Freemasonry and the Southern Baptist Church, etc...

Dwight Moody on Masonry
The celebrated evangelist of long ago, D.L. Moody wrote:

I do not see how any Christian, most of all a Christian minister, can go into these secret lodges with unbelievers. They say they can have more influence for good, but I say that they can have more influence for good by staying out of them and reproving their evil deeds. You can never reform anything by unequally yoking yourself to ungodly men. True reformers separate themselves from the world. But, some say to me, if you talk that way you will drive all the members of secret societies out of your meetings and out of your churches. But what if I did? Better men will take their places. Give them the truth anyway, and if they would rather leave their churches than their lodges, the sooner they get out of their churches the better. I would rather have ten members who are separated from the world than a thousand such members! Come out from the lodge. Better one with God than a thousand without Him! We must walk with God, and if only one or two go with us, it is all right. Do not let down the standard to suit men who love their secret lodges or have some darling sin they will not give up!

Freemasonry and the Southern Baptist Church
by Ed Decker

The Beaumont Enterprise of August 31, 1985 bannered the news across the front page of its religion section. The headline, "Religious leaders blast Freemasonry as satanic" sat above a large Square and Compass complete with its encircled "G".

The Religion Writer, Thomas Morton reported that, "Dr. Larry Holly, a Beaumont physician, and the Rev. Charles Burchett, pastor of First Baptist Church of Kirbyville, submitted a resolution at the June convention in Dallas stating that The Masonic Lodge, often called Freemasonry, is "not compatible with Baptist faith and message."

The article continued, "The strongly negative resolution, which parallels some positions from other denominations, went to the Home Mission Board of the convention for consideration.

Morton interviewed the top Mason in Texas. "Such attacks on Freemasonry are not new", says George R. Scott, Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Texas, and no one talks about it. "We just ignore the whole thing. I have instructed our members not to comment on it."

Rev. Charles Burchett already knew he was in for some tough times. In 1984, when he read from several of Albert Pike's statements, about 85 people left his church, most of them with close ties to the Masonic lodge.

Burchett and Holly contacted me for permission to use portions of the text in "The Question Of Freemasonry" and distributed 15,000 copies of their resolution. Entitled, "FREEMASONRY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH BAPTIST FAITH AND MESSAGE, BOLD MISSION THRUST, OR COOPERATIVE PROGRAM", it created a major stir amongst the convention and its leadership.

It listed some six specific examples of how Freemasonry denied the Word of God and concluded,

"Be it therefore RESOLVED, that we the messengers of the Southern Baptist convention meeting in Dallas, Texas, June 11-13, 1985, recognizing that the vast majority of men in Freemasonry are unaware of the occult, satanic, and sensual nature of Freemasonry, declare Freemasonry as a contemporary example of what God calls and condemns in the Word of God as 'profane....Jewish fables' which cause men to question and turn from the truth, and...Be it further RESOLVED, that we urge all southern Baptists to hear the Truth of the Word of God when it says,'Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.' (II Corinthians 6:14 -17) ...And once having heard the Word of God, we urge every Southern Baptist to be a doer of the Word and not a hearer only, by confessing and repenting before the Lord of their involvement in this ungodliness and removing before men their names, energies and resources from this spiritually devastating and ungodly brotherhood of Satanic darkness."

After the Convention, Pastor Burchett wrote and updated me in a June 18, 1985 letter. "The resolution was entered into the official minutes Tuesday afternoon, and we passed out 15,000 copies of the booklet. The title is somewhat ridiculous but it was designed to capture the attention of Southern Baptists. Wednesday afternoon the Resolutions Committee considered the resolution and asked me questions. Although they didn't report it out of committee to the floor of the Convention for debate and a vote, they unanimously agreed to refer it to our Home Mission Board's cult department for study and dissemination of the facts of Freemasonry to Southern Baptists."

"This avenue is longer and less dynamic than a floor debate," Pastor Burchett continued, "but in the long run it will have more lasting effects on peoples' lives and provide a better opportunity for extensive education of Southern Baptists on Freemasonry."

On February 8, 1989, I called the Home Missions Board in Atlanta, Georgia and spoke to a representative of the Interfaith Witness department at the offices of Gary Leazer, department head. I was told that the request for the study had ended up in the Interfaith Witness department for response , but that the Directors felt that the study did not fall within the scope of that department.

A brief statement was distributed to those who would (or knew to) request it and a copy was mailed to me on February 10, 1989. It reads:

"The 1985 Resolutions Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention referred to the Interfaith Witness Department of the Home Missions Board for their study and recommendation the resolution by Larry Holly and Charles Burchett entitled "Freemasonry Not Compatible with Baptist Faith and Message, Bold Mission Thrust, or Cooperative Program."

"In answer to the Resolution Committee, it is recommended that the Home Mission Board respond that after a thorough study by the Interfaith Witness Department, it is the Board's conclusion that Freemasonry does not fall within the scope of assigned responsibility of the Home Mission Board."

We can only assume that the issue has died an ignominious death. There seems to be no group within the entire structure of the Southern Baptist Convention that will admit the assigned responsibility for dealing with the subject of Freemasonry.

THE HIDDEN HOOK

There continues to be some sort of hidden hook to all this uptight refusal to deal with the heretical practices and roots of Freemasonry within the Southern Baptist Church. There are solid Biblical cautions about secret societies and blood oath taking, yet here were intelligent, normally Biblically sound Christians tap dancing through some sort of spiritual mine fields that let family background and cultural behavior override their dedication to Biblical inerrancy and obedience to God's Word.

One extremely important piece to the puzzle came in a book entitled, ROYAL AMBASSADOR CEREMONIES, DRAMAS AND RECOGNITIONS.

It's Title page states, "Copyrighted in 1988 and published by the Brotherhood Commission, SBC., 1548 Poplar Ave. Memphis TN 38104-2493, James H. Smith, President, A Southern Baptist Convention agency supported through the Cooperative Program." It is the official ritual book for Recognition Services and the Initiation Ceremonies of the young men and boys groups in the Southern Baptist Church. It is specifically associated with the Royal Ambassador program.

First, let's understand that the Royal Ambassador program is part of a foundational program to raise up young men to be servants of God, and true Ambassadors for Christ. Throughout the pages of the ritual manual, the name of Christ is lifted up and Jesus is an obvious and integral part of the entire program. The Motto itself, "We are Ambassadors for Christ" comes from 2 Corinthians 5:20.

However, just as every step along the ladder of advancement is filled with deeper commitment to the cause of Christ, each step is equally filled with Masonic ritual, terminology and metaphor. This is not some accidental coincidence, but a planned system of Masonic indoctrination, as you will see.

In the recognition ceremonies on page 8, the young initiates are told, "Royal Ambassadors, keep this in mind. The shields, badges and other awards that are about to be presented to you are not prizes, These are tokens of what you have done or where you have been." The tone of the charge, the way the sentences are formed and spoken and words such as token, well done, travel, and journey are key Masonic words that are more than just subliminal here.

Some other simple examples are described in the instructions for the LADs, "You have just begun the journey to the mountain of adventure..." and for the Trialblazers (page 9), "Well done. You have advanced more than halfway up the mountain of adventure. Your token is in the form of a shield with a gold circle around it.". .and on it goes.

Again, we must realize that these young men are being prepared by subliminal force to be comfortable so that when they are later enjoined to step into the trap of the Gnostic mysteries of Freemasonry they will feel on familiar ground. As that young man stands at the Lodge door, with a hoodwink over his eyes, a cabletow around his neck and his sleeve and pant leg rolled back, embarking on the mystical journey for higher knowledge and seeking the light of lodgery, he must think, "well, it can't be too strange. I did almost this same thing at church when I was in Royal Ambassadors. It must be OK."

That's is the gravity of the matter. In looking into the rituals with our understanding of the Masonic forces at work, the ceremonies appear to have been purposely established by this Brotherhood Commission to prepare young men for that darker initiation into the occult mysteries of Freemasonry. Look into the actual initiation rituals itself, on pages 25-27, and compare them to only one of numerous Freemasonic counterparts. You will see what I mean.
INITIATION

Candidate is blindfolded, right shoe and coat are removed, and left sleeve is rolled up slightly.

(In the Masonic ritual for Entered Apprentice, the candidate is blindfolded-or hoodwinked, coat and shoes are removed, left arm is out of the shirt sleeve, left pant leg rolled up, slipper placed on right foot rope or cable-tow placed around neck.)

ONE: (Leads candidate by left arm to door and knocks twice, sharply.)

(In the Masonic ritual, candidate is led to door and the steward seizes candidate's right wrist and raps three times on door)

TWO: (Knocks from within)

(In Masonic ritual, Senior Deacon raps three times from within)

ONE: (Knocks once.)

TWO: Who comes here? (He shouts, opening the door. Raps candidate on left shoulder.)

(In Masonic ritual, the Steward opens the door partially and the Senior Deacon shouts from within, "Who Comes Here?)

ONE: Mr. (candidate's name), a weary traveler, along life's highway, seeking entrance and companionship along his journey up the straight and narrow path.

(In the Masonic ritual, the Steward replies, "a poor blind candidate, who is desirous of being brought from darkness to light and receiving part of the rights, lights and benefits of this worshipful lodge, erected to God and dedicated to the holy saints John, as many a brother and fellow has done before him.")

TWO: Mr. (candidate's name), is it your free will and desire that you be allowed to enter into our midst?

(In the Masonic ritual, the Senior Deacon asks the candidate, "Is it of your own free will and accord?)

CANDIDATE: Yes, it is.

TWO: Have you the key with which to enter?

ONE: He has it not, but I give it to him.(Steps forward and clasps Two's hand and saying in a low voice)Share the light of the world.

( In the Masonic ritual, this secret key is passed on in the second or Fellow Craft degree. At an almost identical routine at the door, the Senior Deacon asks the Steward, "Has he the pass?" to which the Steward replies, "He has not. I have it for him." "Give me the pass," the Senior Deacon states. The Steward gives the pass or key, to the Senior Deacon in a whisper, "Shibboleth.")

TWO: Wait until I return. I shall inform our counselor(or President) of your wish. (walks briskly to front of room and makes his address.) There is a weary traveler outside our gate, seeking entrance.

(In the Masonic ritual, the Senior Deacon reports with the same message to the Worshipful Master)

COUNSELOR OR PRESIDENT: Let him be escorted in.

TWO: (Returns to door) You have permission to enter.

ONE: (Slowly leads candidate in and around the room three times. Counselor or President raps gavel or strikes bell once as candidate approaches each post. (Counting the President, there are 4 posts).

As the candidate passes each Post, a portion of Scripture is read. Romans 12:1, 12;2, Matthew 14:23 and Luke 14:23 are used in that order.

(On second and third trips around the room, each post rereads his Scripture as the candidate passes the respective posts.)

Following the tour, the candidate learns the Motto, "Share the Light of the world", taken from John 3:12.

Finally the candidate is led to the Counselor or President and kneels on one knee, in front of a Bible. and repeats the Royal Ambassador Pledge.

COUNSELOR OR PRESIDENT: To seal this pledge, you will place your hand on the Bible. (ONE holds Bible)

COUNSELOR OR PRESIDENT: Remove the blindfold so that (Candidate's name) can see the Bible. This is the key which opens the door to our fellowship so that we may work together in being Ambassadors for Christ...

(In the Masonic Entered Apprentice ritual, The candidate is led around the Lodge room three times by the right arm, in what is called the Rite of Circumambulation. As he passes each station of office, each one gives a loud rap on the floor. As the first rap is given by the Junior Warden, the Worshipful Master begins reciting the 133rd Psalm, timing it so that the Psalm is completed just as the candidate finishes his tour around the Lodge.)

(In masonry, the candidate is then instructed to advance to the Altar, "kneel on your naked left knee; place your right as to form a square, your body erect, your naked left hand supporting the Holy Bible, Square and Compasses, your naked right hand resting thereon.")

In that position, the candidate swears the Masonic oath or OBLIGATION, after being told by the Worshipful master that "The solemn engagements which you will be required to make before you can participate in our labors and privileges are made in the name of God, and once taken they can never be repudiated or laid aside; yet I am free to inform you that our obligation contains nothing which can conflict with your duty to God, your country, your neighbor or your self."

Of course, that is a blatant lie. The candidate is swearing an oath on the very Bible that prohibits such oath taking. The candidate will be obligating himself by, "binding myself under no less penalty than that of having my throat cut from ear to ear, my tongue torn out by its roots and buried in the rough sands of the sea, at low water mark where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty four hours, should I in the least knowingly or wittingly violate or transgress this my Entered Apprentice obligation. So help me God and keep me steadfast."

He is then told that , "In token of your sincerity of purpose in these solemn engagements, you will kiss the Holy Bible now open before you." The design of the darkened lodge room is such that a single light now shines just at this moment upon the Bible. In both the Lodge and the Royal Ambassador rituals, the attention of the candidate is directed to the Bible, while the oath taking is being conducted.
THE BISHOP INITIATION

Specifically designed for Pioneers, this ceremony is set up with an air of secrecy and has even more direct ties to Freemasonry. It is detailed on pages 26-28 of the referenced Brotherhood Manual.

In it, the Counselor is instructed to be secretive in the operation of the ritual. "It is suggested that this initiation service be known only to you, a few selected leaders, parents and those boys who have been initiated. This initiation is a reprint of an emphasis incorporated some years ago by Ivyloy Bishop, the first national director of the Royal Ambassador program."

The room is prepared such that there are sequential piles of cans, bricks, rocks, sticks and a ladder. A Bible sits upon a table. There is a second room opening up into this ritual room. The candidate is taken to this side room by the Director, where his coat is removed, his sleeves rolled up. The candidate is then securely blindfolded. He is then led to the door of the ritual room.

"The Director gives the secret knocks which are: two quick raps, pause, then two more quick knocks. The Counselor [inside] answers with the same knock, opens the door, asks who the candidate is, if he will keep the secrets, do the work and bear the responsibilities of a Royal Ambassador. After the candidate answers "yes," he is admitted."

After he is admitted he is told that he is going on a journey and must pray for guidance. After a short prayer, the candidate is given a heavy sack of bricks or rocks. "It should be about all he can carry to symbolize a real burden."

"Carrying the burden, the candidate is led two or three times around the room....At the end of the last round he is rudely halted by the counselor....(removes the burden). The candidate is then walked rapidly forward....a stick is held across his path in such a way that it lightly taps him on the forehead. He is told that this is to teach him that if on the journey of life he is proud and high headed and does not bow humbly to the will of God, he will meet with obstacles. He is told to bow very low, and so passes under the rod..."

"He is now marched over various rough objects in his path. These may include tin cans, bricks, a ladder lying flat on the floor, stairs, etc. All this time the director is holding him by the arm to prevent him from falling down, but allowing the candidate to stumble along."

"The candidate is halted and told that the path of life is not always easy, but is often rough and difficult to travel. He will find pitfalls and stumbling blocks along the way. He will not be able to see what is ahead, but if he, with faith puts his hand in the hand of Christ as he did with the director, he will be helped along the way."

The candidate is led to the ladder and similar analogy is used as he climbs the ladder being held by several of the men.

"The candidate is now conducted to a low table or chair on which lays an open Bible. The candidate kneels before this Bible; his right hand is placed over his heart and his left hand rests on the edge of the table touching the Bible. The candidate is told that is kneeling before an open Bible and that his right hand is over his heart as a symbol of sincerity. He is instructed that in this position he is to take the obligation of his chapter and if he will promise to keep the obligation, he is to answer "I do" after each of [a series of] questions."

Following the obligation, which deals with Christian lifestyle, the room is made entirely dark. The Counselor turns a flashlight on the Bible. With the candidate still kneeling, the blindfold is taken off and he is told that the world is in darkness without the Bible; that the Scriptures are God's light that comes from above..." The lights are turned on and the candidate is greeted by each member of the Chapter. This ritual is repeated for each initiate.

The parallels to Freemasonry are astonishing. First, we have the usual blindfolding, the sleeves rolled up and the secret raps and signals at the entry door between two ritual workers. The Brotherhood manual clearly instructs that the candidate must be asked if he is willing to "keep the secrets". This is asked in Freemasonic fashion prior to the young mans knowledge of any of the details of those secrets.

He must trust his Royal Ambassador leaders, just as he may be asked in later life in Freemasonry to trust the Worshipful Master. Of course, we have seen that the Worshipful Master will lie to the Entered Apprentice so that he is seduced into swearing the Masonic Obligation.

In the Pioneer ritual, the oath is also referred to as "the obligation of the Chapter." Again, the candidate is asked to promise to keep the obligation without knowledge of the actual text. Here, it is simple and deals only with the young mans relationship with Christ. However, in Freemasonry, it binds the candidate to occult principles.

The bait and switch method of occult indoctrination is clearly present here. Why is it necessary to blindfold and lead these young men around some form of a lodge room? Why are Christian leaders asking young men to violate Scriptural warnings and swear oaths of obligation? I believe it is to soften their spiritual sensitivities for the actual rites of the higher degrees of Freemasonry.

In the Masonic ritual, we find several very close parallels to the Pioneer initiation. Perhaps the easiest to understand is the Royal Arch or Seventh Degree ritual in the York Rite. This is the degree in which the candidate steps directly into the occult path of Gnostic enlightenment. Here, he learns the secret name of the Masonic god and takes upon himself the password of the Royal Arch member, I AM THAT I AM.

Candidates are presented in groups of threes and it requires that same number of Royal Arch Masons to pronounce the sacred name. The candidates are prepared by having their coats removed, bandages placed over their eyes (or blindfolded securely) and are tied together with a long rope, with about 3 feet of slack between them.

The candidates are presented as three sojourners from Babylon. A Royal Arch member plays the role of the Principal Sojourner who leads them by the rope. Once past the entry door and its responsive knocking or rapping and passwords, he speaks to the candidates, "Companions, you will follow me. I will bring the blind by a way they know not; I will lead them in paths they have not known; I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and will not forsake them. Stoop low brethren, he that humble himself shall be exalted."

Meanwhile Lodge members form two facing lines and interlock their fingers, forming a low arch under which the candidates must stoop and under which they are eventually forced to the floor to crawl their way through. This is a direct counterpart to the Pioneer ritual of stooping under the stick to "bow very low".

Notice the similarity between the Pioneer Director and the Principal Sojourner. Both are there to lead the blindfolded candidates through the perils of darkness and trials and bring them to the light. While the Director is portrayed as the example of Christ, the Principal Sojourner is not hampered by any such restriction, he and the Lodge represent the light, the truth and the way. Jesus is not mentioned.

Both rituals require the same form of solemn obligation, both ask its candidates to agree to the ritual and obligation in advance of knowledge and by virtue an implied but absent free will; both use the metaphor of darkness and light and both recognize the leader and group as the truth bearers. Both require the candidate to kneel before a Bible to take their obligation.

In the Royal Arch Degree, the three candidates are led around the Lodge room in a close equivalent of the Pioneer initiation.

"Each candidate shoulders his working tools and follows the Principal Sojourner, going single file to a corner of the room where a quantity of blocks or bricks are scattered around."

The candidates find a trap door and after returning to the High Priest of the Chapter to report their find, one of them eventually goes down into a lower chamber to first recover three small trying squares.. In this ritual, a ladder is usually used.

