The actions of a minority do not prove the alleged wrongs of the majority.

If anyone is truly interested in learning just how shallow the claim of institutionalized segregation and discrimination is they might want to check out this link:

http://bessel.org/masrec/pha.htm

This link deals ONLY with recognition of Prince Hall Masonry. Most Grand Lodges have NO restrictions or requirements for membership based on race or ethnic origin. And in most Grand Lodges around the world, there is no issue whatsoever with members of various ethnic backgrounds being members of a Lodge. Odd, Masonry is attacked for being "too inclusive" when it is convenient, then it is attacked for being "to discriminatory"when that is convenient.

Be careful Mike, strattling the fence can prove to be a pain in the . . . . . !

 

[Jerrell]

Dont try to coat Freemasonry with symbols and values of Christianity, because in truth it's origins have nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity.

 

[George the 3rd]

Dont try to coat Freemasonry with symbols and values of Christianity, because in truth it's origins have nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity.

Perhaps as you study, grow and mature you might find that many of the symbols and values of Christianity have their origins in beliefs and systems that predate Christianity by centuries. And perhaps as you study, grow and mature you might find that a forum is for exchanges of ideas and insights, not a pulpit for pontification.