SlASOmtY
785
SIASONBY
Many Anglo-American Freemasons are wont to
protest strongly against all charges accusing Freema-
sonry of interfering with political or religious affairs or
of hostility to the Church or disloyalty to the public
authorities. They even praise Freemasonry as " one
of the strongest bulwarks of religion " (Chr., 1887, II,
340), "the handmaid of religion^ (Chr., 1887, 1, 119)
and the "handmaid of the church" (Chr.. 1885, II,
355). "There is nothing in the nature or the Soci-
ety", says the "Royal Craftsman", New York, "that
necessitates the renunciation of a single sentence of
any creed, the discontinuance of any religious customs
or the obliteration of a dogma of belief. No one is
asked to deny the Bible, to change his Church rela-
tions or to be less attentive to the teaching of his spir-
itual instructors and counsellors" (Chr., 1887, II, 49).
" Masonry indeed contains the pith of Christianity "
(Chr., 1875, 1, 1 13) . " It is a great mistake to suppose
it an enemy of the Church." " It does not offer itself
as a substitute of that divinely ordained institution."
"It offers itself as an adjunct, as an ally, as a helper in
the great work of the regeneration of the race, of the
uplifting of man" (Chr., 1890, II, 101). Hence, "we
deny the rigjit of the Romish Church to exclude from
its communion those of its flock who have assumed
the responsibility of the Order of Freemasonry"
(Chr., 1875, 1, 113). Though such protestations seem
to be sincere and to reveal even a praiseworthy desire
in their authors not to conflict with religion and the
Church,' they are contradicted by notorious facts.
Certainly Freemasonry and "Christian" or "Catho-
lic" rehgion are not opposed to each other, when
Masons, some erroneously and others h3rpocritically
understand "Christian" or "Catholic" in the above
described Masonic sense, or when Masonry itself is
mistakenly conceived as an orthodox Christian insti-
tution. But between "Masonry" and "Christian"
or "Catholic" religion, conceived as they really are:
between " unsectarian " Freemasonry and " dogmatic,
orthodox " Christianity or Catholicism, there is a radi-
cal opposition. It is vain to say: though Masonry is
officially " unsectarian", it does not prevent individual
Masons from being "sectarian" in their non-Masonic
relations; for in its official " unsectarianism " Free-
masonry necessarily combats all that Christianitv con-
tains beyond the " universal religion in which aU men
agree", consequently all that is characteristic of the
Christian and Catholic religion. These characteristic
features Freemasonry combats not only as superfluous
and merely subjective, but also as spurious additions
disfiguring the objective universal truth, which it pro-
fesses. To ignore Christ and Christianity, is practi-
cally to reject them as unessential framework.
But Freemasonry goes farther and attacks Catholi- cism openly. The " Voice " (Chicago), for instance, in an article which begins: "There is nothing in the Catholic religion which is adverse to Masonry", con- tinues, "for the truth is, that masonry embodies that religion in which all men agree. This is as true as that all veritable religion, wherever found, is in substance the same. Neither is it in the power of anjr man or body of men to make it otherwise. Doctrines and forms of observance conformable to piety, imposed by spiritual overseers, may be as various as the courses of wind; and like the latter may war with each other upon the face of the whole earth, but they are not re- ligion. Bigotry and zeal, the assumptions of the priestcraft, witn all its countless inventions to magnify and impress the world . . . are ever the mainsprings of strife, hatred and revenge, which defame ana ban- ish religion and its inseparable virtues, and work un- speakable mischief, wherever mankind are found upon tne earth. Poperv and priestcraft are so allied, tnat they may be called the same; the truth bein^, that the former is nothing more nor less than a special case of the latter, being a particular form of a vicious princi- ple, which itself is but the offspring of the conceit of IX.— 50
self-sufficiency and the lust of dominion. Nothing
which can be named, is more repugnant to the spirit of
masonry, nothing to be more carefullv guarded
against, and this has been alwajrs well imderstood by
au skillful masters, and it must in truth be said, that
such is the wisdom of the lessons, i. e. of masonic in-
struction in Lodges, etc." (Chr., 1887, 1, 35) . In simi-
lar discussions, containing in almost every word a hid-
den or open attack on Christianity, the truly Masonic
magazines and books of all countries abound. Past
Grand Deacon J. C. Parkinson, an illustrious English
Mason, frankly avows: "The two systems of Roman-
ism and Freemasonry are not only incompatible,
but they are radically opposed to each other" (Chr.,
1884, II, 17): and Amencan Masons say: "We won't
make a man a Freemason, until we know that he
isn't a Catholic." (Chr., 1890, II, 347: see also 1898,
1,83).
With respect to loyalty towards "lawful govern- ment " American Masons pretend that " everywhere Freemasons, individually and collectively, are loyal and active supporters of republican or constitutional governments ("Voice" quoted in Chr., 1890, I, 98) . " Our principles are all republican " (" Voice " in Chr., 1893, I, 130). "Fidelitjf and Lovalty, and peace and order, and subordination to lawful authori- ties are household gods of Freemasonry" ("Voice" in Chr., 1890, I, 98); and English Freemasons declare, that, "the loyalty of English Masons is proverbial" (Chr., 1899, 1, 301). These protestations of English and American Freemasons in general mav be deemed sincere, as far as their own countries and actual gov- ernments are concerned. Not even the revolutionary Grand Orient of France thinks of overthrowing the actual political order in France, which is in entire con- formity with its wishes. The question is, whether Freemasons respect a lawful Government in their own and other countries, when it is not inspired by Masonic principles. In this respect both English and Ameri- can Freemasons, by tneir principles and conduct, provoke the condemnatory verdict of enlightened ana impartial public opinion. We have already above hinted at the whimsical Article II of the "Old Charges", calculated to encour&ge rebellion against Governments which are not accoiding to the wishes of Freemasonry. The "Freemason's Chronicle" but faithfully expresses the sentiments of Anglo-American Freemasonry, when it writes: "If we were to assert that under no Circumstances had a Biason been found willing to take arms against a. bad government, we should only be declaring that, in trying moments, when duty, in the masonic sense, to state means an- tagonism to the Government, they had failed in the highest and most sacred duty of a citizen. Rebellion in some cases is a sacred duty, and none, but a bigot or a fool, will say, that our countrymen were in the wrong, when they took arms against King James II. Loyalty to freedom in a case of this kind overrides all other considerations, and when to rebel means to be free or to perish, it would be idle to urge that a man must remember obli^tions which were never in- tended to rob him of his status of a human being and a citizen"(Chr., 1875, 1,81).
Such language would equally suit every anarchistic movement. The utterances Quoted were made in defence of plotting Spanish Masons. Only a page further the same English Masonic magazine writes: " Assuredly Italian Masonry, which has rendered such invaluable service in the regeneration of that mag- nificent country", "is worthy of the highest praise" (Chr., 1875, I, 82). "A Freemason, moved by lofty principles ", says the " Voice " (Chicago), " may rightly strike a blow at tyranny and may consort with othera to bring about needed relief, in ways that are not ordi- narily justifiable. ^ History affords numerous in- stances of acts which have been justified by subse- quent events, and none of us, whetner Masons or not.