In the obligation of this Degree, the candidate swears an oath of severe proportions. In part he states, "I furthermore promise and swear, that I will keep all the secrets of a Companion Royal Arch Mason (when communicated to me as such, or I knowing them to be such), without exceptions." At the conclusion of this three page oath, the initiate is commanded to seal his oath by kissing the Bible (or other sacred book) seven times. One must wonder what dark secrets have been hid from the world of truth and justice under the guise of such fraternal fidelity.

The initiation ritual of the Shrine (The Ancient Arabic Order, Nobles Of The Mystic Shrine) is one that openly mocks the dignity of Christian integrity. The initiation ritual is designed with numerous sexual overtones and it is hard to imagine that any Shriner would want his wife or children to watch him.

In one of the least offensive parts of the Shriner ritual, we can see another connection to the Royal Ambassador initiation. "The candidates are hoodwinked and in stocking feet enter after three loud alarms (violent blows from the mallet). At first they proceed one by one on carpet, then upon a spread of corn husks, then a strip of stair cover or sheeting strewn with pebbles, followed by a ladder with close rounds, camp stools folded and a roller or any rough road most conveniently prepared out through hallways, etc."

We must realize that the young men going through the Bishop Initiation are being prepared to accept spiritual submission to the inner depths of Freemasonry without those spiritual warning bells ringing. Freemasonry will have that familiar spirit. It will bring to the surface those good feelings, that acceptance and approval by those in authority and those they love.

Perhaps you can now see what Larry Holly and Charles Burchett had their work cut out for them and why the National offices wanted nothing to do with the issue. To deal with it honestly would be the kiss of death to any career at the national level. I was told by one such leader, "No one dares touch this sacred cow. Too many influential Pastors and Lay leaders are dedicated Masons."
HOT POTATOES

A letter to Dr. Jerry Falwell in early 1988 brought this response regarding his position from Rick Lawreson, Theological correspondent for Dr. Falwell, dated March 23, 1988. "I have enclosed a commentary addressing the subject of Masons. I would encourage you to take time to study this commentary so that you will have a proper understanding of the position that Dr. Falwell and this ministry [Liberty Home Bible Institute/ Old-Time Gospel Hour] take with regard to this subject."

The printed commentary stated, "We appreciate the opportunity to be of assistance to you with regard to your inquiry regarding whether or not the Christian should be involved in Freemasonry.

"Without doubt, the Freemason organization and especially the Shriners and their particular interest in providing medical assistance to children, both burned and crippled, is to be commended. These humanitarian acts of charity are certainly showing forth the character of a Christlike compassion...

"It is unfortunate that there is not more charity being shown in today's society. Jesus Himself is our great example of One who willingly gave Himself compassionately to those who were in greatest need...

"Unfortunately, there are some individuals who condemn others to Hell for belonging to the Freemasons. They fail to understand the passage: For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved (John 3:17). People are not condemned to Hell because of some organization that they do or do not belong to, but people are condemned to Hell because of their unbelief in the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal saviour...

"Dr. Falwell has never belonged to the Mason organization and does not intend in the future to belong to the Mason organization. He feels that all of his time should be given over to the Christian service to which God has called him.

"Dr. Falwell does not take a public stand concerning Masonry; but neither does he let this be the issue that draws a line between fellowshipping with other Pastors."
James Draper

During that time of family turmoil, when my Dad became so violently upset over my book, The God Makers, and the publication of my first article on Masonry, I wrote to several national Christian leaders who were Masons to seek their counsel in dealing with the dark side of masonry and its specific effect upon my family. One was Dr. James Draper.

On June 4, 1984, when I wrote to James Draper, he was the President of the Southern Baptist Convention. In the letter, I shared that my family had been involved in Masonry for a number of generations, and that my questions and bold position had caused a great division in my family because of my father's strong defense of the fraternity.

I said that I had been told he was a 33rd degree Mason and that I needed some straight answers. "If I can't trust you, I might as well throw in the towel."

I asked him, "Dr. Draper, how can a Christ centered Christian put his thumb to his throat in an oath? How can a Christian call upon the name of Jaobulon as the true God? Please! My father and mother talk about ending their lives and Dad has a very bad heart. I need help quick! I pray that you can speak to this problem before it destroys my family."

Dr. Draper responded in a letter dated June 18,1984. _He stated that he was a 32nd degree Mason, having joined the lodge as a young preacher many years ago. He did not evade my implication that he might just be a stumbling block in this matter of my relationship with my father.

He wrote, "I do not recommend anyone become a part of the Masonic Lodge. I have not been active for many years. From what I read and the things I have been able to find out, some of the additional teachings of the Masonic Lodge are very heretical and certainly not conducive to Christian commitment."

"However, I have discovered that many Masons are not even aware of those things and feel they are actually extending their commitment through the Masonic Lodge. Do not ascribe to your father everything you have read about the Masons."

The letter closed with the remark, "Again, let me tell you that I do not recommend the lodge." It was signed, In His Love, Jimmy Draper.
JIMMY DRAPER DEMITS

In late July, I received a copy of Jimmy Draper's Letter of Demit, dated July 17,1984. Addressed to the Estelle Lodge No. 582, A.F. & A.M. in Euless, Texas, he described his membership as that of Blue Lodge masonry, having been raised to the degree of Master Mason. (In his letter to me, he had indicated he was raised to the 32nd degree. I am inclined to believe that his letter to me was in error on that point.)

Dr. Draper wrote that he had never felt his Christian walk challenged by his involvement in masonry. He said, "All this is to say that my experience with the masons has been a positive one." He wrote that while he had been inactive for the last 14 years, he had "maintained my dues in the organization. I have many cherished friendships in the Lodge and am grateful to God for them."

It wasn't difficult to see that Dr. Draper was struggling between his long term friendships with good people and the Biblical position regarding Freemasonry.

His letter of Demit continued, "For the past several years I have been studying the teachings of Freemasonry. Obviously, there is much taught in advanced degrees that I was not taught. (This is way I am sure he was in error stating that he was a 32nd Degree Mason...ed) In studying Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and other books produced by masons, I have learned that there are additional teachings to the ones I learned. While Freemasonry teaches the unity of God, it does not center on the Jehovah God of the Bible and His only son, Jesus Christ... while the Bible is honored, it is not viewed as the sole rule of truth. Good works and virtue are seen as the key to heaven."

"In these critical times in which we live, I find that I must carefully identify myself with the Lord Jesus Christ and no other entanglement must be seen as competing with that commitment. The Bible tells me that "If eating meat causes my brother to stumble, then I will not eat meat." It is obvious that my membership in the Freemasons is a stumbling block to others. For that reason I must ask that my name be removed from the rolls of the [Lodge]."

"I make this decision after many months and several years of prayer and study. My love for you as brothers in Christ remains constant. I am not on a crusade to discredit Freemasonry. I simply must make clear in my own life that my sole and supreme allegiance is to my Lord Jesus Christ and no vow must be seen as competing in any way with my love for and commitment to Him."

Let me note here that after the publication of this article, the SBA pulled these youth rituals that were so blatantly Masonic. The greater question is why were they there in the first place, and if I am not telling the truth, why pull them after I revealed them? Remember that most of the adult male membership of the SBA went through these Masonic rituals as youth. Is it any wonder that the SBA still sits joined at the hip to the Masonic leadership within the SBC?
Footnotes:

1. A RESOLUTION FOR THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION, C. Burchett, J. Holly, 1985, page 3.

2. STANDARD FREEMASONRY ILLUSTRATED, THE POWNER CO, CHICAGO, 1983, pages 96-97

3. IBID, page 97

4. IBID, page 98

5. IBID

6. IBID

7. IBID

8. IBID, page 171

9. IBID, page 107

10. IBID, page106

11. IBID, page 109

12. DUNCAN'S MASONIC RITUAL AND MONITOR, Malcolm C. Duncan, Ezra Cook Publ., Chicago, 1974, page 226

13. IBID, page 228

14. IBID, pages 241

15. IBID, Royal Arch Oath, page 230

16. THE MYSTIC SHRINE, AN ILLUSTRATED RITUAL, Ezra Cook Publ., Chicago, Ill, 1975. page 32.

17. Letter Dated March 23, 1988, Rick Lawrenson, enclosure; notes entitled, Masons

18. Letter dated June 18,1984 James T. Draper, on file

SOUTHERN BAPTISTS AND FREEMASONRY
THE STORY GOES ON....AND ON

by Ed Decker

While our Freemasonry Conference was in session, the talk was all about the ongoing study and eventual Southern Baptist Convention's denominational vote on Freemasonry. Called to do a fair study by the Convention a year earlier, the Home Missions Board appointed Dr. Gary Leazer to head up an unbiased review. It turned into a can of worms for everyone involved.

As things turned out, the report became somewhat tainted when it was discovered that Dr. Gary Leazer, the man in charge of the study, was getting "clandestine" help in its preparation from Masonic Friends.

A letter surfaced during the study, written by Leazer to one of the Masonic leaders, thanking him for all the help and making several depreciating remarks concerning those who were opposed to the Lodge. That letter had Leazer removed from his job as head of the study, but both Leazer and the report continued on at the HMB without correction. The report went to the floor of the convention as prepared by Leazer and his Masonic tutors.

Months after the vote was taken, in favor of the Masonic position, Dr. Leazer's obvious ties to the Lodge created a new stir within the denomination when a copy of a speech he had made at a Masonic gathering reached the wrong hands..

In the Columbus Dispatch, dated 11-6-93, Religious News Service writer, David Anderson reported,

"Larry Lewis, president of the Home Missions Board, said he requested Leazer's resignation for "Gross insubordination" following publication in October of a speech Leazer gave to a Masonic group.

Lewis said Leazer's Aug. 8 speech violated an order to "refrain from any and all involvement in the Freemasonry issue." Lewis told Baptist Press, the denomination's official news agency, he had accepted Leazer's resignation Oct. 22.

"He has clearly violated that directive and in doing so has demonstrated his unwillingness to submit to the authority of his supervisors, "Lewis said. Whether Baptists can also be members of a Masonic Lodge has been a volatile issue."

The Convention and the Vote: The afterglow

It's an amazing thing that after the smoke had all settled, the Freemasons declared a mighty victory at the SBC. In the August/93 Scottish Rite Journal, (pp. 3-6) The Grand Commander, C. Fred Kleinknecht, called the vote historic, saying, "this [vote was the] significant turning point for modern Freemasonry."

And well it might be. The Masonic Fraternity believes it has withstood its most severe challenge in more than a century.

To the shame of the SBC's commitment to Biblical standards, the Convention, by an overwhelming majority approved the report and recommendation on Freemasonry issued by the SBC Home Missions Board, which listed a number of things about Freemasonry that were compatible with Christianity and a number of things that were not. The report went on to say that membership in a Masonic order was the business of the individual, not the church.

The Masonic Grand Commander called it a great victory. He stated that by its vote, the SBC had "... joined Freemasonry in its elevation of individual conscience as the guide to personal beliefs and actions."

In a letter addressed to All Active Members, Deputies of the Supreme Council, Representatives and Secretaries, dated June 21, 1993, Kleinknecht again inferred that vote was a great victory for the craft. He stated,

"The Board's [Home Missions Board] report, based on a nearly year-long study by the SBC's Interfaith Witness Department, rejects the allegation that Freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity and Southern Baptist Doctrine."

It sure sounded like a victory for the craft so far, but he mentioned

one problem a little further in his letter. He said, "Although the report contains 8 unjustified, we feel, specific criticisms of Freemasonry, it also includes several commendations of Freemasonry."

Let's back up just a hair. The Leazer affair proved without doubt that the Masons, themselves, were involved with the report and aided the man in charge of writing the report. Even then, they were unable to prevent the mention of some specific criticisms of Freemasonry.

Next, the Masons made an unprecedented push to get control of the Convention. The same Grand Commander wrote a letter to all those addressed above, plus the Editors of all Masonic Publications and said that "It is crucial that Masons who are Southern Baptists become messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention."

On the back of Kleinknecht's letter was a 12 step plan for every Baptist Mason to follow in getting to be a Messenger at the SBC. The Masons rallied as never before in their history. Only the Masons know what percent of the 17,800 Messengers were Masons.

Yet, in spite of the enormous efforts by the Masons, the report still listed a number of things so wrong with Freemasonry, that if they were reviewed in context of Biblical Christianity, no Christian could truly be a Mason. This is what they said:

The Eight Problems With Freemasonry

1. The prevalent use of offensive concepts, titles, and terms such as "Worshipful Master" for the leaders of the lodge; references to their buildings as "mosques," "shrines," or "temples"; and the use of such words as "Abaddon" and Jah-Bul-On," the so-called secret name of God. To many, these terms are not only offensive but sacrilegious.

2. The use of archaic, offensive rituals and so-called "bloody oaths" or "obligations," among those being that promised by the Entered Apprentice: [listed in original] or that of the Fellow Craft degree: [listed in original] Or that of the Master Mason: [listed in original] Or that of other advanced degrees with required rituals considered by many to be pagan and incompatible with Christian faith and practice.

Even though these oaths, obligations and rituals may or may not be taken seriously by the initiate, it is inappropriate for a Christian to "sincerely promise and swear," with a hand on the Holy Bible, any such promises or oaths, or to participate in any such pagan rituals.

3. The recommended readings in pursuance of advanced degrees, of religions and philosophies, which are undeniably pagan and/or occult, such as much of the writings of Albert Pike, Albert Mackey, Manly Hall, Rex Hutchins, W.L. Wilmhurst and other such authors; along with their works, such as Morals and Dogma, A Bridge to Light, An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and The Meaning of Masonry.

4. The reference to the Bible placed on the altar of the lodge as the "furniture of the lodge," comparing it to the square and compass rather than giving it the supreme place in the lodge.

5. The prevalent use of the term "light" which some may understand as a reference to salvation rather than knowledge or truth.

6. The implication that salvation may be attained by one's good works, implicit in the statement found in some

Masonic writings that "Masonry is continually reminded of that purity of life and conduct which is necessary to obtain admittance into the Celestial Lodge above where the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides." (LA Monitor, page 79)

Even though many Masons understand that the "purity of life and conduct" can only be achieved through faith in Jesus Christ, others may be led to believe they can earn salvation by living a pure life with good conduct.

7. The heresy of Universalism (the belief all people will eventually be saved), which permeates the writings of many Masonic authors, which is a doctrine inconsistent with New Testament teaching.

8. The refusal of most lodges (although not all) to admit for membership African Americans.

(As reported by the Home Missions Board, SBC, 1350 Spring Street NW, Atlanta, GA 30367-5601)

On the positive side, the report commended the Masons for its many charitable endeavors, hospitals, burn centers. It acknowledged that many outstanding Christians and Southern Baptists now and in the past have been Masons.

They recognized that many of the tenets and teachings of some Grand Lodges could be considered compatible and supportive of the Christian faith and practice, such as a strong emphasis on honesty, integrity, industry and character and the insistence that every member believe in [a] God. The report then quoted a number of Biblical quotes from the Texas Monitor to show that there are some explicit references to the Christian faith.

However, the report cautioned that "To be sure, not all Grand Lodges affirm Christian Doctrine, and many do not declare Jesus as the unique Son of God; but many do, and for this we commend them."(Ibid.)

Their final statement concludes with this:

"We exhort Southern Baptists to prayerfully and carefully evaluate Freemasonry in the light of the Lordship of Christ, the teachings of the Scripture, and the findings of this report, as led by the Holy Spirit of God" (Ibid.)

And we say that if a Christian Mason truly did that he would honestly have to leave the Lodge.

Dr. James Holly is the President of Mission and Ministry to Men, 550 N. 10th Street, Beaumont, TX 77702. He has been God's man of the hour for the Southern Baptists. He has taken a strong stand time and again both as an official Messenger to the Convention, and as an individual member of the denomination. He has almost single-handedly brought this issue to the place where Freemasonry is being exposed as the terrible threat it truly is to the church.

Dr. Holly has been cursed, slandered and defamed for his efforts, but continues to demand that the HMB admit that the report was slanted and that the Convention vote was skewed in favor of the many Baptist Masons. He has continued to ask the SBC leaders to re-evaluate their stand. In a recent letter to the Home Mission Executive Committee, dated 2/9/94, He responded to a HMB Resolution justifying their SBC report.

"The Executive Committee's affirmation of its own actions is disingenuous. It was Dr. Lewis himself who said that the HMB was in a 'no win situation' in regard to the study of Freemasonry. It was Dr. Lewis himself who said that if the HMB found for the Lodge or if they found against the Lodge the HMB would lose money. The Executive Committee's praise of its own work rings hollow in the face of the obvious deficiencies of the HMB' handling of the study of Freemasonry...... the HMB's A Study of Freemasonry is not objective, scholarly or thorough."

Until the Southern Baptists take on this issue from a Biblical position and not a political one, the denomination will wallow in self destructive cover-up after cover-up. Pray that the Holy Spirit of God will break through the darkness in high places and set the SBC free.

Church of England Backs off from
its Strong Stand on Freemasonry

In an attempt at soothing the ruffled feathers of the English Masonic Brotherhood, The New Archbishop of Canterbury tries to recover from a case of foot in mouth disorder.

Several years ago, the Church of England issued a statement declaring the rituals and practices of the Lodge were incompatible with Christianity. This was in spite of the large numbers of Masons who were also members of the church.

"There are a number of very fundamental reasons to question the compatibility of Freemasonry with Christianity."
(High Anglican Church of England Synod, official publication "Freemasonry & Christianity: are they compatible?" page 40, July 1987).

While Archbishop Williams was reluctant to give in on his statement of the incompatibility of the Lodge to Christianity, this apology has given the Masons a tool to use in regaining controls of local parishes.

We would pray that the Archbishop would review how his ‘apology’ is being twisted and make a Godly, strong stand on the principles of his faith. – ED

Rowan Williams apologizes to Freemasons
By Chris Hastings and Elizabeth Day The Daily Telegraph, London, England
(Filed: 20/04/2003)

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has been forced to apologize to Britain's 330,000 Freemasons after he said that their beliefs were incompatible with Christianity and that he had rejected them from senior posts in his diocese.

Dr Williams has written to Robert Morrow, the Grand Secretary of the United Grand Lodge of England, in an attempt to defuse the row prompted by comments he made last year. In his letter, the Archbishop apologizes for the "distress" he caused and discloses that his own father was a member of the Craft.

Freemasons, many of whom are active members of the Church of England, reacted angrily to his disclosure that he "had real misgivings about the compatibility of Masonry and Christian profession" and by his admission that, as Bishop of Monmouth, he had blocked the appointment of Freemasons to senior appointments……….

He Continued….: "I have been sorry to learn of the distress of a considerable number of Freemasons . . . In replying to private correspondence, I had no intention of starting a public debate nor of questioning the good faith and generosity of individual Freemasons and I regret the tone and content of the media coverage."

He added: "The quoted statements about the 'satanic' character of the Masonic ceremonies and other matters did not come from me and do not represent my judgment. Since my late father was a member of the Craft for many years, I have had every opportunity of observing the probity of individual members." Dr Williams does not, in his letter, deny that he has misgivings about the role of Freemasons within the Church.

He wrote: "Where anxieties exist, however, they are in relation not to Freemasonry but to Christian ministers subscribing to what could be and often is understood [or misunderstood] as a private system of profession and initiation, involving the taking of oaths of loyalty."

In an earlier article in the Official Church of England Newspaper, The Evangelical Alliance praised Williams’ earlier stand opposing Masonry. Number: 5642 Date: 11/21/02

EA support for Dr Williams

The Evangelical Alliance has supported Rowan Williams’ statement on freemasonry. The Archbishop of Canterbury-designate questioned the “compatibility” of freemasonry with Christian teaching in a letter to Hugh Sinclair, an author researching the subject.

The EA sent out a statement in which they “welcome and support” Dr Williams’ views on the subject of freemasonry within the church.

Dr Williams, in a personal letter, makes clear his opposition to the appointment of freemasons within the clergy. He said, “I have resisted the appointment of known masons to certain senior posts. I have real misgivings about the compatibility of masonry and Christian profession.”

The EA has concerns about the teachings and rituals of freemasonry. David Hilborn, the theological adviser to the Alliance, believes that freemasonry compromises “the unique revelation of God in Christ. In freemasonry it seems that there is an attempt to go beyond this specific revelation to a more general view of God”. There were further concerns about the “mysticism and Gnosticism” of the masonry system. Mr Hilborn feels that freemasonry reduces the importance of Christ, making him into a “reformer” comparable to Confucius or Zoroaster. The EA also sees freemasonry as a “works” religion. “In freemasonry at the end of the day salvation is through good works”.

The EA is keen to stress that the Archbishop’s remarks were “a personal response to a personal letter”, and do not want to get embroiled in an Anglican dispute. “The EA is a pan-evangelical body and we have never interfered with appointments,” he said.

That said, he makes it clear that the EA is “very keen to critique the Archbishop” when that is right. For example, the EA clearly opposed Williams’s attendance at a druidical ceremony earlier this year.

Proclamation To the Christian Churches Regarding the Participation of Christians in Freemasonry

# Whereas, Freemasonry declares that its Deity, the "Great Architect of the Universe," can be worshipped by all men, whether they be Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, or Hindus, without controversy; while the Bible teaches that only through Jesus Christ can God be worshipped (John 14:6, 1 Timothy 2:5, 1 John 2:22-23); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry refuses to acknowledge the unique Godhood of Jesus Christ or that He died for our sins and rose from the dead; while the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is truly God Almighty come in the flesh who died for our sins and rose again (John 1:1-14, Col.1:15, 2:9; 1 Cor.15:4); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry denies the unique and inerrant character of the Holy Bible as the Word of God by saying that it is no better or worse than any other holy book; while the Bible teaches of itself that it is truly the inspired Word of God (2 Tim.3:16, Mt.5:18, 1 Pet.1:25, Ps.119:89; 12:6-7; 19:7-8); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry declares than man can be saved by his own labors without faith in Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross ; while the Bible teaches that a person can only be saved by grace, through faith in Christ (Rom.10:9-10, Eph.2:8-9); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry blasphemes the name of God by associating it with pagan fertility gods such as Ba'al; while the Bible affirms the absolute holiness, separateness and majesty of God's name (Ex.20:2-7, Deut.6:4, Ps.8:1, 29:2); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry refuses to warn its members about the dangers of an everlasting hell; while the Bible is insistent and urgent in its warnings concerning the dangers of damnation (Matt.13:49-50, 25:31-46; 2 Thess.1:7-9); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry requires that men swear oaths on a Bible in the name of God involving mutilation and murder of human beings; while the New Testament forbids the taking of oaths (Matt.5:34-37, Jas.5:12) and the Bible forbids taking God's name in vain and committing murder (Ex.20:7, 13); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry links its members in solemn, spiritual bondage to one another, irrespective of members' creeds; while the Bible forbids Christians from being "unequally yoked" with unbelievers (2 Cor.6:14-17, Rev.18:1-4); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry forbids a Christian Mason from witnessing Jesus Christ to his fellow lodge members who are unsaved; while Jesus Himself commands His Church to preach the gospel to everyone (Matt.28:19, Mark 16:15); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry aims at the improvement of the natural man only (1 Cor. 2:14, Col.2:8); thus, incorrectly channeling by bad interpretation vital spiritual terms (2 Pet. 3:16); and
# Whereas, Freemasonry insists on keeping its supposedly valuable truths bound under the most serious of secret oaths and available only to a very few, while the Bible does not allow for such secrecy (Matt.10:26-27; John 18:20; Acts 26:26) and
# Whereas, Freemasonry demands that its members call its leaders titles like "Worshipful Master," and kneel before them; the Bible commands us to call no one master, save Jesus (Matt.6:24; 23:8-10) and to worship none, save God (Matt.4:10; Acts 10:25-26; Rev.22:8-9); and

Whereas, Freemasonry absorbs the loyalties (Luke 9:62), time (Eph.5:16), emotional and spiritual resources and finances of Christians Masons away from the God-ordained tasks of the Church such as overseas missions, evangelism, and taking care of the poor to the glory of Jesus' name (Matt.6:1-3, 28:19; Luke 6:38; Jas.1:27). Therefore, we, as humble servants of Jesus Christ and ministers of His gospel call upon all pastors and Christian leaders of all denominations to take a firm stand in their preaching against the cult of Freemasonry-a rival religion to Christianity which has too long been winked at, tolerated, or even praised with Christian churches! "How long halt ye between two opinions? If the LORD be God follow him: but if Ba'al, then follow him" - 1 Kgs 18:21.

Albert Pike 33o Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, 1966, p.226 and Albert Mackey, 33o Mackey’s Revised Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, 1966, pp.8-9.

ibid., p.525; also see Henry Clausen 33o Practice and Procedure for the Scottish Rite, 1981, pp.75-77, R.S. Clymer, The Mysticism of Masonry, 1900, p.47; and J.D. Buck, Symbolism of Mystic Masonry, 1925, p.57.

Manly P. Hall, 33o The Lost Keys of Freemasonry, 1976, p.90-91.

Pike, op.cit., p.539.

Mackey, op.cit, p. 133; also Henry W. Coil, Coil’s Masonic Encyclopedia; 1961; p.520; and Oliver Day Street, Symbolism of the the Three Degrees; 1924; pp 44-45 .

Simmons and Macoy, Standard Masonic Monitor of the Degrees of Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft and Master Mason, 1984, p.111, 125; also C. H. Lacquement, “Freemasonry and Organized Religions,” The Pennsylvania Freemason (February, 1989), p.7.

Malcolm C. Duncan, Duncan’s Masonic Ritual and Monitor, 1974, p.224-5, 250-51.

Masonic Monitor of the Degrees of Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft and Master Mason (F.& A.M., Arkansas), 1983, p.15

Duncan, op.cit, pp.35, 65, 96.

ibid., p.36.

Pike, op.cit., p.167; Mackey, op.cit, 1:192; and J. Blanchard, Scottish Rite Masonry Illustrated, 1979, 2:47.

Duncan, p.13.

Christ or the Lodge?
A Presbyterian Report on Freemasonry

Introduction

At the ninth General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, meeting at Rochester, New York, June 2–5, 1942, the Committee on Secret Societies presented its report. The Assembly instructed the Committee to send this report to the ministers and sessions of the Church for their study. The report deals with a matter of such timely importance that the Committee on Christian Education has decided to publish it in its series of “Tracts for Today.”

The Committee which drew up the report consisted of R. B. Kuiper, Chairman, Oscar Holkeboer, Arthur O. Olson, Robert A. Wallace, and Paul Woolley. The report is printed exactly as it appeared in the minutes of the ninth General Assembly, except that two introductory paragraphs have been omitted. The Committee on Christian Education is responsible for the title.

I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

1. Masonry and Other Secret Organizations

The mandate given this committee speaks of oath-bound secret societies in general. The committee frankly admits that it has not attempted a detailed investigation of all such societies. To accomplish that would have required even more time than was devoted to the preparation of this report, and much more time than the members of the committee had at their disposal. It may also be doubted whether so comprehensive an investigation is necessary. In the main the committee has restricted its study to that society which is known as the Ancient Order of Free and Accepted Masons. It should be borne in mind that Freemasonry, which is the oldest of the larger secret orders in this country, is generally admitted also to be their mother. Such popular orders as the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, the Knights of Pythias, the Loyal Order of Moose, the Independent Order of Odd-Fellows, the Improved Order of Red Men, the Woodmen of the World and the Order of the Eastern Star are all of them in many ways similar to their earlier prototype, the Masonic order. Their rituals, secrets, terms of membership, objects and purposes have in varying degree characteristics like those of Masonry. It follows that, if the objections which have been taken to Masonry are well taken, then these same objections apply also in the main to the other orders mentioned and to whatever smaller orders of similar character may exist.

2. Is Reliable Information Available?

An objection frequently raised to any study of secret orders by non-members takes the form of the statement: You cannot get any reliable information. It may be said categorically that, in the case of the major orders, particularly the Order of Free and Accepted Masons, this statement is not correct. Reliable information concerning all points of major importance, and concerning many others that are not important, is accessible to any who will make a proper study of the matter.

The so-called secrets of Masonry constitute only a portion of the total activity of the order. The general ideals of Masonry and the history and philosophy of the order have been developed by numerous Masonic and non-Masonic writers in books designed for the general public as well as for Masons. Of course, even Masonic writers do not always agree fully with one another about these matters, but that is true of any field of research. On the whole the agreement among them is striking.

Much of the Masonic ritual is of a non-secret character, and handbooks concerning speeches, statements, prayers and similar matters are published without secrecy. A great mass of useful information concerning the relationship of the order to Christianity is available from volumes of this character.

