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!

Separation of Church and State

John B Heaton

Registered User
19APR17 The United States Supreme Court is about to hear a case in which a church supported school is suing the State of Missouri for funding which it believes it is entitled to. As one of the main tenants of the AASR/SJ is that no public monies should be allocated to religious organizations or individuals. As Scottish Rite Masons are we, as an organization, propelled to oppose the use of Federal or State Funds for the benefit of a particular religious group. And if so, should the Supreme Council 33 not offer an amicus brief opposing the use of government funds to support a private religious school?
 

goomba

Neo-Antient
Site Benefactor
I am not a member of the Scottish Rite and will bow out from the discussion if asked.

The fraternity should not enter the political sphere. However, the interpretation of what "separation of church and state" means would change how any person or group responds. I am willing to bet the AASR as in most groups the view of the members and leadership are all over the political spectrum.
 

imxbx

Attach the Stone of Triumph
Premium Member
I think that taking some kind of public position on this would be divisive at best. I'm a Jeffersonian in my perspective of law: it should reflect the ethics of the generation over which it governs, and I believe our founding fathers set up a an amazing system that allows the pendulum of politics to swing freely. Hopefully that dramatic swing first left (in my lifetime) and then right will hopefully lead nearer to center.


Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
The fraternity should not enter the political sphere. However, the interpretation of what "separation of church and state" means would change how any person or group responds. I am willing to bet the AASR as in most groups the view of the members and leadership are all over the political spectrum.
I think that taking some kind of public position on this would be divisive at best.
True. If we all were to reply with our true feelings I'll bet that this topic would run into replies in the hundreds and get very heated.
 

JCeire

Registered User
If a Masonic body, SR or otherwise, offered an amicus curiae brief, the conspiracy nutters would rise like zombies from the basements where they reside. Probably best to avoid a stance as a Mason.

Now, pursuing it as an citizen or a corporation of citizens is a different matter entirely.
 

LeoValMer05

Registered User
Freemasonry should in general keep away from politics, nothing good can come from this other then giving anti-masons some real fuel for their theories.

While I understand, I don't think so. Everything that exists in human society is political, even the paradoxical position of not engaging into politics. I think Freemasons have the responsibility of applying their teachings, like fighting tyranny or discrimination. By fighting, I don't mean a coup d'état or an armed revolution, but openly criticizing any act that constitute an attack to a collective, or even an individual being oppressed. Of course, limitations should exist, and rules on what we should engage into should also be applied. For instance, these can be optional reunions that can be set into a date apart from the usual meetings as not all masons might become part of it. These can also need an approval from the Grand lodge so Freemasonry is not implicated with people that can harshly negatively affect the brotherhood.
 

LK600

Premium Member
I am not a member of the AASR SJ so take this for what it worth. No to all the above. We do not take political stances. We do not lean left or right. We are above and separate from such things. An internal civil war would not be a good thing.
 

LeoValMer05

Registered User
I am not a member of the AASR SJ so take this for what it worth. No to all the above. We do not take political stances. We do not lean left or right. We are above and separate from such things. An internal civil war would not be a good thing.

Oh! I agree! The argument that I did was not to take a political stance. Also, most of my brothers agree that we shouldn't also be part of political issues. I am just sharing my personal, and perhaps unpopular, opinion. We must remember that Freemasons have been persecuted by the left and right wing government. For instance, Freemasons were persecuted in Soviet Russia, and still is in Communist China (left wing), and by Fascist governments such as Franco's Spain, Nazi Germany, and Fascist Italy (All were right wing). I think we must keep that in mind, and keep a keen eye that it doesn't happen again. Moreover, that is why I promoted rules and approval within the order to evade any insults, and present a more respectful atmosphere. Also, I also promoted that if there were political debates or meetings, they should be optional and outside the usual meeting.
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
I am not a member of the AASR SJ so take this for what it worth. No to all the above. We do not take political stances. We do not lean left or right. We are above and separate from such things.
I am a member of the AASR SJ and the above is true of my Valley and Orient.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
I am not a member of the AASR SJ so take this for what it worth. No to all the above. We do not take political stances. We do not lean left or right. We are above and separate from such things. An internal civil war would not be a good thing.
Well, I agree we should not. Some GLs are vocal.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
Oh! I agree! The argument that I did was not to take a political stance. Also, most of my brothers agree that we shouldn't also be part of political issues. I am just sharing my personal, and perhaps unpopular, opinion. We must remember that Freemasons have been persecuted by the left and right wing government. For instance, Freemasons were persecuted in Soviet Russia, and still is in Communist China (left wing), and by Fascist governments such as Franco's Spain, Nazi Germany, and Fascist Italy (All were right wing). I think we must keep that in mind, and keep a keen eye that it doesn't happen again. Moreover, that is why I promoted rules and approval within the order to evade any insults, and present a more respectful atmosphere. Also, I also promoted that if there were political debates or meetings, they should be optional and outside the usual meeting.

The landmark is against discussion of partisan politics, not against discussion of political principles.

If you can consistently manage to discuss political principles without other others taking it as partisan, go to it. Notice carefully I did not say without yourself taking it as partisan. This is why most of us even avoid political principles even though not technically banned as a topic. I lack the oratory skills to make sure others don't take my words as partisan discussion.
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
Notice carefully I did not say without yourself taking it as partisan. This is why most of us even avoid political principles even though not technically banned as a topic. I lack the oratory skills to make sure others don't take my words as partisan discussion.
I just stay away from political discussion of any type in lodge. These types of conversations just always seem to result in flared tempers.
 
Top