My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Pledge of Allegiance

Traveling Man

Premium Member
The establishment clause has no effect in Masonry, nor does case law, as they apply to government institutions. There seems to be something that is being overlooked and that would be the freedom of association, something lacking in this dialogue. If someone wants to impose all of the contortions that have been misconstrued by the courts and apply them to private institutions they would cease to exist. One could argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but that would be futile. That would be about as futile as trying to apply case law that has been ruled on regarding school pledges to Freemasonry. Telling a banana that's an apple seems seldom to work out with any fruitful outcome.

Lest we forget that at one time we subjected ourselves for judgment of the fraternity. Those yardsticks by which we were judged could be interpreted as "unconstitutional".
There’s those nasty requirements that a candidate be a man and not be an atheist.
So should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

As I’m sure has been said before, you don’t have to recite the pledge, specifically if one has issues with it. All that I’m sure of is that one stands to show some decorum. Just as one would do in a foreign country when they are paying homage to their country.
 

Traveling Man

Premium Member
Why a man may have objections to reciting the Pledge was clearly explained by reference to case law, nothing more. Somewhat off topic, but tell the Brethren of West Virginia (the most recent example) that the courts have no standing vis-a-vis "private institutions." The courts can and have gotten involved - when it could be demonstrated that the institution hadn't followed its own stated rules. For starters, I refer you the the EA charge and remind you to "conform with cheerfulness . . . "

And there's the answer, when individuals decide to drag things as such into court. I however noticed that nothing was said about the terms & conditions on our petition for membership, and nothing mentioned about Anderson's Constitutions nor bylaws and landmarks. Oh, well we'll leave that as it may. As for West Virginia, when you drag your laundry before Caesar you receive that justice which Caesar metes out. It only involves itself when some brethren drag it into the courts and then they only rule on whether we follow our own rules, nothing about the constitutionality of our regulations or charges or membership criteria. Nothing.

Now would anyone care to share where in ANY Masonic Constitution, bylaws, rules or regulations whereby such a pledge of allegiance is expressly prohibited?

There should be nothing inserted between opening and closing that causes any Mason to feel he needs to "opt out."

I summarily opt out of terminating any prayers in lodge that end in "You guess here". Am I going to bring it to the courts? I think not. Is it a tempest in a teapot? Yes it is!


Should we delete or modify this charge?

In the state, you are to be quiet and peaceable subject... and never forgetting the attachment you owe to the spot where you first drew breath.
This charge the opposite of your posit, is it not? Or is this just another Gordian Knot? One may twist and turn about the purpose, but the command is still there. I say the camel’s nose is already under the tent.
 

Lucky7812

Registered User
Thus, it seems the man installed in the Oriental Chair would be free to make the call as to whether or not to include it, absent a Grand Lodge requirement that he do so.



§19-15.1 ORDER OF BUSINESS
The Order of Business for Stated Communications of Subordinate Lodges shall be as follows:
1. Opening of the Lodge
2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

Mississippi Grand lodge By-Laws list the order of business as shall be as follows, not recommended agenda. Thus if you sit in the east you do not have an option to omit the pledge.
 

BryanMaloney

Premium Member
Remember, folks, the USA was a loser in World War II, because the "pledge" didn't have "under God" at that time. Therefore, Germany and Japan (Italy in footnotes) must have won World War II, since the USA didn't have "under God" in the "pledge".
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
It is my thoughts that the reason for the pledge of allegiance at the opening of the lodge is so the government of any of the jurisdictions the Masons are in can not say that the lodge is a subversive anti-government organization. Then it can't be shut down by that government.

The part Bro. Maloney is always worried about the under God was only place in the pledge so state there is a SAOTU. The anti-Christians religions picked up on that word and said that is not what we call our God so it is bad. This is just another word being hijacked and redefined by someone to have a deferent meaning than the original. The original is God equals a SAOTU. Which could be yhwh, Jehovah or any other name. That is why there were Greek God's, Roman God's and so on. God is the SAOTU that you believe in.

Masonry is to bring these different belief systems together so we can have a fraternity that can trust and work together.
 

Traveling Man

Premium Member
You are mistaken regarding decisions rendered by the courts. Whether or not we as a private institution have followed our own rules is the criteria for whether or not the courts have the authority to get involved, not necessarily what decisions they might render.

We are saying the same thing, I was specifically addressing the constitutionality of our (bylaws, etc.) institution, not the back biting within that some would bring into the public courts. Once again, if this were truly a constitutional matter it would have been already ruled as such. Our landmarks are still the same; we are still charged the same.
 
Top