Further, the so-called ceremonies, grips, passwords and such matters are very largely available through printings by recognized Masonic publishing houses in cipher code. These cipher codes, at least some of them, are not difficult to read. They can be used as original sources of information, and also as checks by which to determine the accuracy of the plain English rituals which have been published by non-Masonic sources. Among the texts and descriptions published by such sources are those emanating from individuals who, for one reason or another, have demitted their membership in the Masonic order. When their evidence agrees with that from Masonic sources something of a check in both directions is provided. This committee has had the privilege of personally interviewing and questioning a former member of the Masonic order who was anxious to provide as much information as desired about the body.

It is worth noting that a Mason, Eugen Lennhoff, who has written one of the most comprehensive and well-balanced books about Masonry, admits that the signs, words and grips, and copies of the Ritual and explanations of the symbols, are obtainable by anyone (The Freemasons, p, 18). And in his Introduction to Free Masonry, Carl H. Claudy, also a Mason, says: “There is no obligation of secrecy regarding the truths taught by Freemasonry, otherwise such a book as this could not lawfully be written” (vol. I, p. 34).

Masonic libraries containing books by Masons of high degree and excellent standing are open to the public. One of these is the Scottish Rite Library of Chicago. Masonic literature may be purchased of the Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company of New York City.

For further information on these particular matters the following books, among others, may be consulted:
Eugen Lennhoff: The Freemasons. Translated by Einar Frame. London, Methuen, 1934.
Theodore Graebner: A Treatise on Freemasonry. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1914.
Theodore Graebner: The Secret Empire. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1927.

3. Criticisms That Do Not Seem Weighty

Certain criticisms are sometimes offered with relation to secret orders which do not seem to this committee to be of such weight as to constitute valid reasons for objection.

One of these is the objection to secrecy as such. Obviously, there is nothing wrong in secrecy at the proper time and place. Every family has its secrets. Without secrecy in their preparation, academic examinations could hardly be conducted in our institutions of learning. The pastors and sessions of our churches often deal with personal matters which are much better not divulged to the congregation. Our Lord Himself occasionally commanded his disciples not to reveal to all men things which He told them privately. To be sure, in certain circumstances secrecy is sinful, but it may not be said that secrecy is evil in every instance.

Another objection in the minds of some is to the taking of any oaths whatsoever. Whether or not the oaths required of Masons are reprehensible will be considered at another point in this report. Just now the committee contends merely that the taking of an oath is not to be condemned under any and all circumstances. The Westminster Confession of Faith states that “a lawful oath, being imposed by lawful authority, in such matters, ought to be taken” (XXII, 2).

Still another objection sometimes brought against Masonry concerns the alleged frivolous character of the symbols, garbs and ritualistic articles used. In particular instances criticism of such matters may be and, as will be pointed out later on, actually is well grounded. But a sweeping charge of frivolity should, in the opinion of this committee, be avoided. The actual meaning, significance and value of symbols, as measured in terms of emotional power, are difficult for a non-participant correctly to gauge. What seems frivolous to an outsider may in actuality not be so at all to the initiate.

Fault has been found with Masonry for barring from membership women, negroes and the physically deformed. The worst that can be said about this provision is that it belies Masonry’s boast of universalism. There does indeed seem to be an inconsistency here. But, apart from that, care should be taken not to stress this objection out of measure. Prominent Masons have founded the Order of the Eastern Star for women. The fact that some lodges offer certain insurance benefits to members may be one reason among others for restricting membership to reasonably “good risks.” And it surely cannot be said that every organization is in duty bound to open its doors to men of any and every race.

There are those who interpret “the separated life” so as to rule out the membership of believers together with unbelievers in any organization whatever. They customarily quote 2 Corinthians 6:14–18 to substantiate this view. But that is a serious error. The passage of Scripture just cited condemns the fellowship of Christians and pagans specifically in the matter of religion and worship. To assert that believers may not hold membership with unbelievers in a book club or an automobile club, for instance, savors strongly of Anabaptistic separatism. The apostle Paul took pains to tell members of the Corinthian church that he did not mean that they should have no company with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous and extortioners, or idolaters, for then they would needs have to go out of the world (1 Corinthians 5:9). Therefore, to condemn membership of a Christian in the Masonic order on the sole ground that this order contains unbelievers, in unwarranted.

II. THE RELIGION OF MASONRY

1. The Issue Stated

The foregoing paragraph has named the point on which this investigation must be centered. Is Masonry a religious order, or is it not? That is the crucial question. If it should prove that the answer to this question must be affirmative, then the further question, no less crucial than the first, will arise, what the religion of Masonry is. If it is Christianity, well and good. If it is anything but Christianity, the religion of Masonry is necessarily false, for it is axiomatic that Christianity is the only true religion. And in that case no Christian may have communion with Masonry.

2. Is Masonry a Religion?

On this score the evidence is overwhelming. There is no room for any reasonable doubt as to Masonry’s being a religion. Not only do the symbols, rites and temples of this order point unmistakably to it as a religion, but a great many Masonic authors of note emphatically declare it to be just that. Of almost numberless quotations that could be given here the committee has selected a few.

J. S. M. Ward, the author of several standard Masonic works, defines religion as “a system of teaching moral truth associated with a belief in God” and then declares: “I consider Freemasonry is a sufficiently organized school of mysticism to be entitled to be called a religion.” He goes on to say: “I boldly aver that Freemasonry is a religion, yet in no way conflicts with any other religion, unless that religion holds that no one outside its portals can be saved” (Freemasonry: Its Aims and Ideals, pp. 182, 185, 187).

T. S. Webb says in his Masonic Monitor: “The meeting of a Masonic Lodge is strictly a religious ceremony. The religious tenets of Masonry are few, simple, but fundamental. No lodge or Masonic assembly can be regularly opened or closed without prayer” (p. 284).

Albert G. Mackey, General High Priest of the General Grand Chapter of the United States, and the author of numerous works on Masonry, has this to say: “Freemasonry is emphatically a religious institution; it teaches the existence of God. It points to the celestial canopy above where is the Eternal Lodge and where He presides. It instructs us in the way to reach the portals of that distant temple” The Mystic Tie, p. 32). And in his Lexicon of Freemasonry the same celebrated authority asserts: “The religion, then, of Masonry is pure Theism” (p. 404).

Extremely significant is the testimony of Joseph Fort Newton, a zealous advocate of Masonic principles. He deplores the fact that within the lodge there are many who regard it as “a mere social order inculcating ethical ideals and practicing philanthropy.” He continues: “As some of us prefer to put it, Masonry is not a religion but Religion—not a church but a worship, in which men of all religions may unite” (The Religion of Masonry, pp. 10, 11). With this agrees A. G. Mackey’s declaration: “The truth is that Masonry is undoubtedly a religious institution, its religion being of that universal kind in which all men agree” (Textbook of Masonic Jurisdiction, p. 95).

To be sure, H. L. Haywood says that “there is no such thing as a Masonic philosophy, just as there is no such thing as a Masonic religion” (The Great Teachings of Masonry, p. 18). But on careful analysis it becomes clear that he means that Masonry is not to be put in a class with other religions; in a word, that it is a super-religion. For he asserts that Masonry has a religious foundation all its own and that its religion is universal (Idem, p. 99). No doubt, Haywood would agree with Newton that “Masonry is not a religion, but Religion.”

Such is the unmistakable testimony, not of critics of Masonry, but of Masonic authors who are recognized by Masonry itself as authorities.

3. The Religion of Masonry Evaluated

In seeking to evaluate the religion of Masonry our standard must be Christianity, the one true religion. That Masonry cannot be simply non-Christian is self-evident. Neutrality with reference to Christianity is an obvious impossibility. Either Masonry as a religion is in agreement with Christianity, or it must be at odds with Christianity. Either it is Christian, or it must be anti-Christian. A comparison on several important points of the religious teaching of Masonry with that of Christianity should reveal which of these two possibilities in the abstract is concrete reality.

a. The Origin of Masonic Religion

Christianity is based squarely upon God’s supernatural revelation in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Many Masonic authorities take pains to deny that Masonry is based upon the Bible. A. G. Mackey’s Encyclopedia of Freemasonry informs us that in Masonry the Bible is regarded only as a symbol of the will of God and is on a par with the sacred books of other religions (p. 104). And in speaking of the Blue Lodge, which is the foundation of all Masonry, both the York Rite and the Scottish Rite, Chase’s Digest of Masonic Law declares: “Blue Lodge Masonry has nothing whatever to do with the Bible; if it did, it would not be Masonry, it would be something else” (p. 207).

Many authorities maintain that Masonry is rooted in ancient paganism. For example, J. S. M. Ward, who after fourteen years of research wrote his greatest book, Freemasonry and the Ancient Gods, traces the religious tenets of Masonry back to the religions of India and ancient Mexico and the mysteries of pagan Egypt and Rome (for example, p. 341). And A. T. C. Pierson, another celebrated interpreter of Masonry, says in his Traditions, Origin and Early History of Freemasonry that Masonic religion comes from the Orient and has reference to primitive religion, whose first occupation was the worship of the sun (p. 34). Several Masonic authors put forth the claim that Masonry represents the oldest religious system in the world and constitutes the common basis on which all the religious systems of history were founded.

Whatever one may think of Masonry’s claims to antiquity, it is clear that James Putt, a critic of Masonry, states the case well when he concludes as to the origin of Masonry: “This, then, is the situation. Masonry claims to be the essence of all religions. It guards the most ancient esoteric worship. It aims at a universal religion on the basis of the religious aspirations of man. It is naturalistic and evolutionistic rather than supernaturalistic and revelationary” (Masonry, p. 24).

The God of Christianity is the God of the Bible, the Holy Trinity. Is He also the God of Masonry, or is Masonry’s God another? Recognized Masonic authorities themselves supply the answer.

