[REPLY.] WHAT IS MASONRY?

Freethought Review, Volume I, Issue 9, 1 June 1884, Page 13

[REPLY.] WHAT IS MASONRY?

BY A MASTER MASON.

The Rev. B. W. Harvey, as Presiding Officer, took the opportunity at the consecration of the new Masonic Hall to put forth publicly certain views on Masonry which have provoked some notice among the Craft and in the public Press. That he departed widely from the central principles of Masonry I have no doubt whatsoever. For that universality and comprehensiveness which distinguish our ancient Order, we have had placed in the foreground the doctrines of a sect, the theology and polemics of priestcraft, with what looks very like an attack on individual Masons whose theological and speculative opinions have not been cut according to the sectarian pattern. “As Masons” (said the Presiding Officer) "we can have no fellowship with men who are seeking to destroy the faith on which we have built all our present confidences, all our future hope. We do not judge them ; to God and not to us they are responsible; to Him their account must be rendered. But our aims and theirs are as opposite as light and darkness. We have nothing in common with them; we cannot wish them God speed. The duty of Masons in this respect was clearly marked when the Grand Lodge of England refused any longer to recognise the Grand Orient Lodge of France, on the ground that they had removed the name of the Deity from the ritual.” The speaker went on to say that he had taken the opportunity of the occasion of proclaiming his principles to the world. If it is well that the world should know the views of a Mason and a theologian, it is also well the world should know that there are Masons who are not theologians who do not hold the same views of Masonry.

Now I desire to take my stand on the same ritual, and to profess as deep a reverence for the ancient landmarks as the Rev. Mr. Harvey. Fortunately there is no Pope in Masonry. If anyone, moreover, is to blame for what may seem a religious discussion, I think the Presiding Officer is called upon to render an account for introducing the polemic on an occasion when polemics are forbidden. The first question then that has to be answered is, What is the "faith" to which he referred as binding on a Mason ? Clearly it is not the Christian faith. Mr. Harvey was well aware that that faith is no part of Masonry—that it has been excluded by the most careful process of elimination. If it were included, Jews could not be members of the Order ; yet some of the most distinguished members of the Craft belong to the Jewish faith. And as Jews reject the New Testament as the result of imposture, it cannot be an essential or any part of the "faith" of a Mason. But is the "faith" of a Mason acceptance of the Old Testament minus the New ? If so, then all Masons are simply Jews in religion—professors of Judaism. But leaving out the logical dilemma in which all Christians would be placed by such a theory, is the Rev. Mr. Harvey prepared to deny that Freemasonry may and does exist among Mahommedans, Brahmins, and other peoples who do not acknowledge any part of the Jewish or Christian scriptures ? No wellinformed Mason would take such a stand.

Then is the "faith" a simple Deism ? To this position Mr, Harvey is logically forced, and we do not care to deny him all the advantage it gives him. He stands precisely on the same platform as Thomas Paine, who wrote : (Age of Reason, page i), "I believe in one God, and no more, and I hope for happiness beyond this life," and added. " I believe in the equality of man ; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy." This practical religion some Masons think superior to theological systems. To sum up this part of my argument: The Christian faith is not a tenet of Masonry, or all reference to Christ would not be carefully excluded, and Jews could not be Masons, Judaism, again, cannot be a tenet, or Hindoos could not be Masons. And Deism itself (which I have conceded for Mr. Harvey's consolation), is not thought an essential part of Masonry by the great body of French Masons.

In the reference to the Grand Orient, Mr Harvey is extremely illogical. He speaks in the name of all Masons, yet immediately states that the Grand Lodge of England '' refused to recognise the Grand Orient. " If he had been as cautious as he ought to have been in the presence of so many brethren, he would have simply stated the fact that one body of Masons had refused to continue to hold communication with another body independent in its jurisdiction. In the same way he would have had to admit that the Grand Lodge of England had refused to recognise the Grand Lodge of Victoria and the Grand Lodge of New South Wales (no harm being done by the non-recognition), while nearly every Grand Lodge in America had extended the right hand of fellowship. To confound Masonry in its universal character with the actions of one Constitution, argues an artificial knowledge of the Order or a defective reasoning power not creditable to anyone who assumed the authority to lecture Masons.

And now let me pursue in as brief terms as possible the enquiry, What is Masonry ? What arc the great central principles which, apart from the emblems, allegory, and symbols, distinguish and inspire all true Masons the world over ? I have attempted to show what Masonry is not, and if I am followed, it will not be difficult to discover what it is. In the first place it is a system of morality. This is the great central fact which few Masons will hesitate to accept. The relation of the Bible to that vital truth is emblematical, allegorical, and symbolical. But there are other emblems and symbols of equal authority. Every Mason will apprehend what I mean, and find the warrant for the statement in the ritual. Is this system of morality enforced and illustrated ? Undoubtedly ; and the chief corner stone, or rather the foundation, of the system Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth. This is the universal religion which appeals to all humanity, to the world, and gives the Order its sanctity, authority, and charm with all worthy members. While theologians are quibbling and distressing their narrow circles with

metaphysical puzzles, the Mason practises the religon of duty, action, and conduct, and tries to make that simple but sublime worship universal.

"No fellowship " forsooth ! If Mr Harvey can persuade Masons to abandon, or even modify, the practical religion of the Order, for theological conundrums which he dare not even mention without overstepping the landmarks, he can make the sun stand still and the shadow go backward on the Avail. The most valuable tenets of Masonry are Virtue, Morality, and Brotherly Love. That is the true faith of a Mason, technical as well as real, and even Mr Harvey will hardly venture directly to affirm that in grammar, logic, or articles of faith there is another superlative of higher authority. On that rock I take my stand, and affirm that Mr Harvey was as heterodox in his exposition of the principles of Masonry, as he was obscure and contradictory in proclaiming his faith in the place of the true faith about which no Master Mason, in theory or practice, can err. In conclusion let me remind the rev. gentleman that his theological cant about sending Masons to God for judgment is as arrogant as it is unmasonic ; that the time is past when Masons fear the frowns or the implied threats of a priest ; and that he can only earn their full cofidence and respect when he learns the great lesson, that right conduct, not correct theology, is that which entitles a man to the fellowship of Masons,