# Wiccan Masons



## Payne

How many are you are Wiccan?


----------



## TCShelton

Don't know of anyone on here who is.  Why do you ask?


----------



## SSG_Morrison

From what I understand Wiccans believe in multiple gods and or goddesses.  Similar to Pegans.  Masons believe that there is one God.  Am I correct?


----------



## JTM

Pecans?  I believe you mean "pagans?"

However, to answer your question, masons must believe in a higher power.  We do not specify which.



edit: also added a poll to the thread so you could see some actual responses.


----------



## SSG_Morrison

Yes Yes Pagan not Pacan.  It's very late here in Iraq forgive me.


----------



## Payne

Wicca (pronounced [ˈwɪkə]) is a neopagan, nature-based religion. It was popularised in 1954 by Gerald Gardner, a retired British civil servant, who at the time called it a "Witch cult" and "Witchcraft", and its adherents "the Wica".

Wiccans, as followers of Wicca are now commonly known, typically worship a Goddess (traditionally the Triple Goddess) and a God (traditionally the Horned God), who are sometimes represented as being a part of a greater pantheistic Godhead, and as manifesting themselves as various polytheistic deities. Other characteristics of Wicca include the ritual use of magic, a basic code of morality, and the celebration of eight seasonally based festivals.

There is dispute as to what actually constitutes Wicca. Initially, this spelling may have referred to the lineage of one of Gardner's rivals, Charles Cardell, although from the 1960s it referred only to lineages stemming from Gardner and operating as initiatory Mystery Priesthoods (such as Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wicca). These are now collectively known in North America as British Traditional Wicca. A third usage, which has grown in popularity in recent years, considers Wicca to include other forms of Goddess-oriented neopagan witchcraft that are similar to but independent of that lineage, including Dianic Wicca and the 1734 Tradition; these are sometimes collectively termed Eclectic Wicca.


Pagan or Neopaganism or Neo-Paganism is an umbrella term used to identify a wide variety of modern religious movements, particularly those influenced by pre-Christian pagan beliefs of Europe.

Neo-Pagan religious movements are extremely diverse, with beliefs that range widely from polytheism to animism, to pantheism and other paradigms. Many Neopagans practise a spirituality that is entirely modern in origin, while others attempt to accurately reconstruct or revive indigenous, ethnic religions as found in historical and folkloric sources. 

Neopaganism is a postmodern development in the industrialized countries, found in particular strength in the United States and Britain, but also in Continental Europe (German-speaking Europe, Scandinavia, Slavic Europe, Latin Europe and elsewhere).

The largest Neopagan movement is Wicca, though other significantly sized Neopagan faiths include Neo-druidism, Germanic Neopaganism, and Slavic Neopaganism.

And as JTM said:



JTM said:


> However, to answer your question, masons must believe in a higher power.  We do not specify which.



TCShelton to answer your question, I ask because I am curious


----------



## dhouseholder

I am very eager to hear everyone chime in on this.

While I am not Wiccan, I hold some pretty "non-traditional" beliefs that some theologians might identify as non-Abrahamic. 

I feel that a neo-pagan, or specifically Wiccan, brother must have faith in a Supreme Being, full stop. 

If that Supreme Being is represented by the God/Goddess duality, or the Triple Moon Goddess trinity, or whatever, then so be it. So long as they can do that, without mental reservation or equivocation. I have never been asked nor will I ever ask anyone to define Deity. 

I had struggled with that exact issue for years before my three knocks and I reached my own theological conclusion that made my answer "In God". 

I think that whomever can answer our Petition answers in full Good Faith, is properly vouched for, and so on, is welcomed.

I also think that our beliefs aren't something one should be out flouting around town either. We live in a society where a good number of the population still believes we are a cult.  If you do identify with a religion that is different from the local norm, keep it to yourself; we do not need to give them any more fuel for the fire!

My question is why does this thread start off with a thumbs down icon?


----------



## TCShelton

Well said, Bro. dhouseholder.  I agree with you 100%.  

I'm curious as to the "thumbs down" as well.


----------



## Payne

dhouseholder said:


> My question is why does this thread start off with a thumbs down icon?





I did not know I had used the thumbs down icon... I dono how to change it either...


----------



## TCShelton

Payne said:


> I did not know I had used the thumbs down icon... I dono how to change it either...



No worries, Brother.  I removed it for you.


----------



## Payne

Thanks


----------



## rhitland

There are those who through ignorance will always ridicule just as people do with large groups. 
I do not consider myself wiccan nor any religion exclusively but I am closer than most. I was taught from a young age the power in some of the traditions which have become known to the Wiccian religion; wands, crystals, stones and others.


----------



## Kemis

dhouseholder said:


> While I am not Wiccan, I hold some pretty "non-traditional" beliefs that some theologians might identify as non-Abrahamic.
> ...
> I had struggled with that exact issue for years before my three knocks and I reached my own theological conclusion that made my answer "In God".
> 
> I think that whomever can answer our Petition answers in full Good Faith, is properly vouched for, and so on, is welcomed.



I loved this entire post, but more especially "I had struggled with that exact issue for years before my three knocks and I reached my own theological conclusion that made my answer "In God". "

I departed my religious thoughts from the "norm" a long time ago & it wasn't until a few months before my three knocks that it finally dawned on me that my answer could truly be "In God", too.

I also agree that one of the beauties of Freemasonry is that so long as you can truthfully answer all the petition questions favorably, that you're welcome in the Lodge.  Furthermore, I also find it beautiful that Masonry accepts all religions and typically discourages discussions on the topic at the Lodge.  I think this combination is a part of what has kept Masonry so successful over the centuries.

Matt


----------



## TCShelton

Kemis said:


> I departed my religious thoughts from the "norm" a long time ago & it wasn't until a few months before my three knocks that it finally dawned on me that my answer could truly be "In God", too.



Nice, Matt.  Good post.


----------



## Payne

Well I'd like to thank you guys for your thought on this question as well as being open minded. I was just curious to see how many of you where of like mind in the religion area.


----------



## C. Banks Barbee

SSG_Morrison said:


> From what I understand Wiccans believe in multiple gods and or goddesses.  Similar to Pecans.  Masons believe that there is one God.  Am I correct?



I'm Anglican... and I believe in Pecans.


----------



## Anson575

A brother who flies for a major airline told me of a Lodge he visited in Oregon where they had a Bible, a Quran, a Torah and "The Book of Joe" (can't remember the exact name) on the Altar. A member of the Lodge had written his own religious manifesto and that was good enough for the Brothers of that Lodge.  It is my understanding that other than being a bit 'Oregon odd' Joe was a great guy and a great asset to the Lodge. More power to them I say!


----------



## C. Banks Barbee

I've heard of something like that before, Anson.


----------



## rhitland

I myself have a profound love for Pecans especially paper shell.. !


----------



## apostlepoll

Freemasonry requires belief in a Monotheistic God. At least it used to. Hindus were at one time excluded from Freemasonry because of the belief in multiple Gods until it was decided that these "deities" actually represent the several aspects of the same God.


----------



## apostlepoll

Yes you are correct.


----------



## SSG_Morrison

rhitland said:


> I myself have a profound love for Pecans especially paper shell.. !



Those are very nice...


----------



## rhitland

apostlepoll said:


> Freemasonry requires belief in a Monotheistic God. At least it used to. Hindus were at one time excluded from Freemasonry because of the belief in multiple Gods until it was decided that these "deities" actually represent the several aspects of the same God.



Not much different on the Wiccian end. They do refer to their God in the form of a Trinity which almost all religions have which in the end is connected and are derived from one All Mighty Power. The tree of life best describes this as the ancients believed and passed to us that the one All Mighty Power was incapable of creating on It's own so it divided Itself into three parts, 2 lower parts of wisdom and understanding and the original part of Ultimate Power or Strength thus creating from Itself the trinity responsible for all creation. All religions with multiple gods believed there was a God who was most powerful and ultimately ruled all other gods.


----------



## rhitland

Here is another pic of how the Trinity ties into man.


----------



## JTM

looks amazingly like something in the scottish rite 

also, i'm glad that people decided that the trinity was monotheistic.  i would hate for me not to be a mason.


----------



## TCShelton

JTM said:


> also, i'm glad that people decided that the trinity was monotheistic.  i would hate for me not to be a mason.



It was decided just so you could be a Mason, JTM.


----------



## dhouseholder

rhitland said:


> All religions with multiple gods believed there was a God who was most powerful and ultimately ruled all other gods.


Indeed, what this in effect does is open Freemasonry to all sorts of religions, which I am wholeheartedly behind! Nice job in bringing it back to the ToL. Oh how we as Masons owe so much to the early spiritual ideas of men! 



JTM said:


> looks amazingly like something in the scottish rite


I'm almost certain that it IS the same thing as in the SR.

I have always been meaning to go into Scottish Rite. See, I told my wife, "Don't worry honey! As soon as I am a Master Mason I will be spending a whole lot more time at home! I will only go to lodge once a week or so!" 

And that was my mistake, because now as J. Steward, well... you can imagine how much time I am up there!

So ultimately if I have any more Freemasonry in my life, I will have ALL the time in the world to go to lodge because I won't have a wife!  



JTM said:


> also, i'm glad that people decided that the trinity was monotheistic.  i would hate for me not to be a mason.


 You and a whole lot of brothers!


----------



## SSG_Morrison

rhitland said:


> Not much different on the Wiccian end. They do refer to their God in the form of a Trinity which almost all religions have which in the end is connected and are derived from one All Mighty Power. The tree of life best describes this as the ancients believed and passed to us that the one All Mighty Power was incapable of creating on It's own so it divided Itself into three parts, 2 lower parts of wisdom and understanding and the original part of Ultimate Power or Strength thus creating from Itself the trinity responsible for all creation. All religions with multiple gods believed there was a God who was most powerful and ultimately ruled all other gods.



I like the colors...


----------



## C. Banks Barbee

SSG_Morrison said:


> I like the colors...



I know.  Somebody sprung for the whole box of crayons with the sharpener on the side.


----------



## rhitland

SSG_Morrison said:


> I like the colors...



Funny you mention that because that have meaning as well. Nothing on that tree of life is not symbolic.


----------



## Dredd17

This is an interesting post with several excellent points of view.  We had a bit of a discussion come up like this in our lodge where someone had stated that you should not be able to take your oath on anything but the Holy Bible.  Being a Christian, I understand his reasons for saying that, but part of me still had to disagree.  From what I understand, you are only required to have a belief in a higher spiritual power or Supreme Architect.  Nothing I have seen or read specifically stated that it has to be the Christian God.  I will say that those religions that involve multiple deity does not apply. Any reference to a higher power that I have seen was made in the singular sense.  We all know as Masons, its hard not to judge what we may or may not understand.  As Masons, I think we should strive to keep an open mind and adhere to our traditions as best as possible.


----------



## rhitland

Dredd17 said:


> This is an interesting post with several excellent points of view.  We had a bit of a discussion come up like this in our lodge where someone had stated that you should not be able to take your oath on anything but the Holy Bible.  Being a Christian, I understand his reasons for saying that, but part of me still had to disagree.  From what I understand, you are only required to have a belief in a higher spiritual power or Supreme Architect.  Nothing I have seen or read specifically stated that it has to be the Christian God.  I will say that those religions that involve multiple deity does not apply. Any reference to a higher power that I have seen was made in the singular sense.  We all know as Masons, its hard not to judge what we may or may not understand.  As Masons, I think we should strive to keep an open mind and adhere to our traditions as best as possible.



If you look at the old charges you will see it specifically states all religions are welcome and only a belief in a Supreme Being is required so if you believe in many Gods your are covered and can join. The notion that the Bible only is needed or this is a Christian organization is completely and utterly false.


----------



## Traveling Man

> I also think that our beliefs aren't something one should be out flouting around town either. We live in a society where a good number of the population still believes we are a cult. If you do identify with a religion that is different from the local norm, keep it to yourself; we do not need to give them any more fuel for the fire!



I happen to be of the religion upon which “All wise men agree”; you may ask, what religion may that be? To wit I would answer; wise men do not tell! 
It’s time to send the scalawags into the hinterlands, between the apologists and the self righteous religious bigots whom like the Pharisees who were commanded to pray in their closets; it’s time they were told that their ignorance betrays them and they should not be the purveyors of hate but of love as they were so commanded. These individuals such as Dr. Holly (ex SBC) et al. need to be exposed for what they are… Charlatans!


----------



## SSG_Morrison

Dredd17 said:


> This is an interesting post with several excellent points of view.  We had a bit of a discussion come up like this in our lodge where someone had stated that you should not be able to take your oath on anything but the Holy Bible.  Being a Christian, I understand his reasons for saying that, but part of me still had to disagree.  From what I understand, you are only required to have a belief in a higher spiritual power or Supreme Architect.  Nothing I have seen or read specifically stated that it has to be the Christian God.  I will say that those religions that involve multiple deity does not apply. Any reference to a higher power that I have seen was made in the singular sense.  We all know as Masons, its hard not to judge what we may or may not understand.  As Masons, I think we should strive to keep an open mind and adhere to our traditions as best as possible.



I had also understood it to be that you had to believe in One God, BUT I was thinking in the sense of the Christian God, Muslim God, or Buddha.  AFTER I listened to the others here explain how a multi god or goddess belief works, as in there is always one that is the All powerful or over all others.  I understand that the multi god belief isn't any different than any of the singular god beliefs.  As far as believing that there is One supreme Deity.  So I believe that we are following the traditions, we just have to be open minded enough to Hear and learn what we don't understand.


----------



## dhouseholder

Every Mason should have a deep understanding of the Tree of Life. It is a complete and very esoteric thought symbology. 

What else do we do but understand life? We teach morality! Which is the *way* to live life, paradigms aside. This method of living [morally] is a concept in which few non-religious thought structures [i.e. Freemasonry] embrace with no reservations. 

Really though! We are a "peculiar system of morality, veiled in allegory, and taught through symbols". Morality being a concept in which BETTER life is taught. We can describe existence, which is life (therefore morality), in the ToL. 

The ToL exhibits multiple ideas. The Tree, from Kether, which is really a manner in which one describes the limitless aspect of God (or the top circle) to Malkuth (the bottom circle) which is the Kingdom (or Physical Plane of Existence), is a perfect descriptor of reality of life. 

Therefore the Tree of Life is one of the reality maps in which one can describe the world that we sense; thus making it a valid icon. Good call.


----------



## dhouseholder

Traveling Man said:


> I happen to be of the religion upon which â€œAll wise men agreeâ€; you may ask, what religion may that be? To wit I would answer; wise men do not tell!


Nor should they ask! If you answered "in God" then it should not be an issue.



Traveling Man said:


> Itâ€™s time to send the scalawags into the hinterlands, between the apologists and the self righteous religious bigots whom like the Pharisees who were commanded to pray in their closets; itâ€™s time they were told that their ignorance betrays them and they should not be the purveyors of hate but of love as they were so commanded. These individuals such as Dr. Holly (ex SBC) et al. need to be exposed for what they areâ€¦ Charlatans!


I think Freemasonry teaches a man to keep one's passions within due bounds. Once they have exceeded that boundary, you must rethink your actions. 




SSG_Morrison said:


> I had also understood it to be that you had to believe in One God, BUT I was thinking in the sense of the Christian God, Muslim God, or Buddha.  AFTER I listened to the others here explain how a multi god or goddess belief works, as in there is always one that is the All powerful or over all others.  I understand that the multi god belief isn't any different than any of the singular god beliefs.  As far as believing that there is One supreme Deity.  So I believe that we are following the traditions, we just have to be open minded enough to Hear and learn what we don't understand.


So mote it be! Once we can all agree that EQUAL and DUE parts  reason and faith lead us to righteousness, we can then be fit for the Builder's use.


----------



## Traveling Man

dhouseholder said:


> I think Freemasonry teaches a man to keep one's passions within due bounds. Once they have exceeded that boundary, you must rethink your actions.


 

While indeed it does; it also teaches tolerance and abhors bigotry, but then again you were not witness to Dr. Holly and his ilk writing down license numbers of your lodge members while parked at the lodge during meetings and then excoriating them on Sunday were you? Have you been told that you were no longer welcomed as a member of your religion, or you cannot receive a â€œproper funeralâ€ because you are a Masonâ€? It would seem that organized religion is suffering enough at itâ€™s own hands (membership issues) and ought not be condemning other organizations by bearing false witness against their neighbors.

Tolerance only goes so far my brotherâ€¦ As you can see this is a two way street. The light of truth needs to be shed on these charlatans, whether itâ€™s the, â€œI wrote a book exposing Freemasonryâ€, or â€œthey worship the devilâ€ crowd; I think very few of these individuals are doing these things through ignorance but greed, power and control and should be exposed as such. The only thing I can say good about Dr. Holly is that he succeeded in doing the opposite of what he was trying to achieve, he actually drove candidates to our doors and he has been thrown out of the SBC! There is an old saying; â€œif you donâ€™t take care of politics; politics will take care of youâ€œ!


----------



## Scotty32

No man is responsible for the rightness of his faith; only the uprightness of it.


----------



## drowen

Payne, I didn't know you knew such long words.


----------



## Sirius

Traveling Man said:


> you cannot receive a â€œproper funeralâ€ because you are a Masonâ€?



When My Uncle Jake (pm, Ceder Creek Lodge)  passed away the family asked me speak at his funeral in the church my uncle helped build. That day I approached the pastor to ask about funeral logistics, and he asked me what I was going to say form the lectern. And I told him. The word freemasonry was used. 20 minutes later the pastor came back and said I would not be allowed to speak inside the church , a church I used to be a member of. The also did not allow the Masonic funeral in the church, it had to be short formed in the 103 degree heat at graveside.


----------



## Payne

drowen said:


> Payne, I didn't know you knew such long words.



What are you referring  to..?


----------



## drowen

Chris I was referring to your excellent explanation of Wicca.  I guess we don't utilize our total vocabulary inside of prison walls as we could.


----------



## Payne

-reads your name again- No we don't Dan. I don't use half my brain at that place, good seeing you here and you have a PM


----------



## vanderson78102

Payne said:


> -reads your name again- No we don't Dan. I don't use half my brain at that place, good seeing you here and you have a PM



Is this another local I don't know about Bro. Payne?


----------



## Payne

Bro. Anderson,

 Dr.Owen is some what local. He is a member of  Refugio 190. We used to work together.


----------



## drowen

I worked with Bro Payne for quite a while in Beeville, but transferred to Rusk to help care for my mother who is now in an assisted living center for a short while until she can build up her strength from a bought with pneumonia.  I am a member still of Refugio 190, and Milam 2.  I think one of your old cronies came back to Refugio and was Master there as well.  I took his dad to Beeville to watch his installation. I can't remember his name.  His dad was Tom.  He was a big ugly fella.


----------



## Payne

I have only attended Beeville lodge a few times so I have no idea who that would be. Bro. Anderson my know though


----------



## vanderson78102

I can't think of who you are talking about right off.


----------



## drowen

Barry Watson.  It came to me last night after I got off the computer.


----------



## vanderson78102

I know the name but haven't met him.  He doesn't come to lodge.


----------



## rhitland

Sirius said:


> When My Uncle Jake (pm, Ceder Creek Lodge)  passed away the family asked me speak at his funeral in the church my uncle helped build. That day I approached the pastor to ask about funeral logistics, and he asked me what I was going to say form the lectern. And I told him. The word freemasonry was used. 20 minutes later the pastor came back and said I would not be allowed to speak inside the church , a church I used to be a member of. The also did not allow the Masonic funeral in the church, it had to be short formed in the 103 degree heat at graveside.



My Uncle Jake was about as good a Mason as they come and he loved the craft will all of his heart as it facilitated a huge change in his life. This man sweat blue and lived every minute I ever saw by the craft. I was proud that day to be able to wear my white leather apron and although you were not allowed to speak Cousin I know Uncle Jake is so happy and proud of us right now. I think of him quite often as his memories can be a safe harbor in rough seas.


----------



## Sirius

rhitland said:


> My Uncle Jake was about as good a Mason as they come and he loved the craft will all of his heart as it facilitated a huge change in his life. This man sweat blue and lived every minute I ever saw by the craft. I was proud that day to be able to wear my white leather apron and although you were not allowed to speak Cousin I know Uncle Jake is so happy and proud of us right now. I think of him quite often as his memories can be a safe harbor in rough seas.



True enough. Jake taought me the working tools before I knew that I had learned them. 

I guess I'm still disturbed by the fact that a church would interfere with a funeral. especially a founding member of the church. It'll take another death to get me back in a Baptist church. I still have a bad taste in my mouth from that.


----------



## drowen

Barry moved back to Refugio in about 1999 or so.  He became WM at 190 in 07.


----------



## TexMass

Back in MA we had a Brother who was Wiccan.  Also, in Duxbury, where my lodge is they had a reality show on tv about a Wiccan Priestest and they were located in Duxbury.  They approched us about renting our Masonic Hall monthly for meetings (and we needed the money badly) but the membership said HELL NO.  I have no problem with it at all.  I used to live next door to a family who practiced it and even went to their Beltane Festival which celabrates the coming of spring.  It was fun and very educational.


----------



## Huw

My personal position is fairly ordinary Christian, but I've taken quite an interest in the question of eligibility for other faiths and have debated it extensively in other places.

For Wiccans, the question is quite tricky because it depends upon exactly what the particular petitioner believes.  There is much less central doctrine shared by every Wiccan than in the case of the more established religions, and there are a large number of different traditions within Wicca (habitually abbreviated as "trads" by  Wiccans) which have significant differences in beliefs as well as in practices.  I'm fairly satisfied that some trads (broadly speaking those which identify themselves as "traditional Wicca") are in principle compatible with freemasonry, having a clear belief in an identifiable Supreme Being ("the Source" in Wiccan terminology) and probably having an identifiable scripture (the Book of Shadows) to use as a VSL, but other trads (broadly speaking those which identify themselves as "eclectic Wicca") seem to have vaguer and more changeable beliefs and lack an agreed scriptural basis, so I'm much less convinced that those are eligible.

Therefore, in the case of a petitioner describing himself as Wiccan, I'd want to ask more detailed questions about what he personally believes than in the case of someone professing most other religions - if someone says he's a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, etc., then you automatically know approximately what he means, at least to the extent that he definitely has a Supreme Being and a VSL, but it's less obvious in the case of neo-pagan religions.  Freemasons are not used to having to question a petitioner in detail about his precise beliefs, since this goes against the grain of our inclusive customs, but I think it's generally necessary in the case of neo-pagans to question in detail (but only before Initiation - once it's established that he's eligible, then of course it shouldn't be necessary to question him again afterwards, any more than with any other Brother, unless of course there is some reason to suppose that a Brother's belief has changed and may have ceased to be eligible to remain a Mason).

It also depends somewhat upon the particular GL, since different jurisdictions have slightly different interpretations of the eligibility requirements.  In any case of uncertainty about the local interpretation, a Lodge should obviously seek the guidance of its own GL.  For example, here in UGLE a Candidate must take his Obs on the VSL applicable to his own religion, and if his faith lacks an identifiable VSL then he can't be Initiated and that's the end of the story.  On the other hand, I note that some US GLs appear to be taking a more flexible view and allowing Obs to be taken on any VSL (typically a Bible) even if that particular VSL isn't the one which actually applies to the Candidate's own faith.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## Huw

Hi TexMass.



TexMass said:


> They approched us about renting our Masonic Hall monthly for meetings (and we needed the money badly) but the membership said HELL NO. I have no problem with it at all.


 
That sounds to me like knee-jerk prejudice by the membership, so to that extent I agree with you.  Nevertheless, some practices of many Wiccan covens would strike me as inappropriate usage for Masonic premises, even though I wouldn't object to them practicing what they see fit in their own premises.  To some extent I could question the appropriateness of using Masonic premises for the practices of any particular religion, since we make a point of being open to many faiths and never collectively aligning ourselves with a single view of the divine.  However, some Wiccan practices might be argued to be especially inappropriate, in a way not applicable to most other religions.

Thus I might well have ended up siding with those who voted no, although I'd have wanted to ask some questions before deciding, rather than just saying "HELL NO" by reflex.  If it had turned out to be possible to restrict the use of Masonic premises to only some aspects of Wiccan practice, then I might have been persuaded to say yes ... but of course the Wiccan group might have regarded such conditions as unacceptable interference and withdrawn their application.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## thehibster

Brother Huw,

Iâ€™ve been reading â€œThe Landmarks of Freemasonryâ€, Book II by Silas Shepard and contained within is an article from Oliver Street entitled â€œFreemasonry in Foreign Lands.â€  There was an incident in which the Grand Lodge of Alabama refused to recognize Franceâ€™s Grand Orient because in 1849 the Grand Orient had changed the wording of itâ€™s constitution from â€œFreemasonry has for its principles the existence of Deity and the immortality of the soulâ€ to â€œMasonry has for its principles mutual tolerance, respect for others and for itself, and absolute liberty of conscienceâ€ thereby removing the belief in Deity as a condition for becoming a Mason.

Street argues that a belief in Deity is not one of the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry and uses the following quotation from Andersonâ€™s First Book of Constitutions, 1723 to make his point:  â€œA Mason is obligâ€™d, by his Tenure, to obey the Moral Law; and, if we rightly understand the Art, he will never be a stupid Atheist, nor an irreligious Libertine.  But through in Ancient Times Masons were charged in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet â€˜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 say be good men 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 remainâ€™d at a perpetual Distance.â€

Street argues that Masons are only required to obey a moral law and Masons are obliged to keep any opinion of religion to themselves.  

Iâ€™m sure I donâ€™t do the article justice and you may want to read and interpret the entire article for yourself, but I thought if applied to this particular dialogue concerning the application of Wiccans to Freemasonry, then we would be obliged to do so.

Dave


----------



## Griffin

I agree with the brother(s) who said all that is necessary is that a candidate answer in the affirmative for a belief in a Supreme Being.  I don't have to understand, let alone share, whatever that belief may be.


----------



## Huw

Hi Dave.




thehibster said:


> ... the Grand Orient had changed the wording of itâ€™s constitution from â€œFreemasonry has for its principles the existence of Deity and the immortality of the soulâ€ to â€œMasonry has for its principles mutual tolerance, respect for others and for itself, and absolute liberty of conscienceâ€ thereby removing the belief in Deity as a condition for becoming a Mason.


That's still true, and is the primary reason why no regular jurisdiction anywhere accepts the Grand Orient of France as being genuine freemasons.




thehibster said:


> Street argues that a belief in Deity is not one of the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry


Street is absolutely wrong ... wrong almost to the point of qualifying as an anti-mason for advancing such a view, since this is the most fundamental and unquestionable of all Landmarks. See below.




thehibster said:


> ... uses the following quotation from Andersonâ€™s First Book of Constitutions, 1723 to make his point: â€œA Mason is obligâ€™d, by his Tenure, to obey the Moral Law; and, if we rightly understand the Art, he will never be a stupid Atheist, nor an irreligious Libertine. But through in Ancient Times Masons were charged in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet â€˜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 say be good men 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 remainâ€™d at a perpetual Distance.â€


You'll note that Anderson clearly states that a Mason "will never be a stupid Atheist", so evidently he requires a belief in Deity. Obviously this instantly destroys Street's argument. 

In more detail, however, what you quote is one of the most widely-misunderstood passages in Anderson ... especially by authors who don't understand the social and religious situation in London when Anderson wrote this. In Anderson's time and place:- 

* "Religion" meant Christianity and other faiths weren't really regarded as proper religions at all;

* "The Religion of that Country" meant the locally-approved denomination of Christianity, i.e. to be a Catholic in France, an Anglican in England, and so on - it didn't mean non-Christian religions;

* "That Religion in which all men agree" meant the basic principles of Christianity underlying all of the denominations and sects;

* "Their particular Opinions" meant which Christian denomination a man belonged to, he wasn't taking account of non-Christian beliefs;

* "Denominations or Persuasions" meant Christian denominations or persuasions; and

* "Conciliating true Friendship" between different Christian denominations was a hot issue because we'd been had a series of wars between denominations and there was a great deal of ill-feeling.

Anderson was, after all, a Presbyterian minister - so probably even more than most other men of his time and place, he wouldn't have regarded anything outside Christianity as conceivable for a respectable man in London. (There were Jews around, but they weren't given much respect ... and other religions were almost completely absent.) 




thehibster said:


> Street argues that Masons are only required to obey a moral law and Masons are obliged to keep any opinion of religion to themselves.


He's totally wrong about only being required only to obey a moral law, as I've already said. He's right about being obliged to keep their religious opinions to themselves, because advocating the merits of one's own Christian denomination was fighting talk in London in 1723.




thehibster said:


> Iâ€™m sure I donâ€™t do the article justice and you may want to read and interpret the entire article for yourself, but I thought if applied to this particular dialogue concerning the application of Wiccans to Freemasonry, then we would be obliged to do so.


No, because the quotation isn't about non-Christian religions at all.

The masonic requirement to be a Christian was only officially removed in the early 1800s (although several Lodges had been ignoring the rule and admitting Jews in the late 1700s).


T & F,


Huw


----------



## thehibster

Brother Huw,

Thank you for your reply.  

I have found the different interpretations of what constitutes a â€œlandmarkâ€ to be fascinating.  Also within the â€œThe Landmarks of Freemasonryâ€ is an article entitled â€œThe Ancient Landmarks of Freemasonry as Adopted, Followed or Undecided by the Forty-Nine Grand Lodges of the United Statesâ€ as published by the Masonic Service Association in 1940.  It lists by state how each Grand Lodge interprets the meaning of â€œlandmarksâ€.  No two states are exactly the same and some, like Texas, donâ€™t recognize landmarks at all, but prefer to recognize the â€œOld Chargesâ€ which I think refers to the 1390 Regius Manuscript.

I agree that a belief in Deity is a landmark of Freemasonry, and is so intertwined in the teachings and symbolism that to deny this point seems foolish.  But, the student in me wants to know where this landmark originates and how it evolved, and how it applies to non-Christian religions or beliefs like the Wiccans.  

Thank you for the historical perspective surrounding England at the time Anderson wrote his constitution.  I am nearly through Shepherdâ€™s â€œLandmarks of Freemasonryâ€ and as I skip ahead in volume I of the Little Masonic Library I see next up is the complete 1723 Andersonâ€™s Constitutions.  I will try to keep in mind the historical perspective as I read it.

Thanks,
Dave


----------



## rhitland

Huw said:


> For Wiccans, the question is quite tricky because it depends upon exactly what the particular petitioner believes.  There is much less central doctrine shared by every Wiccan than in the case of the more established religions, and there are a large number of different traditions within Wicca (habitually abbreviated as "trads" by  Wiccans) which have significant differences in beliefs as well as in practices.  I'm fairly satisfied that some trads (broadly speaking those which identify themselves as "traditional Wicca") are in principle compatible with freemasonry, having a clear belief in an identifiable Supreme Being ("the Source" in Wiccan terminology) and probably having an identifiable scripture (the Book of Shadows) to use as a VSL, but other trads (broadly speaking those which identify themselves as "eclectic Wicca") seem to have vaguer and more changeable beliefs and lack an agreed scriptural basis, so I'm much less convinced that those are eligible.
> 
> Therefore, in the case of a petitioner describing himself as Wiccan, I'd want to ask more detailed questions about what he personally believes than in the case of someone professing most other religions - if someone says he's a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, etc., then you automatically know approximately what he means, at least to the extent that he definitely has a Supreme Being and a VSL, but it's less obvious in the case of neo-pagan religions.  Freemasons are not used to having to question a petitioner in detail about his precise beliefs, since this goes against the grain of our inclusive customs, but I think it's generally necessary in the case of neo-pagans to question in detail (but only before Initiation - once it's established that he's eligible, then of course it shouldn't be necessary to question him again afterwards, any more than with any other Brother, unless of course there is some reason to suppose that a Brother's belief has changed and may have ceased to be eligible to remain a Mason).
> 
> T & F,
> 
> Huw


I was under the impression that as long as you are not an atheist you could be a Mason.  If you declare a belief in Deity no many how many Deities that may be you are not an atheist by definition and therefore allowed into Freemasonry.  I am not sure what questioning a petitioner on their explanation of God or Gods would accomplish unless you are in a mood to philosophize with him on the level.  The tenets of Freemasonry are found within the extended points of the compasses and no where in my heart does it say I know what constitutes God or Gods well enough to give me the ability to judge for another if their version of God or Gods is correct for Masonic admission.  As long as they say they believe in a Higher Power or Powers that  good enough for me.


----------



## rhitland

Huw said:


> It also depends somewhat upon the particular GL, since different jurisdictions have slightly different interpretations of the eligibility requirements.  In any case of uncertainty about the local interpretation, a Lodge should obviously seek the guidance of its own GL.  For example, here in UGLE a Candidate must take his Obs on the VSL applicable to his own religion, and if his faith lacks an identifiable VSL then he can't be Initiated and that's the end of the story.  On the other hand, I note that some US GLs appear to be taking a more flexible view and allowing Obs to be taken on any VSL (typically a Bible) even if that particular VSL isn't the one which actually applies to the Candidate's own faith.
> 
> T & F,
> 
> Huw



I have always been curious why and when Masonry required a person to have a book to obligate themselves on?  What about Deist who do not have a book but believe in God?  If I am not mistaken Ben Franklin was a Deist wonder what he obligated himself on?


----------



## Huw

Hi Rhitland.



rhitland said:


> I was under the impression that as long as you are not an atheist you could be a Mason.


 
I don't know where you got that impression. Certainly over here in UGLE, and also in every other regular GL I've come across (including GLoTX, obviously), the requirement is quite specific that a Candidate must believe in the Supreme Being. A polytheistic religion which doesn't include a Supreme Being is not atheism, but nevertheless wouldn't qualify.



rhitland said:


> If you declare a belief in Deity no many how many Deities that may be you are not an atheist by definition and therefore allowed into Freemasonry.


 
No, that's not enough; see above.

Some GLs add further religious restrictions as well. For example, GLoTX requires belief in immortality of the soul as well as belief in the Supreme Being. It may be true that all of the well-known religions which believe in the Supreme Being do also uphold immortality of the soul, but it's conceivable that some obscure minor religion might not see it that way, and therefore would be ineligible even in spite of believing in God. (UGLE, incidentally, does not have this particular additional requirement.)



rhitland said:


> I am not sure what questioning a petitioner on their explanation of God or Gods would accomplish unless you are in a mood to philosophize with him on the level.


 
It's for what I said before: to establish eligibility in cases where it's not automatically obvious what he believes in.



rhitland said:


> ... no where in my heart does it say I know what constitutes God or Gods well enough to give me the ability to judge for another if their version of God or Gods is correct for Masonic admission.


 
In order to recommend a petition, you ought to be satisfied that the Candidate is eligible, and that must necessarily include being satisfied that his religious belief qualifies for Masonic admission. And that must mean qualified according to what the rules of your GL actually are, not merely according to your own view. If you don't feel able to undertake the (admittedly heavy) responsibility of making such a judgment on behalf of your entire GL, then you should consider yourself ineligible to serve on your Lodge's Investigation Committee, because that's precisely the judgment which every member of an Investigation Committee has no choice but to make.



rhitland said:


> As long as they say they believe in a Higher Power or Powers that good enough for me.


 
Of course you're entitled to your opinion about what the rules ought to be. However, GLoTX does not agree, nor does regular freemasonry in general: the rules set out more precise requirements.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## Huw

Hi again Rhitland.



rhitland said:


> I have always been curious why and when Masonry required a person to have a book to obligate themselves on?


 
That's always been so: it's a Landmark derived from the Old Charges of the operative masons. For example, the GL MS #2 (c. 1650) says "... so help me God and the holy contents of this Book", and other Old Charges have wording to similar effect. (Of course, in those days the Book would always mean a Bible.)



rhitland said:


> What about Deist who do not have a book but believe in God? If I am not mistaken Ben Franklin was a Deist wonder what he obligated himself on?


 
That's a very good question! Franklin is probably an example of someone who would have to be asked supplementary questions about what he actually believed in, so as to establish whether or not he was actually eligible.

However, another additional religious requirement laid down by the GLoTX is belief in "the Divine authenticity of the Holy Scripture" (I'm quoting the current GLoTX petition form), and here in UGLE we have an equivalent requirement (in slightly different words). I don't know the precise details of what Bro. Franklin personally believed, but if he didn't believe in some sort of scripture (although not necessarily the usual scripture), then clearly he would not be eligible for GLoTX (or UGLE) under current rules (and even any previous rules, so far as I can determine).

Presumably Bro. Franklin satisfied the Brethren (of St. John's Lodge in Philadelphia) that he did believe in some variety of scripture, and was therefore Obligated on that ... whether it was a standard Bible or something else. It'd be interesting to know!

T & F,

Huw


----------



## rhitland

Does it state somewhere that polytheistic religions are excluded?  I know it says that you have to have a belief in "a" Supreme Being but I am not sure how that wording would exclude Supreme Beings.  The purpose of the belief in the Supreme Being to the fraternity is to bind us to our obligation right?  If that is the purpose then why would it exclude multiple Gods?  I guess I am just not understanding why one petitioning must believe in God as a GL sees Him/Her or walk away.  Does a requirement in a believe in a specific form of God make Masonry an arm of religion in that it uses certain religions interpretation of God?  I mean how do they know they are right in that interpretation to make it a requirement for joining Freemasonry?  That kinda seems far from Brotherly Love and Justice.  Please keep in mind I am but a young Master Mason and still a neophyte in it's history and traditions.


----------



## dhouseholder

rhitland said:


> Does it state somewhere that polytheistic religions are excluded?  I know it says that you have to have a belief in "a" Supreme Being but I am not sure how that wording would exclude Supreme Beings.  The purpose of the belief in the Supreme Being to the fraternity is to bind us to our obligation right?


 Well it really goes deeper than that. A belief in a Supreme Being is required esoterically for two reasons, the first because of the one you just stated. Secondly, without a Supreme Being, you can not have Free Will. Without a Spiritual interpretation of reality, actions within the universe become predetermined. Without the Divine, your life and actions are chemical reactions to other chemical reactions and so on, and your life is a predetermined event. It becomes a cog in reality. 

To Hard Atheists (and it is scientifically postulated), our perception of time is a peculiarity. Everything has already "happened", we are just perceiving it in a linear fashion known as cause and effect. If this is hard to wrap your brain around, then good. It should. It would be like me showing you a picture of the entire Lord of the Rings Trilogy in one image. A belief in the Divine opens the door for Free Will, thus keeping us being relegated to cogs in an uncaring, mechanical universe. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism#Varieties_of_Determinism



rhitland said:


> If that is the purpose then why would it exclude multiple Gods?


 You have to remember the place and time in which modern Freemasonry began. In England, if you were not a monotheist, you were considered barbarous. However, there were multiple interpretations of monotheism and particularly Christianity; so UGLE said, "screw it, just as long as a we can all agree that there is a God, then we're OK." I bet that they were talking about the God of Abraham (Yaweh), since they agreed that all "reasonable" men could agree at least on that, not over whether or not God was Jesus, or the Trinity; but decided on just plain "God" so they could fit the Deists in.




rhitland said:


> I If you declare a belief in Deity no many how many Deities that may be you are not an atheist by definition and therefore allowed into Freemasonry.  I am not sure what questioning a petitioner on their explanation of God or Gods would accomplish unless you are in a mood to philosophize with him on the level.  The tenets of Freemasonry are found within the extended points of the compasses and no where in my heart does it say I know what constitutes God or Gods well enough to give me the ability to judge for another if their version of God or Gods is correct for Masonic admission.  As long as they say they believe in a Higher Power or Powers that  good enough for me.


 Amen.



Huw said:


> Hi Rhitland.
> 
> I don't know where you got that impression. Certainly over here in UGLE, and also in every other regular GL I've come across (including GLoTX, obviously), the requirement is quite specific that a Candidate must believe in the Supreme Being. A polytheistic religion which doesn't include a Supreme Being is not atheism, but nevertheless wouldn't qualify.


 Actually, a polytheism CAN include a Supreme Being. It is called Soft Polytheism. You can have a pantheon headed by a "Supreme Being" (you know, one with tomatos and sour cream[Taco Bell joke :laugh:]). And this particular Supreme Being might order you to worship the lesser gods or whatever. And to be honest, philosophically, that is why if a Wiccan can answer Yes on the application about the belief in a Supreme Being, then I think he's OK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polytheism#In_Neopaganism



Huw said:


> In order to recommend a petition, you ought to be satisfied that the Candidate is eligible, and that must necessarily include being satisfied that his religious belief qualifies for Masonic admission. And that must mean qualified according to what the rules of your GL actually are, not merely according to your own view. If you don't feel able to undertake the (admittedly heavy) responsibility of making such a judgment on behalf of your entire GL, then you should consider yourself ineligible to serve on your Lodge's Investigation Committee, because that's precisely the judgment which every member of an Investigation Committee has no choice but to make.


 See, here is where I disagree. I think that with people's changing attitudes towards different religious/spiritual systems, we need to be sensitive. I SHOULD NEVER have to explain my paradigm to anyone, other than what is required on the petition. And I bet GLoT would back that statement up.





Huw said:


> IOf course you're entitled to your opinion about what the rules ought to be. However, GLoTX does not agree, nor does regular freemasonry in general: the rules set out more precise requirements.


 What are these precise requirements?


----------



## JTM

drowen said:


> Barry Watson.  It came to me last night after I got off the computer.


 
As much as we appreciate your patronage, let's take personal discussions to pm before this is completely disrailed


----------



## Ecossais

Wiccans, Schmiccans. What about those who only serve the great Gozer the Gozerian? What is this, a forum for Freemasons, or a sci-fi/comics convention?


----------



## rhitland

Ecossais said:


> Wiccans, Schmiccans. What about those who only serve the great Gozer the Gozerian? What is this, a forum for Freemasons, or a sci-fi/comics convention?


 ???
please explain???


----------



## Huw

Hi Rhit.



rhitland said:


> Does it state somewhere that polytheistic religions are excluded?


 
No, polytheists can be eligible IF their pantheon includes a Supreme Being. But if they have a variety of gods none of which is Supreme, as with Shinto for example, then they're not eligible.



rhitland said:


> I know it says that you have to have a belief in "a" Supreme Being but I am not sure how that wording would exclude Supreme Beings.


 
Because of the meaning of the word Supreme. If there are multiple deities, they can't all be Supreme - either one has supremacy and the rest are His side-kicks, or the final say in All Things is in some way shared between several or all of them, and none of them is truly Supreme.



rhitland said:


> The purpose of the belief in the Supreme Being to the fraternity is to bind us to our obligation right?


 
That's not the sole purpose of the requirement, but certainly it's one of the purposes, yes.



rhitland said:


> If that is the purpose then why would it exclude multiple Gods?


 
See above. It doesn't necessarily exclude that.



rhitland said:


> I guess I am just not understanding why one petitioning must believe in God as a GL sees Him/Her or walk away.


 
We're a private society with particular purposes and rules. Those who don't believe in the purpose of serving God and the rule requiring belief in Him do not belong in our society.



rhitland said:


> Does a requirement in a believe in a specific form of God make Masonry an arm of religion in that it uses certain religions interpretation of God?


 
No. It makes Masonry a supporter of religion, certainly, but not an arm of religion because we're not specific about exactly which religion a member supports.



rhitland said:


> I mean how do they know they are right in that interpretation to make it a requirement for joining Freemasonry?


 
By the power of Faith, and it works as follows. We each have our own religious faith because we passed the same requirement when we were each admitted, and we each believe our own faith is correct. Not all of us have the same faith, but we all come from faiths which believe that there is a Supreme Being. Therefore, although we can't all agree between ourselves (and deliberately avoid arguing about) which of the many faiths with a Supreme Being is actually correct, we do all agree that every faith which lacks a Supreme Being is false.



rhitland said:


> That kinda seems far from Brotherly Love and Justice.


 
Sorry if it seems that way to you. However, our brotherliness isn't just any vague friendly feeling towards people in general, it's more specific: freemasonry upholds the Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God, a particular kind of Brotherly Love. Likewise, coming as we all do from faiths which believe in a Supreme Being, most (perhaps even all) of us are taught by our respective religions that ultimate Justice derives from the Supreme Being.

Thus our belief in the Supreme Being is central to what we mean and understand in freemasonry by the concepts of Brotherly Love and Justice. In some other (hypothetical) fraternity which doesn't believe in the Supreme Being, concepts such as Brotherly Love and Justice could not mean quite the same thing to them as they mean to us. The character of such an organisation would therefore be different; it would not be Freemasonry.



rhitland said:


> Please keep in mind I am but a young Master Mason and still a neophyte in it's history and traditions.


 
We all are when we start! In fact, it's often a wise view for all of us to remember that there's always lots more to learn, no matter how experienced we may be.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## Huw

Hi dhouseholder.



dhouseholder said:


> ... A belief in a Supreme Being is required esoterically for two reasons ...


 
It's fair to point out that this isn't a standardised teaching of freemasonry. Some Masons will undoubtedly take a different view. Personally speaking, however, I wouldn't disagree very much with what you say.



dhouseholder said:


> Actually, a polytheism CAN include a Supreme Being. It is called Soft Polytheism.


 
Yes, sure. Note that what I had mentioned as ineligible was "polytheistic religion which doesn't include a Supreme Being", not just any polytheistic religion; I chose my words carefully.



dhouseholder said:


> See, here is where I disagree. I think that with people's changing attitudes towards different religious/spiritual systems, we need to be sensitive. I SHOULD NEVER have to explain my paradigm to anyone, other than what is required on the petition. And I bet GLoT would back that statement up.


 
Are you sure we disagree? What is required on the petition is exactly the point. I'm sure GLoTX would back up what it says on its own petition form, of course, because the form presumably says what GLoTX wants it to say. But look again at the GLoTX form: "Do you seriously declare, upon your honor, that you firmly believe in the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the Divine authenticity of the Holy Scripture?" That's a lot more specific than merely believing in some sort of Higher Power. Other GLs have slightly different wordings, but all tend to set out more specific requirements than the rather vague principle suggested by Rhit.

Many petitioners coming from non-standard belief systems will need to ask for clarification of this statement - how firmly is firmly, what do we mean by God, what do we mean by Scripture, and so on - and they might well ask the Investigation Committee of their own accord. But even if they're shy about asking, many will still need some clarification to be certain that they're signing honestly. Therefore, if you know that a petitioner holds non-standard beliefs, then surely it's your duty when serving on an Investigation Committee to help him understand what the question means, which can often involve asking him questions about what he believes in more detail than would be the case for a petitioner who professes some standard religion whose precepts are widely-understood.

The application process is slightly different here in UGLE - we use a shorter form and ask several of the questions at oral interview instead, but obviously the general purpose is the same. I've sat on our interview panels numerous times, and there have been a couple of occasions when I've found it necessary to ask additional religious questions to clarify eligibility, not only in my own mind but also the petitioner's mind. Only a couple of times, not often, but sometimes it does occur.



dhouseholder said:


> What are these precise requirements?


In the case of GLoTX, I meant the requirements stated on your petition form, which are more precise than the requirement advocated earlier in this thread.

In the case of other GLs, I meant whatever equivalent specifications they lay down in their own procedures, which vary a little ... so for example in UGLE, we don't need to ask about belief in immortality of the soul, but we do have to establish exactly which Scripture the petitioner believes in (because we strictly require that he take his Obligation on the book which specifically applies to his own religion).

T & F,

Huw


----------



## masonicknight

The interesting thing about the Book of Shadows is that it is not only the VSL of the candidate but it is uniquely their own.  As they are building upon their understanding of the Wiccan experience and its special initiations and rituals, they are recording them in a fashion that is meaningful to the individual Wiccan.  This not only includes the prayers that they use but also how they celebrate the seasonal change.  Many of the ones that I know are solitary's, those that do not belong to a coven which have there own ceremonies of initiation and instruction though they may have gone through them and then separated.

To pursue another thought.  To say one belongs to a particular faith and then be questioned further about their beliefs in order to belong seems to defeat the purpose of building a good man into a better man.  There are many men who I would say belong to Lodge who the only time I know they attend a service in a church of any kind is a Funeral Service or a Marriage.  They are all good men and Brothers true.  Does that in turn disrupt the thoughts of belief in a Supreme Being because they do not regularly attend services.  There are many who I would love to see become a member but a strict interpretation would probably exclude them from ever entering the doors of a lodge as a candidate.

A Mason as well as a great friend of mine passed on a few years back. A minister friend of his was asked if he would perform the service and he said he couldn't because of the common friend being a Mason, his synod prevented him from officiating.  A Masonic Funeral Service was done and the minister was there.  When asked why he was there when he couldn't perform the service his answer was very simple, "He was My Friend".  While the ministers particular background prevented him from being a participant in the service, hence saying that Masonry was a religion, he overcame that thought and came because of something more important.  

While religion plays an important part in Masonry, that being our belief in a Supreme Being so that our obligations may seem more real and binding on us, maybe the nuances of what constitutes belief are getting jumbled up also by those in lodges who are desperate to have only those of a like mind sitting with them, versus those in which a new understanding may be learned and  appreciated.

Just thoughts.


----------



## Huw

Hi Rhit.



rhitland said:


> ???
> please explain???


 
It may be better not to ask, Bro.  I fear that contributor Ecossais may have been pouring mockery upon the idea of accepting Wicca as being a real religion.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## dhouseholder

Huw said:


> It's fair to point out that this isn't a standardized teaching of freemasonry. Some Masons will undoubtedly take a different view. Personally speaking, however, I wouldn't disagree very much with what you say.


 Sure, sure, I would hope that any brother or otherwise would understand that I do not speak for all of Masonry.



Huw said:


> Yes, sure. Note that what I had mentioned as ineligible was "polytheistic religion which doesn't include a Supreme Being", not just any polytheistic religion; I chose my words carefully.


 Upon cleaning my computer screen, I realized that you had chose your words carefully. My apologies. 



Huw said:


> Are you sure we disagree?


 I think so.



Huw said:


> Many petitioners coming from non-standard belief systems will need to ask for clarification of this statement - how firmly is firmly, what do we mean by God, what do we mean by Scripture, and so on - and they might well ask the Investigation Committee of their own accord.


 And what would our answer be? What form of God does GLoT promote? (You are going to have to indulge me on my Texo-centricism, I know little of UGLE's customs.) So, what if I pointed to my cat, said he was God, stated that my soul was immortal, and told you that my latest issue of _Fancy Feline_ was the divine word of my cat God? Now you might not recommend me because I was being absurd, but could you not say that I had not fulfilled, to the letter, the requirements of the petition? What if I was a great theologian and held the same beliefs? If one were adventurous enough to delve into uncharted religion, then I would only assume that one would come to a full understanding of what is or is not God, or if one did exist.



Huw said:


> But even if they're shy about asking, many will still need some clarification to be certain that they're signing honestly.


 I see it as if one were adventurous enough to delve into uncharted religion, then I would only assume that one would come to a full understanding of what is or is not their definition of God, or if one did exist. What if my definition of God and yours and his were all different? Would that just be a field judgment on your part as the investigator? Probably so, but I am certainly glad that no one ever bothered to ask me to explain my answer to that question; who knows what the outcome would have been?



Huw said:


> Therefore, if you know that a petitioner holds non-standard beliefs, then surely it's your duty when serving on an Investigation Committee to help him understand what the question means, which can often involve asking him questions about what he believes in more detail than would be the case for a petitioner who professes some standard religion whose precepts are widely-understood.


 And this is where I have to disagree. I think it is bad form to ask The Cat Priest from above example the workings of his paradigm. I would think that an individual THAT absurd would throw up hundreds of red flags well before we got to the investigation.



Huw said:


> The application process is slightly different here in UGLE - we use a shorter form and ask several of the questions at oral interview instead, but obviously the general purpose is the same. I've sat on our interview panels numerous times, and there have been a couple of occasions when I've found it necessary to ask additional religious questions to clarify eligibility, not only in my own mind but also the petitioner's mind. Only a couple of times, not often, but sometimes it does occur.


 Interesting. Have you received any Wiccans? How have they answered? Have you received any other uncommon answers? I am quite interested.



Huw said:


> In the case of GLoTX, I meant the requirements stated on your petition form, which are more precise than the requirement advocated earlier in this thread.


  Oh, OK.



Huw said:


> In the case of other GLs, I meant whatever equivalent specifications they lay down in their own procedures, which vary a little ... so for example in UGLE, we don't need to ask about belief in immortality of the soul, but we do have to establish exactly which Scripture the petitioner believes in (because we strictly require that he take his Obligation on the book which specifically applies to his own religion).


  I wonder if any regular GLs DO specify a Supreme Being.

I hope my tone above does not sound offensive or derisive. I habitually argue reductio ad absurdum, and I tend to come off as passionate.


----------



## Huw

Hi masonicknight.



masonicknight said:


> The interesting thing about the Book of Shadows is that it is not only the VSL of the candidate but it is uniquely their own.


 
Ah, well, that depends. Among the eclectic Wiccans, yes, but I'm personally unconvinced about whether a self-written BoS properly qualifies as a VSL. Among the traditional Wiccans, like Gardnerians, the use of Gardner's standardised BoS seems to me more convincing as a VSL.



masonicknight said:


> Many of the ones that I know are solitary's, those that do not belong to a coven which have there own ceremonies of initiation and instruction though they may have gone through them and then separated.


 
Solitaries are almost invariably eclectics, since the practice of traditional Wicca calls for a coven. In addition to my concerns about what can be used as a VSL for eclectics, I've also found that eclectics (and especially solitaries) have a very broad range of beliefs indeed, certainly including deities but not always including a definite belief in a Supreme Being (as is required by GLoTX and here in UGLE). It's definitely a case in which I'd want to ask some additional questions to make sure.



masonicknight said:


> To pursue another thought. To say one belongs to a particular faith and then be questioned further about their beliefs in order to belong seems to defeat the purpose of building a good man into a better man.


 
In general, I agree that there shouldn't be any need for additional questions.

But you've already mentioned an example in which I'd ask further ... a man could, for example, sincerely describe himself as an eclectic Wiccan, and asked if he believed in God could sincerely answer "I believe in the Triple Goddess and worship Her", but then if you asked whether he believes in the existence of any other Deity he'd probably say "There's also the Horned God", and if you followed up by asking which of them is Supreme, he'd probably have to say "Well, er, neither is supreme over the other, that's a central point of my religion". Now a Gardnerian or other traditional Wiccan could go on to say "but the Source stands behind both Goddess and God and is the actual Supreme Being", and I'd be satisfied by that answer ... however, not all eclectic Wiccans necessarily share that additional belief, and therefore may well be ineligible, but you might not find out without a couple of probing questions. And in this example, I'm talking about a fairly orthodox eclectic, I've come across some who describe themselves as eclectic Wiccans but have beliefs which don't seem to me to have much to do with Wicca.



masonicknight said:


> There are many men who I would say belong to Lodge who the only time I know they attend a service in a church of any kind is a Funeral Service or a Marriage. They are all good men and Brothers true.


 
I know many such Brethren, who are not very regular practitioners of their professed religion. Of course freemasonry encourages a Brother to engage in the formal practice of his religion, but it doesn't demand that he does so. What freemasonry demands is simply that he believes in it - whether or not he attends his church (or his synagogue or his mosque or whatever) is between him and his religion, it's not a matter for us. We don't judge his external qualifications, and that includes not judging his church attendance record.



masonicknight said:


> While the ministers particular background prevented him from being a participant in the service, hence saying that Masonry was a religion, he overcame that thought and came because of something more important.


 
Just because his church forbade the minister to officiate in the service doesn't necessarily imply that that church is accusing freemasonry of being a rival religion. It's one possibility, but there are various other grounds on which some people object to us.

Here in UGLE, by the way, we don't do masonic funerals.



masonicknight said:


> ... maybe the nuances of what constitutes belief are getting jumbled up also by those in lodges who are desperate to have only those of a like mind sitting with them ...


 
That attitude would surely be a perversion of freemasonry. We are supposed to be learning, teaching and practicing tolerance (amongst many others things, of course). However, there are limits: in tolerance we respect the right of others to disagree with the fundamental principles of freemasonry, but that obviously doesn't mean that we ought to sit in Lodge with them.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## rhitland

> Huw said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Rhit. Because of the meaning of the word Supreme. If there are multiple deities, they can't all be Supreme - either one has supremacy and the rest are His side-kicks, or the final say in All Things is in some way shared between several or all of them, and none of them is truly Supreme.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure it is that easy to explain the system that the Supreme Architect uses, I fear our minds are not yet equipped to fully understand how He works but we are on the path.  I can think of a multi-system of Gods that are perfect in every way and need not a Supreme Master to oversee their portion of the Divine work b/c the are Supreme and never make mistakes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huw said:
> 
> 
> 
> we do all agree that every faith which lacks a Supreme Being is false.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We do?  I did not read that requirement anywhere.  Just b/c I think what I believe God to be does not mean I have to cast judgment to become a Mason.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Huw said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if it seems that way to you. However, our brotherliness isn't just any vague friendly feeling towards people in general, it's more specific: freemasonry upholds the Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God, a particular kind of Brotherly Love. Likewise, coming as we all do from faiths which believe in a Supreme Being, most (perhaps even all) of us are taught by our respective religions that ultimate Justice derives from the Supreme Being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Freemasonry has clearly defined Brotherly Love and Justice for itself and our religions may compliment  that but not take the place of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Huw

Hi dhouseholder.



dhouseholder said:


> And what would our answer be? What form of God does GLoT promote? (You are going to have to indulge me on my Texo-centricism, I know little of UGLE's customs.)


 
Well, there isn't an official exact answer in most jurisdictions. Neither yours nor mine, anyway, although (see below) there is in some others. It's deliberately left unwritten, thereby leaving us some flexibility to exercise our judgment case by case.

However, broadly speaking, I'm sure that what every regular GL really intends is that the petitioner must believe in some conception of God which is at least approximately equivalent to God as He is understood in the Judeo-Christian paradigm. This is because freemasonry began as Christian, and was then expanded to include other religions which could sufficiently agree with the original Christian membership on a few key points so that the rituals and symbolisms could still mean the same to all of us. I'm hesitant about offering a definition, since I'm unsure both of the masonic propriety of doing so and of my own theological competence to make the attempt, but it means something like this: a Being in the sense of having conscious personality with some plan or purpose for Man, not merely (say) a mechanistic synonym for existence; Supreme in the sense of being omnipotent and ultimately responsible for the universe around us and whatever lies beyond, not merely (say) a first among equals subject to the consent of other deities.



dhouseholder said:


> So, what if I pointed to my cat, said he was God, stated that my soul was immortal, and told you that my latest issue of _Fancy Feline_ was the divine word of my cat God? Now you might not recommend me because I was being absurd, but could you not say that I had not fulfilled, to the letter, the requirements of the petition?


 
No, because the letter of the GLoTX petition requires that "you seriously declare" your belief. I would vote no to your petition on the ground that I could not believe that you were declaring seriously.

No offence to your cat, whom I've not met but I assume is a very nice cat, but no, your cat is not God and it's obviously absurd to claim that he is. Even if you want to claim to be an Osirian and a worshipper of Bast (the ancient Egyptian cat goddess), then I'd say Bast isn't a Supreme Being in that religion, and anyway your cat isn't That cat (in spite of the apparent opinion of most cats that they are).



dhouseholder said:


> What if I was a great theologian and held the same beliefs?


 
I would have to assume that you had suddenly ceased to be a great theologian and were having some sort of mental seizure. I'd call an amblance to take you to the funny-farm, and pray for your recovery.



dhouseholder said:


> I see it as if one were adventurous enough to delve into uncharted religion, then I would only assume that one would come to a full understanding of what is or is not their definition of God, or if one did exist.


 
I'm not so sure about that. People have attempted to do that all through history, and universally convincing answers have proved elusive. But to whatever extent appeared necessary to satisfy myself about a particular Candidate's eligibility, I'd try to follow his thinking so far as my ability allows, and hope that an answer one way or the other would become apparent before I lost track.



dhouseholder said:


> What if my definition of God and yours and his were all different? Would that just be a field judgment on your part as the investigator?


 
Yes, exactly. And of course, in the vast majority of cases, the answer is easily evident.

If I were faced with a sticky marginal case where I didn't feel able to come to any conclusion, then I'd call the GL and ask them to come and talk to the petitioner and help us decide. I've never been faced with such a case myself, but I've heard of cases where a Lodge had to refer to the GL for advice. 



dhouseholder said:


> I think it is bad form to ask The Cat Priest from above example the workings of his paradigm.


 
I'd rather not have to do it either, but with the spread of wacky cults these days I think we'll have to get more used to doing it.



dhouseholder said:


> Interesting. Have you received any Wiccans? How have they answered? Have you received any other uncommon answers? I am quite interested.


 
I've not personally seen any Wiccan petitioners, although I've discussed the issues on the 'net with several Wiccans. Wiccans aren't as common here as in the US, and when Wiccans over here do get interested in joining something like masonry, then they have a strong tendency to apply to the co-masonic (mixed-sex) bodies rather than to regular masonry. (Incidentally, the historical reason for this tendency is that several of the founders of modern Wicca were already co-masons before they got involved in Wicca, and that in turn is probably why there's some overlap between some details of freemasonry and some details of Wiccan practice - they borrowed some terminology and structures from the rituals they already knew.)

However, as an example where I felt no choice but to ask further questions, I once interviewed a petitioner who described himself as a Spinozist and who stated up front that he was unsure whether or not his beliefs qualified him and he needed clarification. Now that's a tough one! Whether Spinoza (a 17th-century Dutch philosopher, originally Jewish but expelled from Judaism for heresy) believed in God in any meaningful way was a controversial question in his own lifetime and has been so ever since; he certainly claimed that he did, and wrote books explaining his theological position, but his definition of God was pretty abstract and amounted to little more than a summation of all that existed in nature ... but he had a slightly mystical perception of nature, not purely materialist, so there was some degree of meaning to his use of the word "God", although exactly how much meaning is the difficult question. I'd lean towards the view that Spinoza himself wouldn't be eligible for freemasonry, on the cautious ground that his conception of the Supreme Being was too insubstantial to count. Faced with this "Spinozist" petitioner, I asked a little more about what he believed, and was able to come to the conclusion that he wasn't a hard-line Spinozist, he appeared to have a somewhat more identifiable and concrete belief in the divine than Spinoza himself ... so after some thought, I signed his petition. But it was marginal, I think he only just barely qualified. (Incidentally, it's worked out quite well and that Candidate is now JW.)



dhouseholder said:


> I wonder if any regular GLs DO specify a Supreme Being.


Yes. This applies wherever the Scandinavian Rite is used, which is all of Sweden, Norway and Iceland, plus parts of Germany, Denmark and Finland. The Scandinavian Rite uses explicitly Christian rituals. Therefore the entire GLs in Sweden, Norway and Iceland, plus the relevant Lodges in Germany, Denmark and Finland, are restricted to Christians only. And these are all regular (and recognised) GLs.

The Scandinavian rituals are very different from the rituals used anywhere else, and are also very different from what we did elsewhere even back in the 18th century when freemasonry everywhere was explicitly Christian, it's a unique system of their own invention. When the rest of the world opened freemasonry to men of other faiths, the Scandinavians refused to follow suit and stayed Christian-only. They do, however, accept non-Christian visitors who are members of other regular GLs.

Being Christian-only didn't used to be a problem in Sweden, Norway and Iceland, because virtually the entire population was Christian until pretty recently, but it's becoming more of an issue now. There could have been a serious issue in Germany and Denmark, but in those countries it only applies to some of the Lodges so non-Christians can join in the other Lodges.



dhouseholder said:


> I hope my tone above does not sound offensive or derisive. I habitually argue reductio ad absurdum, and I tend to come off as passionate.


Me too, in respect of both _reductio ad absurdum_ and sounding passionate, so no offence taken :biggrin:.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## Huw

Hi Rhit.



rhitland said:


> I am not sure it is that easy to explain the system that the Supreme Architect uses, I fear our minds are not yet equipped to fully understand how He works but we are on the path.


 
Agreed. Of course it is axiomatic that human understanding of the Supreme Being is necessarily imperfect. Religions differ in their teachings about the extent to which we can or can't know Him. In any case, however, we can merely do our feeble best.

However, your progress on this path is a matter for your religion, not for freemasonry. Freemasonry is neither a religion nor a substitute for religion.



rhitland said:


> I can think of a multi-system of Gods that are perfect in every way and need not a Supreme Master to oversee their portion of the Divine work b/c the are Supreme and never make mistakes.


 
I'm not convinced, on two grounds.

First, I reckon that in such a system it'd turn out that They're all the same God: every portion of the Divine work must surely affect every other portion in some way, therefore completely perfect understanding and control of any one portion must surely imply equally perfect competence in all other portions, therefore these deities must surely all maintain perfectly identical awareness at every moment, therefore They must surely be identical even down to the level of thought, therefore They must surely all be the same Being in any meaningful sense (even if it might for some reason suit His convenience to maintain multiple manifestations of Himself). I'm not sure about this, because it requires speculative assumptions about the nature of deity and Divine thought ... but nevertheless it seems to me at least as likely as any other conclusion.

Secondly, I reckon you're abusing the meaning of the word Supreme: Webster's, for example, offers the definitions as "highest in rank or authority, highest in degree or quality, ultimate, final", all of which definitions imply uniqueness; There Can Be Only One to Whom all the others answer (regardless of whether or not they actually need supervision in their work), or else none of them qualifies as Supreme.



rhitland said:


> We do? I did not read that requirement anywhere.


 
Yes, you do. It's not a written requirement, it's simply a logical inevitability from the meaning of the words. Whichever religion you believe, you believe it is true - that's what believe means. If you don't believe a religion is true, then that's not your religion. And you don't believe something which is directly contrary to whatever you do believe.

In regular freemasonry, we have all professed belief in the Supreme Being (by whichever name we know Him) as a condition of admission. Therefore we do not believe that there is not a Supreme Being. Therefore any faith which holds that there is not a Supreme Being is a faith which we do not believe is true. Thus we do all agree that every faith which lacks a Supreme Being is false, which is what I said in the first place. (Unless, perhaps, there is someone who has lied his way into freemasonry by pretending to believe in the Supreme Being when actually he didn't believe in Him - and of course, it's likely that there are some such cases somewhere.)



rhitland said:


> Just b/c I think what I believe God to be does not mean I have to cast judgment to become a Mason.


 
It's not about casting judgment to become a Mason, it's about casting judgment to believe in God. Every man makes his own choice, but if he aspires to become a Mason then he must first have cast his judgment to believe in God. Choosing is what your free will is for.

Later on, when someone else petitions to join, then you're not obliged to cast judgment upon him, but if you won't do so then some other Brother will have to take that responsibility instead, because the suitability of every Candidate must be judged. Freemasonry teaches and requires judgments in many ways, of which this is only one. Judging is what your brain is for.



rhitland said:


> Freemasonry has clearly defined Brotherly Love and Justice for itself and our religions may compliment that but not take the place of.


 
I reckon you've got that backwards. Your religion (whichever it may be) has defined Brotherly Love and Justice for itself, and freemasonry may complement that but not take its place.

One of the great discoveries of freemasonry, which might properly be called one of the "real secrets", is that the conceptions of Brotherly Love and Justice in the various religions which believe in the Supreme Being always seem to turn out to be quite surprisingly compatible: sufficiently compatible that it's generally possible for each Brother to apply the concepts (as he understands them from his religion) to another Brother of another religion in such a way that the other Brother will recognise them (in pretty much the same way as he would understand them from his own religion). THIS is how universal Brotherhood actually works, yet those who haven't lived it often find this great "secret" unbelievable and instead insist upon believing that we're "hiding" something or that we're in some way "subverting" or "syncretising" the teachings of the different religions involved.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## rhitland

I fear I might bend this discussion into a circle with further response but something Brother Huw said did get the Masonic juices flowing and in order not to high-jack this thread I made a new one.

http://www.masonsoftexas.com/showthread.php/11087-Origins-of-Freemasonry?p=41817#post41817


----------



## masonicknight

I decided that since this is an interesting discussion that I would look at the pertinent section of the California Masonic Code and this just a part of what is listed but interesting none the less.  Remember this is California's version. 