Says T. S. Webb in his Masonic Monitor: “So broad is the religion of Masonry, and so carefully are all sectarian tenets excluded from the system, that the Christian, the Jew, and the Mohammedan, in all their numberless sects and divisions, may and do harmoniously combine in its moral and intellectual work, with the Buddhist, the Parsee, the Confucian, and the worshiper of Deity under every form” (p. 285). This amounts to saying that the God of Masonry is that Deity which is worshiped by the adherents of all religions alike. That the Christian conception of God differs essentially from all other conceptions of God and that the God of the Bible is God alone—these truths are ignored and by necessary implication denied.

In perfect harmony with Webb’s teaching concerning the God of Masonry is J. S. M. Ward’s statement: “Freemasonry has taught each man can, by himself work out his own conception of God and thereby achieve salvation” (Freemasonry: Its Aims and Ideals, p. 187). But Christianity maintains that only the God who has revealed Himself in the Bible is truly God and that all other Gods, products as they are of human speculation, are idols.

The divine transcendence is boldly denied by J. F. Newton. After lauding as the three great rituals of the human race the Prajapati ritual of ancient Hinduism, the Mass of the Christian Church and the Third Degree of Masonry, he says: “These testify to the profoundest insight of the human soul that God becomes man and that man may become God” (The Religion of Masonry, p. 37).

In a pamphlet entitled The Relation of the Liberal Churches and the Fraternal Orders, and published by the American Unitarian Association, E. A. Coil, minister of the First Unitarian Society of Marietta, Ohio, and one-time Worshipful Master of the Masonic Lodge of that city, pleads for closer cooperation between the liberal churches and the fraternal orders. He bases his plea on the contention that both have essentially the same conception of God. Both, he holds, believe in the universal fatherhood of God (p. 9). With this agrees J. F. Newton’s assertion: “The basis of our Temple of Fraternity rests back upon the reality of the Divine Fatherhood” (The Religion of Masonry, p. 116). Needless to say, the universal Father of all mankind is not the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ and of those who through faith in Him have received the right to be called the sons of God (John 1:12).

c. Masonry and the Word of God

As was already shown, Masonry disclaims being founded upon the Bible. Says A. G. Mackey: “Within a few years an attempt has been made by some Grand Lodges to add to these simple moral and religious qualifications another, which requires a belief in the divine authenticity of the Scriptures. It is much to be regretted that Masons will sometimes forget the fundamental law of their institution, and endeavor to add or detract from the perfect integrity of the building as it was left them by their predecessors. Whenever this is done, the beauty of our temple must suffer. Thus, in the instance here referred to, the fundamental law of Masonry requires only a belief in the Supreme Architect of the universe, and in a future life, while it says with peculiar toleration, that in all matters of religious belief Masons are only expected to be of that religion in which all men agree. Under the shelter of this wise provision, the Christian and the Jews, the Mohammedan and the Brahmin are permitted to unite around a common altar, and Masonry becomes in practice, as well as in theory, universal” (Text-book of Masonic Jurisprudence, pp. 94, 95).

It is significant, however that in Masonic ritual in use in so-called Christian lands, as Great Britain and the United States, quotations from Holy Scripture abound. It cannot be doubted that this fact has blinded the eyes of many to the real character of the Masonic order. And yet, no keen discernment is required to penetrate this thin veil of seeming Christianity. Regarding itself as the essence of all religions, Masonry has no difficulty adapting itself to the prevailing religion of any land. Therefore, in a historically Christian country like America it employs the Bible in its ritual and by the same token it employs the Koran in Moslem countries. As a matter of fact, eminent Masons, such as A. G. Mackey, openly avow that for them the Bible and the sacred books of other religions are all in a class (Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, p. 104).

Frequently in Masonic ritual the inspired Word of God is seriously mutilated, and in many instances this mutilation consists in the omission of the name of Jesus Christ. In Mackey’s Masonic Ritualist the name of Christ is omitted from 1 Peter 2:5 (p. 271), 2 Thessalonians 3:6 (p.348), and 2 Thessalonians 3:12 (p. 349). With reference to the elision of the Saviour’s name from 1 Peter 2:5 the following explanation is offered: “The passages are taken, with slight but necessary modifications from the First Epistle of Peter” (p. 272). The reason for this modification is obvious. Masonry does not claim to be Christian but, on the contrary, purports to be the essence of all religions; therefore, its ritual has no place for distinctly Christian material. That the omission of the Name which is above every name is described as a slight but necessary modification speaks volumes.

In view of the foregoing it is to be expected that the name of Christ would be omitted also from the prayers offered in the lodge. As a matter of fact W. P. Loveless, a former Masonic chaplain who seceded, has this to say: “As Chaplain in the Masonic Lodge I offered the prayers of the Lodge and heard many others offered, but never one in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. His name is excluded” (The Christian and Secret Societies, p. 14).

Time and again in Masonic ritual portions of the Word of God are erroneously—and, it must be said, even blasphemously—applied. One striking instance may be cited. On page 286 of Mackey’s Masonic Ritualist is found an etching of the Masonic keystone. Above it and alongside of it one reads: “The following passages of Scriptures are here appropriately introduced:—‘This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head stone of the corner.’—Acts iv. 11 ‘To him that overcometh, will I give to eat of the hidden manna; and I will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth, saving he that receiveth it.’—Rev. ii. 17.”

The same blasphemous use of the Holy Scripture appears in the following quotation from J. S. M. Ward’s Freemasonry and the Ancient Gods: “Light is the key which opens the door to our mysteries, and it is the same Light which ‘shines in every letter of the Koran,’ and is the Light of Mithra, who is the light of Ahura-Mazda. It is the same Light from which Moses shaded his eyes when it appeared to him in the bush, and the sign of a R(oyal) A(rch) is still made by an Arunta native of Australia when he returns from the final degree through which he passes in the mysterious ceremonies peculiar to that primitive people. It is that Light of which it is written in our Scriptures that ‘the Light shineth in the Darkness and the Darkness comprehended it not’ ” (pp. 61, 62).

It is no exaggeration to assert that Masonry does most serious violence to the inscripturated Word of God and does the gravest despite to Jesus Christ, the personal Word.

d. The Ethics of Masonry

In his Text-book of Masonic Jurisprudence A. G. Mackey is careful to explain that the moral law of Masonry is not the moral law of the Bible. We read: “Every Mason is obliged by his tenure to obey moral law. Now this moral law is not to be considered as confined to the decalogue of Moses, within which narrow limits the ecclesiastical writers technically retain it, but rather as alluding to what is called the lex naturae or the law of nature. This is the moral law to which the old charge already cited refers, and which it declares to be the law of Masonry. And this was wisely done, for it is evident that no law less universal could have been appropriately selected for the government of an institution whose prominent characteristic is its universality. The precepts of Jesus could not have been made obligatory upon a Jew; a Christian would have denied the sanctions of the Koran; a Mohammedan must have rejected the law of Moses, and a disciple of Zoroaster would have turned from all to the teachings of his Zend Avesta. The universal law of nature, which the authors of the ‘Old Charges’ have properly called the moral law, is, therefore, the only law suited in every respect to be adopted as the Masonic code” (p. 502).

H. L. Haywood in his Great Teachings of Masonry places Masonic ethics on an experiential, humanistic and utilitarian basis. Says this teacher of Masonry: “Human experience, both individual and racial, is the one final authority in morals. Wrong is whatever hurts human life or destroys human happiness. Acts are not right or wrong intrinsically but according as their effects are hurtful or helpful” (p. 39). More blatant disregard of the law of God is hardly imaginable.

In this connection reference must be made to Masonic oaths. According to Theodore Graebner’s A Treatise on Freemasonry (pp. 22, 23), the following is an example of the very first oath required in Masonry, that for a candidate being initiated as an Entered Apprentice Mason:

“I, ____________ , of my own free will and accord, in the presence of Almighty God and his Worshipful Lodge, erected to Him and dedicated to the Holy Saint John, do hereby and hereon most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear that I will always hail, ever conceal, and never reveal any of the secret arts, parts, or points of the hidden mysteries of Ancient Freemasonry, which have been heretofore, may at this time, or shall at any future period be communicated to me as such, to any person or persons whomsoever, except it be to a true and lawful brother Mason, or within a regularly constituted Lodge of Masons, and neither unto him nor them, until by strict trial, due examination, or legal information I shall have found him or them as lawfully entitled to the same as I am myself.

“I furthermore promise and swear that I will not write, print, paint, stamp, stain, cut, carve, make, nor engrave them, nor cause the same to be done upon anything movable or immovable, capable of receiving the least impression of a word, syllable, letter, or character, whereby the same may become legible or intelligible to any person under the canopy of heaven, and the secrets of Freemasonry be thereby unlawfully obtained through my unworthiness.

“To all of this I most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, with a firm and steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same without any equivocation, mental reservation, or secret evasion of mind whatever, binding myself under no less a penalty than that of having my throat cut across, my tongue torn out by its roots and buried in the rough sands of the sea at low water mark, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, should I ever knowingly or willingly violate this my solemn oath or obligation as an Entered Apprentice Mason. So help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due performance of the same.”

From the viewpoint of Christian ethics this oath is open to serious criticism on more than one score. The Christian, bound as he is to maintain justice and equity before God and man to the best of his powers, has no right to pledge himself in advance to keep secret something the bearing of which on questions of justice and morals he cannot know. And, aside from the question whether an oath is not too solemn a transaction for a ceremony of such doubtful importance as reception into a mere human organization, it must be said without hesitation that the violence of this oath is plainly contrary to our Lord’s principles of speech as set forth in Matthew 5:34–37.

