# GM of Nevada Rules 'No Multiple Volumes of Sacred Law' in Lodges



## My Freemasonry (Nov 7, 2019)

​
Over a month ago, the Grand Master of Nevada, Most Worshipful Steven A. Robinson, Jr., issued an Order that declares the use of any other Volume of Sacred Law (VSL) or book of faith besides the Bible during lodge ceremonies, meetings or degrees is a violation of Nevada's Masonic code.

While the Old Testament of the Holy Bible is central to the origins and allegories of Masonic ritual, in recent decades most U.S. grand lodges have taken a broad approach (or turned a blind eye) to the use of alternative VSLs - especially when obligating new candidates who are not specifically Christian in their beliefs. According to GM Robison's Order, that is not permitted in the Grand Lodge F&AM of Nevada's Masonic Code.

Order No. 1, issued September 26, 2019, states, in part:
_"It has been brought to my attention that several lodges are using, or are planning to use, books other than the Holy Bible on the Altar during Degrees or at other times during Masonic meetings.
"I've consulted with the Grand Lecturer concerning this practice. We are in agreement that this practice is not part of our approved and adopted Standard Work as found in our Nevada Masonic Code 4.350 (1). As our Grand Lecturer stated in his Ritual and Work Committee Report at the Annual Communication of 2017: 'Allowing the use of any other than the Holy Bible would be in violation of our Masonic Code, ritual and Work. Deviating from this could be considered a Masonic offense'..."_​


_Click image to enlarge_​James Anderson's 1723 *Constitutions* from which the *Ancient Charges* have almost uniformly been adopted throughout the regular, recognized Masonic world, let the camel's nose under the tent flap when he famously stated the following:
*I. Concerning GOD and RELIGION.*
A Mason is oblig’d by his Tenure, to obey the moral law; and if he rightly  understands the Art, he will never be a stupid Atheist nor an irreligious Libertine. But though in ancient Times Masons were charg’d in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet ’tis 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 Men and true, or Men of Honour and Honesty, by whatever Denominations or Persuasions they may be distinguish’d; whereby Masonry becomes the Center of Union, and the Means of conciliating true Friendship among Persons that must have remain’d at a perpetual Distance.​That very first _Ancient Charge_ gave Freemasonry in England a unique cachet, coming on the heels of the English Civil War in the 1640s. The Catholic Inquisitors were still at work in Spain and Portugal. The Protestant movements across Europe were all too frequently bloody ones. But Masonry was a torchbearer for the Enlightenment. It was the first organized, voluntary, associative society that specified faith as a membership requirement, but not the members' religious creed. Less than a century after Englishmen were executed for arguing about how many holy sacraments there were, or whose prayer book was hidden under their pillows, Masonry didn't care what religion you practiced, as long as you _DID_. That has not changed.

The Charges make no mention of the Holy Bible itself. Because of the way the Ancient Charges are phrased, Jews were permitted to join London lodges just ten years after the _Constitutions_ were published - something that was unheard of at the time. As the British Empire sailed its way around the globe and spread its colonial power and influence to the corners of the Earth, Freemasonry was along for the ride, and the lodges became a way of bridging relationships between important native, local leaders and English colonial officials. Frequently, those local men were not Christian, but were welcomed into the lodge regardless, based on the Ancient Charges. As a result, while the Bible was always present on the lodge altars, it was also often accompanied by the Jewish Tanakh, the Islamic Quran, or other volume deemed to be sacred law by local members. (All three are on the altars of the Grand Lodge of Israel today because their members are Jews, Muslims and Christians.) Different VSLs were used at the very least when a non-Christian took the obligations of the three degrees, and for good reason. A man making an oath before God by placing his hand on a book that has nothing to do with his own faith is a completely hollow gesture, and is liable to cause the man to feel the ceremony violates his beliefs - or is at best, unbinding upon his heart and word. Making accommodations for such members today should not even be remotely controversial.




​
But I do understand and sympathize with Nevada's rule on the subject of multiple VSLs. Arguments have flared over the last century and longer about what constitutes an appropriate book or symbol to be obligated upon if the new Mason has no specific book in his religion. Feathers, bones and other objects have even been used. Some lodges in the world stack every holy book they can find on their altars like Congress does at their swearing in ceremonies as a symbol of their universality (or occasionally as a virtue signaling stunt). 

Some modern day Masons feel compelled to go through all sorts of ethical and legalistic gymnastics to sufficiently compel their lodges to comply with what is obviously someone being a smart ass tweaking at the fringes of our level of tolerance. In recent years, there's a certain strange development of men who show up with an almost defiant sense of pranksterism and demand their belief be specifically catered to, just as a test to see if Masons really do welcome all faiths. _("I'm a follower of Robespierre's French Revolution-era Cult of the Supreme Being. Neo-pagan-pan-theistic guys like me would join your lodge if I can be obligated on Rousseau, except I don't like organized religiousy sounding things.") _

It's possible to be too open minded to even take your own side in an argument. 

Part of what blew things up between the Grand Orient of France and the rest of the Masonic world over a century ago was their elimination of the Holy Bible on the altar or even a faith requirement at all, with a substitution of a blank, white book as a stand-in for ALL sacred books. So my guess is that Nevada's rule is a very old one, and was designed to draw a line in the sand before these fights got out of hand at a time when the men knocking at the door of their lodges were 98% Protestant Christian in beliefs. Like it or not, the makeup of the American population who espouses any religious or spiritual faith at all in 2019 is much smaller, very, very different and far more nuanced and diverse than even just 40 years ago. Masonry's very construct demands that we draw our membership from only the pool of such men, leaving the 'stupid' atheists, the 'irreligious libertines,' and even any 'smart atheists' out there to look elsewhere. 

Before indignant internet Masons erupt in some explosive insulting of Nevada, the Grand Master, Christians, or American Freemasonry in general, I would urge some major restraint. The wording of GM Robinson's _Order No. 1_ appears to simply be a clarification of the way Nevada's Masonic Code is written and the basic fact that the Holy Bible is the sole book permitted by it. That does not necessarily mean that he or the Grand Lecturer agree with it (even though they may). It simply means that this practice has to stop unless or until Nevada's Freemasons properly amend their Code to explicitly permit different or multiple VSLs.  Depending upon how strongly some of their lodge members feel on the subject, it's entirely possible that someone in Nevada right now is drafting a resolution for their next annual communication to attempt to change it. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Continue reading...


----------



## CLewey44 (Nov 7, 2019)

There is no question if you use anything other than a Holy Bible, according to Nevada's rules, you are in violation of the Masonic Code there. With that said, it certainly doesnt mean its a good rule/law and should be changed so that any religion should feel welcomed and validated. I have no problem with following rules but they can be changed to conform to the times.


----------



## hanzosbm (Feb 25, 2020)

CLewey44 said:


> There is no question if you use anything other than a Holy Bible, according to Nevada's rules, you are in violation of the Masonic Code there. With that said, it certainly doesnt mean its a good rule/law and should be changed so that any religion should feel welcomed and validated. I have no problem with following rules but they can be changed to conform to the times.


While in general I agree, I think for the GM to hide behind "well, them's the rules" is a bit of  a cop out (assuming his disagrees).  As the article points out, Anderson's Constitutions, which can easily be considered the landmarks, says that Freemasonry should be religion agnostic.  Nevada clearly has some contradictory practices/rules that need to be addressed, but in my opinion, they went the wrong way.  

From what I've gathered, we have 3 items involved in the conflict:
1) Anderson's Constitutions says all religions are welcome (I know there's nuance, I'm just simplifying)
2) Nevada's code says Bible only
3) Some Nevada lodges want to use something besides the Bible

The GM has decided to say  that #3 doesn't jive with #2, so #3 is wrong.
He could just as easily have said that #2 doesn't jive with #1, so #2 is wrong.  Yes, it requires more work, and maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong about the jurisprudence here, but if it's recognized that the GL code is in violation of one of the landmarks, I wouldn't think that it would need to be taken to a vote.


----------



## Glen Cook (Feb 25, 2020)

hanzosbm said:


> While in general I agree, I think for the GM to hide behind "well, them's the rules" is a bit of  a cop out (assuming his disagrees).  As the article points out, Anderson's Constitutions, which can easily be considered the landmarks, says that Freemasonry should be religion agnostic.  Nevada clearly has some contradictory practices/rules that need to be addressed, but in my opinion, they went the wrong way.
> 
> From what I've gathered, we have 3 items involved in the conflict:
> 1) Anderson's Constitutions says all religions are welcome (I know there's nuance, I'm just simplifying)
> ...


That would not be the construction given in either masonic or civil law. The law controls over practice. Indeed, I applied that construction today. 

As you are aware, there is no standard list of landmarks, so Anderson is not easily considered such, or there would not be varying lists (or no lists).

There are many GLs and rites in those GLs with many belief restrictions: belief in resurrection, the immortality of the soul, monotheism, even Christianity.  Some rites require use of the Gospels, not in principle different than using the Bible. 

At times, a GM is equally hostage not the law.  This would appear to be the case in this instance.


----------



## Thomas Stright (Feb 26, 2020)

His thinking process is flawed....


----------



## Glen Cook (Feb 26, 2020)

Thomas Stright said:


> His thinking process is flawed....


How so?  If his “code” requires the Bible as he states, how is his thinking process flawed?


----------



## Thomas Stright (Feb 26, 2020)

Glen Cook said:


> How so?  If his “code” requires the Bible as he states, how is his thinking process flawed?



Isn't Masonry open to all who have a belief in a higher power?
Why does it matter what is placed upon the alter if the candidate believes in a higher power?


----------



## Glen Cook (Feb 26, 2020)

Thomas Stright said:


> Isn't Masonry open to all who have a belief in a higher power?
> Why does it matter what is placed upon the alter if the candidate believes in a higher power?


No, it isn’t open to all who have a be higher power, as I wrote in a post above. 

Your second point avoids the issue: if NV “code “ says this, how does the GM deal with his vow to follow the laws, rules and regulations and to require others to do so?  Accepting that the code requires it, he is bound now by his obligation, is he not?


----------



## Thomas Stright (Feb 26, 2020)

Glen Cook said:


> No, it isn’t open to all who have a be higher power, as I wrote in a post above.






Glen Cook said:


> Your second point avoids the issue: if NV “code “ says this, how does the GM deal with his vow to follow the laws, rules and regulations and to require others to do so?  Accepting that the code requires it, he is bound now by his obligation, is he not?



Can't the GM issue a ruling changing the law? 
I see WM make rulings in lodge on how issues are handled... Is this wrong also?


----------



## Glen Cook (Feb 26, 2020)

Thomas Stright said:


> Can't the GM issue a ruling changing the law?
> I see WM make rulings in lodge on how issues are handled... Is this wrong also?


Two different issues. I cannot answer as to NV Masonic law, but in the Western GLs, a GM’s powers tend to be more limited, and the usual rule is that he cannot alter the law. Indeed, I have addressed the point with a GM who wished to provide a two month time for notices to the GL. However, the code already had a one month time requirement. My view was that he could not vary the code.

On the second point, he has done exactly what you suggest: he has made a ruling on how issues are handled.

Let’s take the opposite thought: what if he issued a ruling that only the Book of Constitutions could be used for an obligation?  On what basis would we object to that?


----------



## Thomas Stright (Feb 26, 2020)

Since I am unfamiliar with the Book of Constitutions I would need to read up on that.
Does every GL have one?


----------



## Glen Cook (Feb 26, 2020)

Thomas Stright said:


> Since I am unfamiliar with the Book of Constitutions I would need to read up on that.
> Does every GL have one?


Every GL of which I am aware has a document setting forth their law. It is my understanding that GL Texas does.
So, let’s change the scenario. What if he said the ob had to be taken on the phone book. On what basis would we object to that?  I would quip that a phone book is as relevant in most masons’ lives as a Bible, but that’s another discussion. .


----------