Â§402.060. ALTERNATE HOLY WRITINGS.
A candidate for a degree in Masonry may select an alternate Holy Writings on which he will be
obligated, but only under the following circumstances:
A. If the candidate does not wish to be obligated on the Holy Bible, he must select an
alternate Holy Writings in book form from a list promulgated from time to time by the
Grand Master of the Holy Writings of those recognized religions whose theology is not
inconsistent with a belief in a Supreme Being and a future existence. The Grand Masterâ€™s
list shall at all times include the al-Kitab al-Aqdas of Bahaism, the Tripitaka of
Buddhism, the Analects of Confucianism, the Vedas of Hinduism, the Koran of Islam,
the Tanach of Judaism, the Koji-ki of Shintoism, the Adi Granth of Sikhism, the Tao-te
Ching of Taoism and the Zend Avesta of Zoroastrianism. In selecting an alternate Holy
Writings, the candidate must state that the book chosen is the Holy Writings of his
religious faith;
E. When an alternate Holy Writings is used during a degree, a closed Holy Bible of any size
must be on the altar....

This is just for the interest of discussion.


----------



## Huw

Very interesting, masonicknight.  Thanks for that.

In UGLE we don't publish an official list of this sort, and I suspect that most other GLs don't do so either, although our GL office stands ready to advise on what's appropriate when necessary.  Interestingly, GLoCA includes the Scriptures of certain religions which I don't believe are generally eligible, because the usual teachings of those religions don't include a Supreme Being.  However, I acknowledge the possibility that individual followers of those religions might hold a non-standard interpretation which does include a Supreme Being, in which case of course I've no objection - but again, that's a situation in which I'd want to ask a petitioner a couple of questions to satisfy myself that this is so.

Here in England, when we use an alternate VSL for a Candidate of non-Christian religion (as indeed we do fairly often), we keep the Bible open in addition to the Candidate's VSL, not closed as in GLoCA.  In some of our overseas Lodges in countries which are religiously very diverse, it is standard practice to use several VSLs side by side.  UGLE rules require that the Bible is always there as a VSL regardless of where the Lodge is, and other VSLs are used as appropriate for the place and the membership.  I've heard of UGLE Lodges in India and south-east Asia where it is normal to use 6 different VSLs simultaneously at every meeting!

T & F,

Huw


----------



## rhitland

Brother knight your post got me curious to see if the GLoT prints a list as well.  They do not and are a little more vague on that issue to allow almost any booh divinely inspired, next to the open bible of course.  I also found some other neat stuff that might add to the convo.  

Art. 18. Recognition Criteria of Other Grand Lodges. Fraternal recognition may be extended to a Grand Lodge when it appears to the satisfaction of this Grand Lodge, a Committee having first considered and reported thereon:
1.	That such a Grand Body has been formed lawfully by at
least three just and duly constituted Lodges, or that it has been
legalized by a valid act issuing from the Grand Lodge of Texas, or
from a Grand Body in fraternal relations with this Grand Lodge.
2.	That it is  an independent,  self-governing, responsible
organization with entire, undisputed and exclusive dogmatic and
administrative authority over the Symbolic Lodges within its
jurisdiction, and not in any sense whatever subject to, or dividing such authority with, a Supreme Council, or other Body claiming ritualistic or other supervision or control.
3.	That it makes Masons of men only.
4.	That it requires conformity to the following, which the Grand
Lodge of Texas considers necessary in a Masonic Body:
A.	Acknowledgement of a belief in God the Father of all
men.
B.	Secrecy.
C.	The Symbolism of Operative Masonry.
D.	The division of Symbolic Masonry into the three degrees
in Texas.
E.	The legend of the Third Degree.
F.	That its dominant purposes are charitable, benevolent,
educational   and   religious;   and   that   it   excludes
controversial politics and sectarian religion from all
activities under its auspices.
G.	The Sacred Book of the Divine Law, Chief among the
Three Great Lights of Masonry, indispensably present
in the Lodges while at work.
5.	That it occupies exclusively its territorial jurisdiction or else
shares the same with another by mutual consent; and that it does
not presume to extend its authority, or presume to establish Lodges
in, a territory occupied by a lawful Grand Lodge, without the
expressed assent of such supreme governing Masonic Body.
Art. 397. (434). Religious Belief. A firm belief in the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the divine authenticity of the Holy Scriptures is indispensably necessary before a candidate can be initiated, but this Grand Lodge does not presume to prescribe any canonical books or what part thereof are inspired. It is the policy of this Grand Lodge to permit a candidate whose religious persuasion is based upon other than the Holy Bible to be obligated upon the % book of his chosen faith, and same may be situated upon the Altar in front of the Holy Bible during the conferral of the three degrees of Masonry. In which event, all esoteric references to "The Holy Bible" during the conferral of the degree(s) and the lessons appropriate thereto shall be substituted with "The Book of your (my) Faith."
(Revised 1995)


----------



## JTM

> Sacred Book of the Divine Law



interesting that it doesn't specifically say "the bible"


----------



## Huw

Hi JTM.



JTM said:


> interesting that it doesn't specifically say "the bible"


 
Note that this reference was in your recognition criteria, not in your rules for what you do at home in TX.  So by avoiding saying "the bible" in the recognition criteria, you allow yourselves to recognise GLs in countries where some other Book (or perhaps combination of Books) might be the standard VSL instead of the bible.  There may be one or two cases where you do in fact recognise such GLs.

Incidentally, your recognition criteria are noticeably different from ours in UGLE.

T & F,

Huw


----------



## rhitland

I also found this definition in the back of my Texas Monitor for the word Scripture-_the sacred writing of any people_
I wanted to compare it to what Webster's had as the definition- _1 a (1) capitalized : the books of the Bible â€”often used in plural (2) often capitalized : a passage from the Bible b : a body of writings considered sacred or authoritative
2 : something written <the primitive man's awe for any scripture â€” George Santayana> _


----------



## Christopher

To me, the issue is very simply one of applicability.  Freemasonry isn't for everyone.  We already say that we don't take bad men and make them good; we take good men and make them better.  Right there we've excluded a group of men (bad men) from Masonry, presumably on the basis that they won't get anything out of membership in our order.  I think the same argument applies to anyone without certain beliefs which axiomatically underlie all of our ritual and teaching.  They either wouldn't get anything out of our ritual, or they would feel left out by some of it.

  For instance, we speak a lot about our Supreme Being as both a creator, and as a guiding figure in the world, someone who has a plan for mankind in general, and each of us personally.  He/she is called the "Great Architect of the Universe", implying both that he/she is the source of all creation, and has an intelligent purpose in its design.  We don't vet candidates for these same attitudes, but if I know a friend of mine is much more determinist-minded, and simply doesn't believe that Deity either drove the ordering of the universe or is involved in mankind, I'm reluctant to point him to the Fraternity.  He's likely to find the ritual and teachings somewhat absurd because he doesn't share the beliefs that underlie them, that give them their applicability to the lives of the Brethren.  I can only imagine how awkward the third degree must be for someone who doesn't believe in the immortality of the soul.

  Another point.  When Masons gather, for whatever reason, we pray.  This is not only a very frequent activity for Masons, but one which serves to unite us, since where creeds differ, still I know of no established religious tradition, not even a polytheistic one, whose adherents do not reverently bow their heads to their God or gods in regular petition.  For someone who believes in only a single deity, even if in all seriousness he believes his pet to be that deity, it's easy to join in and enjoy the prayer, especially if the one praying tries consciously to pray in an interfaith style.  Where one only believes in a single deity, then only a single deity can be prayed to.  Hence, the applicability of the Masonic style of prayer to all monotheistic/pantheistic/panentheistic brethren.

  However, for a brother who believes in many deities, none of which is supreme over the others, I can only imagine a certain awkwardness during Masonic prayer.  Which of their deities do they imagine is being prayed to on their behalf by the chaplain, if any?  If they don’t conceive of a single omnipotent, omniscient Deity, creator of all, and guider of earthly affairs, such as the chaplain is invoking, then perhaps they would imagine the chaplain is praying to no one.  Or else that the god of the Masons is yet another god among the many, but one which they don’t worship.  Either way, prayer among the Brethren would serve not to unite the polytheist to his Brothers, but to divide him from them.  At every Masonic convocation, he’d be reminded of how different he is from his Brothers.  I think over time, he would simply stop coming to any Masonic functions, if only to avoid the awkwardness.  I also think any attempt to pray in a manner that would suit both the hard polytheist and the monotheist/pantheist/panentheist, would be comical, at best.

  I think if anyone attends a Masonic degree and tries to view it through the lens of someone who earnestly believes in a collection of less-than-omniscient, less-than-omnipotent deities, and denies a grand creator/father deity, he will find that the lessons of Masonry begin to look misguided at best, and comical at worst.

  For this reason, I think it is as much in the interest of the candidate as it is in the interest of the Lodge that the candidate is fully informed, to a sufficient detail, the faith requirements of admission as given on the petition, and that the Lodge satisfy itself that the candidate meets those requirements.

  Christopher


----------



## Seeker

Well said Bro. Christopher


----------



## rhitland

Christopher said:


> For instance, we speak a lot about our Supreme Being as both a creator, and as a guiding figure in the world, someone who has a plan for mankind in general, and each of us personally.
> 
> However, for a brother who believes in many deities, none of which is supreme over the others, I can only imagine a certain awkwardness during Masonic prayer.  Which of their deities do they imagine is being prayed to on their behalf by the chaplain, if any?  If they don’t conceive of a single omnipotent, omniscient Deity, creator of all, and guider of earthly affairs, such as the chaplain is invoking, then perhaps they would imagine the chaplain is praying to no one.  Or else that the god of the Masons is yet another god among the many, but one which they don’t worship.  Either way, prayer among the Brethren would serve not to unite the polytheist to his Brothers, but to divide him from them.  At every Masonic convocation, he’d be reminded of how different he is from his Brothers.
> 
> Christopher


 
We do talk of GAOTU as being the creator and of divine intelligence who will lend his hand the moment he is asked but I am not sure where the personal plan part comes in?  I completely agree with the general plan being stated all in our ritual but not sure what part of the ritual refers to God having a specific plan for me or any other mason?  

The second statement about prayer seems a pretty narrow scope on the power of prayer.  The are the possibilities that said prayer might reach all of the Brothers Deities and each assist accordingly to the prayer or at the very least he might enjoy the energy which the ritual of prayer creates especially when said Brother believes the power of prayer grows according to the number of people involved.  Seems to me they may love the ritualistic environment no matter who says the prayer or to which God they pray.


----------



## rhitland

Some good info on Wiccans I found 


> Q:
> Do Witches believe in God?
> A:
> Most Witches don't believe in the Christian concept of God.  They believe in an unknowable Ultimate Deity. Witchcraft, being the oldest religion/philosophy on earth, has its own pantheon of Gods and Goddesses that are used in a way similar to the way Catholics use Saints. Please also refer to information from our Pantheist friend for more on this subject.





> Wiccan believe that the spirit of the One, Goddess and God exist in all things.   In the trees, rain, flowers, the sea, in each other and all of natures creatures.   This means that we must treat "all things" of the Earth as aspects of the divine.   We attempt to honor and respect life in all its many manifestations both seen and unseen.



these are the sires 
http://www.wicca.org/
http://www.wicca.com/celtic/wicca/wicca.htm


----------



## owls84

Yeah I have reached a point that it is not my job to decide what god that person prays to but that they are good people and they pray to a god. The line says "a supreme being" not Jesus or Muhammad. Too often we are so quick to shun the different when we would be considered different ourselves somewhere else.


