The Age Old Question: Is Freemasonry A Religion?

[jjjjjggggg]

Another post from Freemason Information which is spot on.

http://freemasoninformation.com/201...medium=rss&utm_campaign=freemasonrys-religion

 

[Warrior1256]

Masonry most definately has a religious theme but it is not a religion unto itself. Just my opinion.

 

[dfreybur]

There exist religions that expect exclusivity. Any member of one of them is likely to be insistent that Masonry is not a religion. The jurisdictions that are oldest and/or largest exist in regions where such religions are in the majority. Whence our rhetoric that we aren't a religion. A strict Christian or Muslim might care deeply about the definitions.

There exist religions that don't care if their practitioners are exclusive. Any member of one or more of then unlikely to care if Masonry is described as a religion. We have jurisdictions in regions where such religions are in the majority. We have minority members of these faiths in most jurisdictions. In Japan it's not unusual for a person to practice more than one of Shinto, Buddhism and/or Taoism as they don't require exclusivity. A Japanese brother is unlikely to care if Masonry gets described as a religion.

This situation tells us that the issue is really a matter of definitions and boundaries. Before taking our obligations we are told that they do not interfere with our duty to God. That statement gives critically important context about the nature of our obligations and about the nature of Masonry. Masonry stands aside on issues of exclusivity. Masonry stands for unity on issues of unity. The boundary is up to the individual brother but the choice must be in the context of the admonition we are given and agree to before taking each obligation.

Have you noticed that Antis ignore the admonition given to us before each obligation? There is an important reason for this. It's the context that the admonition gives those of us who have decided to take our obligations.

Whether Masonry is a religion or not ultimately comes down to a semantics game played about definitions and the motivations behind why such definitions matter. Masonry is not in conflict with any faith that requires an exclusive commitment and is therefore not a religion to the members of any such faith. Masonry is in harmony with any faith that does not care about exclusive commitment and it therefore does not matter if Masonry is a religion to the members of any such faiths.

If you care, Masonry is not. Unless you're an Anti careful to ignore the context of the admonition ...

I've left this post iconified on my screen for a while working on the wording. Still too stilted and verbose but I don't think I'll be able to do better without a ton of thought and time.

 

[cemab4y]

The Supreme Court of the state of Nebraska ruled that Freemasonry is NOT a religion. The case was Lancaster County (Neb) v. Scottish Rite Building (1922).

 

[jjjjjggggg]

Dfreybur,

Doesn't seems tilted to me... in fact, one of the most thoughtful and balanced posts I've read on the subject. Well done!

 

[BryanMaloney]

If one wishes to stretch "definitions" enough, then everything is a religion.

If everything is a religion, then nothing is a religion.

 

[coachn]

Thank God we don't have to deal with Extremists WITHIN the Fraternity! (snicker)

 

[BryanMaloney]

You mean, like Masons who argue that Christians shouldn't be Freemasons or that Freemasonry is a religion?

 

[coachn]

Nah! We couldn't POSSIBLY have such narrow minded extremists within our Ranks. You must be referring to some other organization.

 

[Brother_Steve]

Freemasonry is a religion as much as football is a religion to the fanatic.

You get out of it what you put into it. Some may consider Masonry to be their "religion" but not for the reasons the word actually defines in the sense of Deity.

 

[Warrior1256]

Two groups wish to classify Freemasonry as a religion: Those who wish to destroy Freemasonry and those who have no religion of their own and try to make Freemasonry their substitute.

I agree!

 

[Brother JC]

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

 

[coachn]

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

James 1:27

 

[BryanMaloney]

Badly taken out of context:

"Know this, my beloved brethren. Let every man be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger, for the anger of man does not work the righteousness of God. Therefore put away all filthiness and rank growth of wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.

But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if any one is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror; for he observes himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But he who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer that forgets but a doer that acts, he shall be blessed in his doing.

If any one thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this man’s religion is vain. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world."

What is "the word"? In this case, it would be the Holy Gospel of Christ, not just any old set of pious wordage. The entire Epistle of James is not about "just do good and you'll be fine". The Epistle of James is about "believing only" will not grant salvation. It is through and through a thoroughly Christian document. Quoting a single verse out of context is of no value at all.

Footnotes:

 

[coachn]

... Quoting a single verse out of context is of no value at all.

(cough) No value at all? It got you to reply with some good Light. There's value in that?