According to the cipher ritual a Master Mason takes the solemn pledge “that I will not have illicit carnal intercourse with a brother’s wife, his mother, sister or daughter, I knowing them to be such.” In the opinion of the committee some critics of Masonry are too severe in their denunciation of this pledge. For example, it has been said evidently to leave “no closed season” for other women and to protect even a Masonic brother’s women relatives only when they are known to be such. That seems to be an exaggeration. A promise to abstain from illicit intercourse with some women does not necessarily imply a reservation of liberty to engage in such intercourse with other women. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that this pledge does introduce a distinction which is not only foreign to Christian ethics, but even contrary to it. Christianity demands that a man respect the chastity, not merely of certain women, but of all alike.

e. Salvation According to Masonry

Every religion has a doctrine of salvation, and to that rule Masonry is no exception. Is the Masonic teaching on this important subject in harmony with the teaching of Holy Writ, or are the two at variance with each other? The answer to that question may well be unequivocal.

Christianity claims to be the only true religion and to set forth the one and only way of salvation. Christ Himself declared: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). “In none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved” (Acts
4:12). But Masonry teaches that there is salvation in other religions as well. W. L. Wilmhurst, Grand Registrar of West Yorkshire District, says: “Our science in its universality limits our conception to no one exemplar. Take the nearest and most familiar to you, the one under whose aegis you were racially born and who therefore may serve you best; for each is able to bring you to the center, though each may have his separate method. To the Jewish brother it says: ‘Take the father of the faithful, and realize what being gathered to his bosom means.’ To the Christian brother, it points to him upon whose breast lay the beloved disciple. To the Hindoo brother it points to Krishna, etc. To the Buddhist it points to the Maitreja of universal compassion. And to the Moslem, it points to his Prophet, and to the significance of being clothed in his mantle” (The Masonic Initiation, p. 105). According to the July 10, 1940, issue of The Covenanter Witness, J. S. M. Ward has attempted to express the same thought in verse

“Bacchus died and rose again,
On the golden Syrian Plain;
Osiris rose from out his grave,
And thereby mankind did save;
Adonis likewise did shed his blood
By the yellow Syrian flood;
Zoroaster brought to birth
Mirthra from his cave of earth.
And we today in Christian lands
We with them can join hands.”

The Christian doctrine of salvation is heterosoteric; it teaches that man must be saved by another. Masonry’s doctrine of salvation, on the other hand, is autosoteric; it teaches that man must and can save himself. “Freemasonry,” we are told by J. S. M. Ward, ‘has taught that each man can, by himself, work out his own conception of God and thereby achieve salvation (Freemasonry: Its Aims and Ideals, p. 187). And in his book, What Masonry Means, which is warmly recommended in an introduction by J. F. Newton, William F. Hammond says: “Masonry’s conception of immortality is something for which man must qualify while still in the flesh. Through the fellowship of a moral discipline Masons are taught to qualify for the fellowship of eternal life” (p. 171).

The Christian way of salvation is supernatural. But the Masonic way of salvation is naturalistic. According to Christianity the new birth is a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. According to many Masonic authorities a person is born again through initiation into the lodge. H. L. Haywood, for instance, declares: “The whole process (of initiation) should be made one of the most crucial experiences of the candidate’s life, one that will change him to the center of his being. It is like the moral and spiritual change which comes over a man who passes through the religious experience known as ‘conversion’ or ‘regeneration.’ Masonic initiation is intended to be quite as profound and revolutionizing an experience. As a result of it the candidate should become a new man” (The Great Teachings of Masonry, pp. 30, 31).

Salvation by grace is the very core of the Christian doctrine of salvation. But Masonry boldly teaches salvation by works and character. Says William E. Hammond: “Masonry inculcates faith in immortality as indispensable to moral living and urges its members to qualify for eternal life by the practice of those qualities—integrity, fellowship and service—which may reasonably be expected to constitute the felicity of a future life” (What Masonry Means, p. 175). At this point may be introduced two somewhat lengthy quotations from the pointed pamphlet, The Relation of the Liberal Churches and the Fraternal Orders, by E. A. Coil, a Unitarian minister and a Masonic Worshipful Master. Says this clear-headed writer: “That the fundamental difference in the principles embodied in the historic creeds of Christendom and those of our modern secret orders has not been clearly thought out is indicated by the fact that many pledge themselves to both. There are lodge men who, in the churches, subscribe to the doctrine that ‘We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, by faith and not for our own works or deservings,’ and enthusiastically join in the singing of hymns in which that idea is embodied. Then in their lodge meetings they just as enthusiastically assent to the following declaration: ‘Although our thoughts, words and actions may be hidden from the eyes of men, yet that All-Seeing-Eye whom the sun, moon and stars obey, and under whose watchful care even comets perform their stupendous revolutions, pervades the inmost recesses of the human heart, and will reward us according to our merits’. A little child, once its attention is called to the matter, ought to be able to see that it is impossible to harmonize the creed statement here quoted, with the declaration taken from the monitor of one of our greatest and most effective secret orders, and found, in substance, in the liturgies of nearly all the others. If ‘We are accounted righteous before God, for the merit of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, by faith and not for our own works or deservings,’ then it cannot possibly be true that the All-Seeing Eye ‘Pervades the inmost recesses of the human heart, and will reward us according to our merits.’ One of those declarations excludes the other. Men cannot consistently subscribe to both” (pp. 10, 11). Coil goes on to say: “I have been devoting much time to an investigation of the subject, and I say, without fear of successful contradiction, that the liberal churches, from their beginning, have been developing in thought and sentiment, along the same lines as those followed by most of our great modern fraternities. They have championed and advocated the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of Man, immortality, and salvation by character, and these are the very principles for which nearly all the great fraternities stand. Taught these principles in childhood, as they should be taught them in the Sunday schools and churches, people will not have to unlearn or deny them should they choose to identify themselves with almost any one of our present day fraternities, as those brought up in ‘Orthodox’ Sunday schools and churches have to unlearn, deny or ignore much that has been taught them if they become members of a lodge” (pp. 17, 18).

f. The Brotherhood of Masonry

Scripture tells us that God “made of one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth” (Acts 17:26). Therefore it is not amiss to assert that there is a physical brotherhood of all men. It may even be admitted that by virtue of such remnants in fallen man of the original image of God as reason and conscience, all men are brothers in more than a physical sense. But Scripture emphatically denies that the universal brotherhood of man is spiritual. On the contrary, it teaches that there is an absolute spiritual antithesis between believers and unbelievers. Spiritually they are opposites like righteousness and iniquity, light and darkness, Christ and Belial (2 Corinthians 6:14, 15).

Masonry boasts of the brotherhood of its members and glories in the universal brotherhood of man. Says J. F. Newton: “If one were asked to define Masonry in a single sentence, it would be to say: Masonry is the realization of God by the practice of brotherhood.” He goes on to describe universal brotherhood as physical and intellectual and spiritual. It is spiritual, according to him, because, while religions are many, “Religion is One.” He adds that the genius of the religion of Jesus was “the extension of the idea of the family to include all humanity” (The Religion of Masonry, pp. 116, 123ff.). And E. A. Coil says: “It is becoming more and more clear to me as the facts relating to the subject are brought out, that the fraternities and churches called ‘Liberal’ have been working along parallel lines; but, because the one puts the chief emphasis upon the fatherhood of God, and therefore emphasizes theology, while the other puts the chief emphasis upon the brotherhood of man, and therefore emphasizes sociology, they have not realized that they were occupying practically the same ground” (The Relation of the Liberal Churches and the Fraternal Orders, pp. 9, 10).

g. The Universalism of Masonry

There is a Christian universalism. God has His elect in every age and every nation. Ever since the fall of man the Son of God has been gathering the elect into His church by His Word and Spirit. In Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female, for all are one in Him (Galatians 3:28). John saw the four living creatures and the four and twenty elders fall down before the Lamb and he heard them sing: “Thou wast slain, and didst purchase unto God with thy blood men of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation” (Revelation 5:9).

Masonry also lays claim to universalism, but its universalism differs radically from that of Christianity in that it denies Christian particularism and exclusivism.

Christianity claims to have the only true book, the Bible. Masonry places this book on a par with the sacred books of other religions.

Christianity lays claim to the only true God, the God of the Bible, and denounces all other Gods as idols. Masonry recognizes the Gods of all religions.

Christianity describes God as the Father of Jesus Christ and of those who through faith in Him have received the right to be called the sons of God. The God of Masonry is the universal father of all mankind.

Christianity holds that only the worship of the God who has revealed Himself in Holy Scripture is true worship. Masonry honors as true worship the worship of numerous other deities.

Christianity recognizes but one Saviour, Jesus Christ, the only Mediator between God and man. Masonry recognizes many saviours.

Christianity acknowledges but one way of salvation, that of grace through faith. Masonry rejects this way and substitutes for it salvation by works and character.

Christianity teaches the brotherhood of those who believe in Christ, the communion of saints, the church universal, the one body of Christ. Masonry teaches the brotherhood of Masons and the universal brotherhood of man.

Christianity glories in being the one truly universal religion. Masonry would rob Christianity of this glory and appropriate it to itself.

Christianity maintains that it is the only true religion. Masonry denies this claim and boasts of being Religion itself.

III. CONCLUSION

The committee finds that the evidence presented concerning the religion of Masonry permits but one conclusion. Although a number of the objections commonly brought against Masonry seem to the committee not to be weighty, yet it is driven to the conclusion that Masonry is a religious institution and as such is definitely anti-Christian.

Far be it from the committee to assert that there are no Christians among the members of the Masonic fraternity. Just as a great many who trust for eternal life solely in the merits of Christ continue as members of churches that have denied the faith, so undoubtedly many sincere Christians, uninformed, or even misinformed, concerning the true character of Freemasonry, hold membership in it without compunction of conscience. But that in no way alters the fact that membership in the Masonic fraternity is inconsistent with Christianity.