----------



## SSG_Morrison

owls84 said:


> Too often we are so quick to shun the different when we would be considered different ourselves somewhere else.


 
+1


----------



## rhitland

Huw said:


> Hi again Rhitland.
> That's always been so: it's a Landmark derived from the Old Charges of the operative masons. For example, the GL MS #2 (c. 1650) says "... so help me God and the holy contents of this Book", and other Old Charges have wording to similar effect. (Of course, in those days the Book would always mean a Bible.)
> 
> T & F,
> 
> Huw


The ancient charges where written by men about their version of the most popular form of Masonry at the time, which we proudly adhere to in modern times but  the craft had obviously existed for many many years before the ancient charges which ultimately means it was around before many sacred volumes of law where around.  Freemasonry as we know it in Christian countries is firmly rooted in the Old Testament which tends us to assume the bible was all that has ever been used in a Masonic lodge but how could that be the case if we have been around since time immemorial?  I found a great article I will post on Isalm and Freemasonry but I feel a quite from the paper is relevant.  





> For the Muslim mason, the Holy Quran is one of the three emblematical lights in masonry.


----------



## masonicknight

So very true Owls, so very true.


----------



## Christopher

rhitland said:


> We do talk of GAOTU as being the creator and of divine intelligence who will lend his hand the moment he is asked but I am not sure where the personal plan part comes in?  I completely agree with the general plan being stated all in our ritual but not sure what part of the ritual refers to God having a specific plan for me or any other mason?



Fair enough, I may be reading too much into the degrees.



rhitland said:


> The second statement about prayer seems a pretty narrow scope on the power of prayer.  The are the possibilities that said prayer might reach all of the Brothers Deities and each assist accordingly to the prayer or at the very least he might enjoy the energy which the ritual of prayer creates especially when said Brother believes the power of prayer grows according to the number of people involved.  Seems to me they may love the ritualistic environment no matter who says the prayer or to which God they pray.



I suppose that's possible, but it still seems strange to me.


----------



## rhitland

Christopher said:


> Fair enough, I may be reading too much into the degrees.
> 
> 
> 
> I suppose that's possible, but it still seems strange to me.


 
Well the one thing I know about Masonry is that one could not read into it to much.  It was not my intention to disolve this believe for you or any others but to hear philosphy on how you derived this conclusion.  I cannot say for sure this is not indicated in the ritual but I am oblivious to its where abouts.
As for it being strange, to me this is what the craft is all about bringing knowledge and experience of the unknown and strange.  I think it goes "concilates true friendship among those who mght otherwise have remained at a perpetual distance."


----------



## peace out

Viewing Masonry as a new EA, this thread contains the very essence of why I sought initiation.  The level of civility and open mindedness is astounding.  Try posting some of these in a Religious forum and see the closed minds.  Amazing.


----------



## drowen

mch4970,
Religious entities would blow you out of the water for bringing up an advesarial religion.  Masons don't talk about religion, nor politics inside the Lodge Room for a really good reason.


----------



## bpire2002

I am a master mason and I do not recoginze any mason who believes in multiple gods. The end.


----------



## drowen

Hi bpire2002,
You may not as a Master Mason, but Grand Lodge of Texas and all other jurisdictions do.  In the Masonic Tenets, there is no restriction placed on God.  The question is who do YOU place your faith, not anyone else.  If an individual who believed in a different God took an oath to a different God in whom they did not believe, the oath would not be binding.  Might try some floor school to brush up on some of the primary tenets of the degrees.


----------



## Ashton Lawson

I see there are 6 Wiccans in this thread. Help please, PM if you prefer.

I just wrote a paper on the cardinal virtue of justice from a Masonic perspective, and I referenced the Holy Books of several religions as well. Frustratingly, I had an extremely difficult time trying to find much of anything on how Wicca perceives justice. Can any Wiccans shed some light here? I could not locate an online copy of the Book of Shadow either.

The best I could come up with was a poorly written paper that essentially suggested the only real method of applying justice that a Wiccan adheres to, is trying to catch the attention of the Crone(?) and focus it onto the person who is need of justice. I had a very difficult time quantifying this into anything I could readily understand. Research is frustratingly hard to come by aside from how to work spells. If that's the answer, that's fine, but I am having trouble specifying methodology or practice.

Help?


----------



## bpire2002

drowen said:


> Hi bpire2002,
> You may not as a Master Mason, but Grand Lodge of Texas and all other jurisdictions do. In the Masonic Tenets, there is no restriction placed on God. The question is who do YOU place your faith, not anyone else. If an individual who believed in a different God took an oath to a different God in whom they did not believe, the oath would not be binding. Might try some floor school to brush up on some of the primary tenets of the degrees.


 
My Brother, in the petition of the Grand Lodge of Texas you will find a question which says;

Do you seriously declare, upon your honor, that you firmly believe in the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the Divine authenticity of the Holy Scripture? 

Do you see any plural God(s) in that question?

in the degrees and prayers do we say supreme architect(s) of the universe? 

The answer is NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Trust me brother, i know my floor work. 
I believe a Wiccan believes in multiple GODS.


----------



## Ashton Lawson

You don't know Wicca as well as you think. 


> Most Wiccans believe that a creative force exists in the Universe, which is sometimes called “The One” or “The All”. Little can be known of this force. Most regard the Goddess and the God as representing the female and male aspects of The All.


 
Taken from here.

"The All" or "The One" certainly sound like a Supreme Being to me. Before you argue, consider the Triune nature of the Christian God wherein we find the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. He is yet worshiped and recognized as One, the Supreme Being, even though He is God in three parts.



> Wiccans have a wide range of beliefs when it comes to the Afterlife. Some believe in ancient legends of a Summerland, where souls go after death. Here, they meet with others who have gone before, review and integrate their previous lives on earth, and are eventually reincarnated into the body of a newborn.


 
Sounds like a belief in the immortality of the soul.

Wicca also holds up several books as representative of a path to their beliefs, and generally primarily holds the Book of Shadows up as their "Holy Book."

Even in Texas, Wicca does not conflict with our Grand Lodge Laws on faith and recognition of a Supreme Being. 

Not that it matters, but I post this as a devout Christian.


----------



## bpire2002

Wiccans, as followers of Wicca are now commonly known, typically worship a Goddess (traditionally the Triple Goddess) and a God (traditionally the Horned God), who are sometimes represented as being a part of a greater pantheistic Godhead, and as manifesting themselves as various polytheistic deities. Other characteristics of Wicca include the ritual use of magic, a basic code of morality, and the celebration of eight seasonally based festivals

Just going off what was described by another member of the forum.

I dont wish to argue


----------



## Ashton Lawson

I don't wish to argue either, Brother. Only to educate and learn where possible. 

I personally think Wicca falls into an unusual gray area that is really up to the individual Wiccan. Wicca is not your typical religion, as it allows for its followers to seek their own path. There are those that may choose to believe in a Supreme Being, and those that do not.

My expectation as a Mason would be that those Wiccans who become Masons, choose and acknowledge the path that ends in recognition of a Supreme Being; in their understanding, "The All or The One."


----------



## bpire2002

Thanks


----------



## drowen

Brothers,
That is exactly why religion is never to be discussed inside the Lodge Room.  When you speak of gods, from another perspective, Christians also believe in three gods, being God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.  As far as magic, what did Jesus do when he turned water into wine, healed the sick or when Moses slapped the rocks with his stick and water came forth.  I know, we as Christians call these miracles, but others don't do so.  The term Holy Scriptures does not imply the Holy Bible.  Scriptures can be found in the Holy Bible, Holy Quran, and many other books.  We as Masons are a group that has evolved into an organization that is relgiously sterile.  Commandery or Knights Templar however, is a horse of a different color.  You take an oath unto Jesus Christ Our Lord and Savior.  I am not defending other religions, I am just saying Freemasonry allows for religious freedom.  It is not my fault those who do not believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior will be going to hell.


----------



## tom268

I'm not a wiccan, but I had my years in the "esoteric world" before I returned to Christianity. The modern Wicca movement has much in common with freemasonry, not the less because Gerald Gardner, broadly seen as the founder of modern wicca, was a freemason.  Therefore I have no doubt that many male wicca belong to the craft or are at least attracted to masonry.

I see no base on what freemasonry would require a monotheistic belief. Surely, masonry was created in a christian culture and was originally meant for christians only. But that was a time when non-christians were not considered socially equal, monotheistic or polytheistic was not the point of interest. Today, there is no requirement to prohibit polytheists to join masonry.


----------



## drowen

Well said tom268


----------



## Wingnut

I would agree and say that there is no monotheistic requirement in the GL Law book.  It would also be an interesting discussion on some of the commonalities of stories in Christianity, Islam, Judaism and the believes from ancient Egypt and Greece.
to name a few:
stories of 2 brothers in conflict
resurrection or ascension into 'heaven' and an afterlife.
judgment for your deeds


----------



## drowen

Wingnut, you speak wisdom.  Brother Albert Pike says it best in his wisdom inferred upon us into Scottish Rite literature when he speaks of the multiple religions involved.


----------



## Christopher

Ashton Lawson said:


> Wicca also holds up several books as representative of a path to their beliefs, and generally primarily holds the Book of Shadows up as their "Holy Book."



Just to double-check that you understand, there's no single "Book of Shadows".  A book of shadows is simply a journal that Wiccans are taught to keep where they record what they learn over the years.  This might include the spells they perform and their outcomes, potions recipes they've found useful, dreams they've had, and other useful information.  You could say that it includes "revealed" wisdom in the sense that if you believe the universe works under predictable rules, then trial and error such as is recorded in a practitioner's book of shadows would reveal those rules and possibly insights into spiritual matters.  However, it does not include "revealed wisdom" such as the direct revelation of a deity or prophet regarding spiritual matters.  No book of shadows is considered authoritative by all Wiccans.

This "book of shadows" also does not include divinely-inspired morals or ethics by which practitioners are expected to live.  The traditional Wiccan ethic, as I understand it, is summed up in two bites:  the Wiccan Rede, and the Threefold Law.  The Wiccan Rede is a term that can refer to several things, but is typically used to refer to the phrase "An it harm none, do as ye will."  It's important to note here that the word "an" being used is an archaic English word that means "if".  It's neither the word "and" nor a contraction of it.  The Threefold Law states that whatever one does will come back to oneself three times over.  Kind of like karma, but more extreme.  So if one does good, one will receive three times as much good from other people, and vice versa.

Hope this helps.  If something I've said is incorrect, presumably one of the Wiccan brothers will correct me.


----------



## Cripps

I must admit something. I don't know much about other religions. I am Anglican. I have sat in lodge with a Wiccan WM, and he us also deemed a holy man to the native community, we have had many conversations regarding the whole conversation. Masonry expects us to have faith in the supreme being, gender and faith if said being are not specified. Our final realization came down the this.... B.Y.O.G to masonry!
(Bring Your Own God) 
We have an amazing organization that beleives in tolerance. Accepting one another for who we are, and apart of that comes from having faith, believing in something and someone higher, better, and more loving that we could ever be. Yet it also teaches us the struggle and try to emulate such a being. 

This is also an unfair question. Since religion and politics are not to be discusses in lodge can not put one religion before another as "The correct" choice.  

All we really need to do us beleive. Beleive in the SA, have faith that each brother you meet has morals, just look at the 4 cardinal virtues.


----------



## JTM

2 year old threads get locked.  Please start a new thread if you'd like to continue discussion regarding this topic.


----------

