War of the Worldviews

If you are reading this you are going to think that this is a little far removed from Freemasonry. You may even think that it violates the principle of discussing religion inside Freemasonry. But you would be wrong.

The prohibition in most jurisdictions is against allowing sectarian religion and partisan politics into the Lodge room.

So if I am proselytizing for a religion or denomination within a religion and/or a political party then I am in violation. But if I want to talk about honesty in government or the power of prayer, well I think that is a different story.

Early American Freemasonry was the nation’s biggest booster of the public school system. Are you prepared to tell me that advocating government schools is a violation of the Masonic prohibition about political discussion?

I think that this point is so very, very important because I think that Freemasonry has missed two giant opportunities to teach and help the world, especially America. First Freemasonry could have been the leader in promoting race relations. In 1898 MW William Upton, Grand Master of Mainstream Masonry in the state of Washington recognized Prince Hall. What if that recognition had spread then and there throughout Freemasonry? What if the Craft was able to influence secular government to harmonize the races? Would Martin Luther King’s protest movement have been necessary?

Instead Freemasonry ran from its responsibility for a variety of reasons among them being its timidness towards mixing the secular world and its doings with the fraternity of Freemasonry and its world. So in reality what it ended up doing as a compromise was similar to what the states did before the Civil War – free states and slave states.

Secondly Freemasonry missed its opportunity at promoting World Peace. Our beloved fraternity is one that considers all its members on the level, that is equal regardless of race, religion, political persuasion, creed, culture or economic circumstances. Now what is wrong with promoting that to humankind?

Ultimately Freemasonry must decide whether it is a cloistered society or a community involved society, whether it is a secret or private society or one that is willing to share its philosophy with the public.

 

War Of The Worldviews

While you are thinking about that enjoy the video about science and spirituality. Just don’t tell me it’s a prohibitive sectarian religious discussion.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Visit Our Sponsor

About Fred Milliken

Fred is a Past Master of Plymouth Lodge, Plymouth Massachusetts, and Past Master of Paul Revere Lodge, Brockton, Massachusetts. Presently, he is a member of Pride of Mt. Pisgah No. 135, Prince Hall Texas, where is he is also a Prince Hall Knight Templar . Fred is a Fellow of the Phylaxis Society and former Executive Director of the Phoenix Masonry website and museum.

Comments

  1. William Achbach says:

    Such a discussion is absolutely NOT a violation of the principle! Indeed, it is to our great shame that we (as well as people of faith generally, regardless of sect or opinion) have totally abdicated our responsibility to speak out on this subject for decades. Who we believe we are, as human beings, depends entirely upon our worldview. Those who believe, as an inescapable First Principle, in a Supreme Being, to whom we are ultimately responsible for our actions, are under a rational obligation to act in a manner that acknowledges that ultimate responsibility. Whether the topic up for consideration is world peace or the honest management of business or community affairs, a man with the worldview of a believer (which, of course, all Masons claim to be) finds himself under obligation to “circumscribe his desires and to keep his passions within due bounds with all mankind.”

    The point is not at all that a man who is not a believer cannot be a decent, moral or public-spirited citizen: a good neighbor and a productive member of society. Rather, I would make the argument that a man who has not that dimension of active faith in his life has no reason external to himself–unchanged by the changing conditions of his own experiences and understanding–to become and to continue to be that sort of person, not ultimately being responsible to any authority beyond himself for his actions.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: