Albert Pike declares in Morals and Dogma, "Every Masonic lodge is a temple of religion, and its teaching are instructions in religion…this is true religion revealed to the ancient patriarchs; which Masonry has taught for many centuries, and which it will continue to teach as long as time endures."
Albert Mackey says in the Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry, "The religion of Masonry is non-sectarian. It admits men of every creed within its hospitable bosom. It is not Judaism, though there is nothing to offend the Jew. It is not Christianity, but there is nothing in it repugnant to the faith of a Christian.
Mackey further argues, "Look at its ancient landmarks, its sublime ceremonies, its profound symbols and allegories - all inculcating religious doctrine, commanding religious observances, and teaching religious truth, and who can deny that it is eminently a religious institution...? Masonry then, is indeed a religious institution; and on this ground mainly, if not alone, should then religious Mason defend it."
J.S.M. Ward says in Freemasonry: its aims and ideals, "I consider Freemasonry is a significantly organized school of mysticism to be entitled to be called a religion…Freemasonry …taught that each man can by himself, work out his own conception of god and thereby achieve salvation…that thought these paths appear to branch off in various directions, yet they all reach the same ultimate goal, and that to some men, one path is better and to other, another."
Frank C.Higgins maintains: “It is true that Freemasonry is the parent of all religions” (Ancient Freemasonry p. 10)
33rd Degree Freemason Norman Vincent Peale, says: “I consider Masonry to be the purest form of religion on earth” (Masonic Monitor, May 1992 pg.17).
Sir John Cockburn addresses the matter in Freemasonry: What, Whence, Why, Whither where he writes, "The question whether Masonry is a religion has been keenly debated. But the contest appears to be merely a war of words. Perhaps the best way of arriving at a conclusion would be first of all to enumerate the points which are common to most religions, and then to enquire in what respect Masonry differs from them. Religion deals with the relationship between man as his Maker, and instils a reverence for the Creator as the First Cause. Religions abound in observances of worship by prayer and praise. They inculcate rules of conduct by holding up a god or hero as a pattern for imitation. All true religions denounce selfishness, extol mutual; service if necessary self-sacrifice. It would be difficult to say in which of these characteristics that Freemasonry is lacking. Surely it abounds in all. Its ceremonies are elaborate, and are unsurpassed in beauty and depth of meaning. They are interspersed with prayer and thanksgiving. In no religion is the reverential attitude of the creature to the Creator more clearly displayed. A bright example of devotion to duty and of self-sacrifice in the path of fidelity. Is ever held before the eyes of the brethren. In what religion are the principles to be found nobler than those on which Masonry rests? Love to the brethren, relief to the distressed, and reverence to the God of Truth. If the title religion be denied to Freemasonry, it may well claim the higher ground of being a federation of religions. It is a form of worship in which all religions can unite without sacrificing a lot of their respective creeds."
George H. Steinmetz (contemporary of Manly P. Hall) writes in his book Freemasonry: Its Hidden Meaning, "The order has at all times been careful to explain that Masonry is not a religion. It has denied the fact over and over again, and insisted that it was a lodge or brotherhood, and in no way did, nor was it intended to, take the place of the church in a man’s life. It is claimed that Masonry is universal, its tenets such that they can be subscribed to by Christian, Jew, Mohammedan and Buddhist alike, and all may meet in brotherhood at its altars. Has Masonry been too careful in its explanation? Too vehement in its denials? Has it so loudly proclaimed it is not a religion that its followers have been misled into thinking it is not religious? Has it been fearful of inadvertently stepping on the figurative toes of some creed, mistaking a creed for religion?"
He continues, "What is religion? The dictionary defines it as: 'The recognition of man’s relation to a divine superhuman power to whom obedience and reverence are due; the outward acts and practices of life by which men indicate their recognition of such relationship; conformity to the teaching of the Bible, effort of man to attain goodness of God'. … In Morals and Dogma Pike offers the following definition: 'FREEMASONRY is the subjugation of the human that is in man by the Divine; the Conquest of the Appetites and Passions by the Moral Sense and the Reason; a continual effort, struggle, and warfare of the Spiritual against the Material and Sensual. That victory, when it has been achieved and secured, and the conqueror may rest upon his shield and wear the well-earned laurels, is the true holy empire'."
He exhorts Masons, "The time has arrived for Masonry to make its position clear, to not only admit, but rather to declare, that it is religious, even though it may well explain it is not a religion in the commonly accepted misuse of the word 'religion'. An attitude to the contrary may have been excusable in the past, as the vast majority of Masons, ignorant of the esoteric teachings, were equally ignorant of the fact that those teachings constitute religion. This has never been true of the Great Masonic Scholars of the past, all of whose writings show their recognition of the religion of Masonry. What is religion? 'Religion is the recognition of man’s relation to a divine superhuman power to whom obedience and reverence are due'. The Masonic Manuel states, 'Freemasonry’s religion, if religion it may be called, is an unfeigned belief in the one living and true God'. The definition of religion continues, 'The outward acts and practices of life by which men indicate their recognition of such relationship'. Paralleling this the Masonic Manuel continues, '[Freemasonry’s] tenets are brotherly love, relief and truth'. How more can one’s 'outward acts and practices' indicate recognition of the Supreme Architect of the Universe and the relationship to Him, than by brotherly love, relief and truth? Recognition of Him of all necessitates the recognition of every fellow man as a brother, demanding brotherly love, which encompasses relief when needed, and above all else, truth."
Dr. Mayer, stated in 1873, "this great art [Freemasonry] may rightly be called a religion. It defines the relation of the individual man to his Creator, to his fellow men, to himself; it develops man into perfection. Freemasonry is a faithful guide through life, with proper instructions to square our actions, and straight measures to keep us in due bounds with mankind. It teaches truth, recommends peace, and directs our attention to the very perishableness of all things. Is it not a religion? Religion! No, my brethren, we may rather call it THE religion! It is entitled to this sublime distinction, through its aim to make man's life happy and godly and his death enviable and peaceful. It is certainly the true religion of mankind, its truth being obvious by its suitableness for all men, its applicableness to all ages, its unchangeableness under all circumstances, its harmonious working in all zones, and the privilege it grants to every man to entertain his own view of his Creator." He continued, "Who is so blind and fanatical as to anathematise Freemasonry on so-called religious grounds? The religion of Freemasonry is within the reach of the Jew and Gentile, the Mohometan and the Hindu, the white and the black, the master and servant, the free and the captive, the rich and the poor - it is the religion of mankind, it is universal. A good Mason loves religion as a pleasant and useful companion in every proper place and every temperate occupation of life; but he hates religions as edifices constructed on prejudicial and superstitious traditions, fanatical propensities and clerical overbearing."
----------
PS- My mention of Wikipedia as a source was meant tongue-in-cheek. This was not meant to be taken seriously, which I thought was obvious in the phrasing.