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.
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's still true, and is the primary reason why no regular jurisdiction anywhere accepts the Grand Orient of France as being genuine freemasons.... 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 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.Street argues that a belief in Deity is not one of the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry
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.... 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€
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.Street argues that Masons are only required to obey a moral law and Masons are obliged to keep any opinion of religion to themselves.
No, because the quotation isn't about non-Christian religions at all.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.