It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Erbal
How can your quote be reasonably considered as evidence the landmark regarding monotheism is a binding and enforced rule throughout regular Freemasonry?
Here is a contradictory interpretation to the one you provided, and it's made by a Mason on the Ask A Freemason forum. www.masonforum.com...
I hope you don’t feel as though I’m arguing with you, Brother Collin…if that’s what the Grand Constitutions say, then that’s what they say. But the application candidates fill out to confirm they meet the requirements of being a Freemason says “Supreme Being,” and the possibility that the Grand Constitutions might be more restrictive never even occurred to me.
Originally posted by Erbal
Linking quotes of landmarks and interpretations of landmarks does NOTHING to prove the landmark is binding and enforced.
Do you understand the distinction between an enforced rule and an unenforced rule? Do you understand that despite your personal interpretation, the generally accepted definition of Supreme Being simply means God, and it explicitly does not mean monotheism?
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Erbal
How can your quote be reasonably considered as evidence the landmark regarding monotheism is a binding and enforced rule throughout regular Freemasonry?
That, coupled with the Grand Lodge websites stating this is the case makes the answer rather obvious.
Here is a contradictory interpretation to the one you provided, and it's made by a Mason on the Ask A Freemason forum. www.masonforum.com...
Contradicts? Really?
I hope you don’t feel as though I’m arguing with you, Brother Collin…if that’s what the Grand Constitutions say, then that’s what they say. But the application candidates fill out to confirm they meet the requirements of being a Freemason says “Supreme Being,” and the possibility that the Grand Constitutions might be more restrictive never even occurred to me.
Seems the Brother you cited concurs that the Grand Constitutions are correct and enforceable.
I’ll take your word for it that the Grand Constitutions say that. But since the application candidates fill out merely requires an expressed belief in a “Supreme Being,” I feel comfortable stating that’s all that’s required…because it’s not really a “requirement” if you’re not making any effort to enforce it. I would never assume it means anything more than exactly what it says, because it’s ridiculous to leave it open for interpretation instead of just clearly stating what we want.
I don’t put any stock in the preamble about the “Landmarks,” since there’s no clear consensus on what the “Ancient Landmarks” of Freemasonry really are…or if they even exist at all.
I hope you don’t feel as though I’m arguing with you, Brother Collin…if that’s what the Grand Constitutions say, then that’s what they say. But the application candidates fill out to confirm they meet the requirements of being a Freemason says “Supreme Being,” and the possibility that the Grand Constitutions might be more restrictive never even occurred to me.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Erbal
Linking quotes of landmarks and interpretations of landmarks does NOTHING to prove the landmark is binding and enforced.
Did you bother to view the websites you opted to ingore with the post I am now addressing? You would have found that these came from the 'requirements' section of each Grand Lodge. You know, 'mandatory' aspects of joining.
Do you understand the distinction between an enforced rule and an unenforced rule? Do you understand that despite your personal interpretation, the generally accepted definition of Supreme Being simply means God, and it explicitly does not mean monotheism?
How is the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts, Georgia and Alabama's viewpoints and requirements my 'personal interpretation'? Considering they explicitly said 'monotheism' I think you may want to address that directly, there was no room for your obviously incorrect interpretation of what Masonry requires.
Belief in a Supreme Being means ONE God. Is this clear yet?
Originally posted by Erbal
Why are you playing BS games?
It's a short, 3 paragraph post and you blatantly ignored the first 2 paragraphs in a futile attempt to take the 3rd paragraph out of context. Did you think no one would notice or have you digressed into full blown trolling?
The first 2 paragraphs make it crystal clear he feels comfortable in saying an expressed belief in God is the true requirement, not monotheism. He makes it clear he feels monotheism is not a real requirement because there is no effort to enforce it! He makes he clear he would never assume something means more than what it says and it's ridiculous to leave "Supreme Being" open to interpretation instead of clearly stating they want monotheists and not theists!
And you clearly have some selective reading issue going on if you think the third paragraph makes any implications about the enforcement of rules... he's obviously talking about the WORDING on the application and how it never occurred to him they should use more restrictive wording on the application because this entire time he has been under the impression Supreme Being simply means God and the God requirement is a reflection of the standard definition.
Originally posted by Erbal
Show me at least a minimal amount of evidence demonstrating monotheism is an actively enforced rule within regular Freemasonry... you haven't even presented a logical argument that supports your claims.
...
Belief in A Supreme Being means belief in at least 1 God. (Could be any type of theism)
Belief in ONLY 1 God means belief in only 1 God. (Can only be monotheism)
Is this clear yet?
Heresy, for instance is not a Masonic crime. Masons are obliged to use the words of the Old Charges, "to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinion to themselves;" and, therefore, as long as a Mason acknowledges his belief in the existence of one God, a lodge can take no action on his particular opinions, however hetrodox they may be. Source
Freemasonry accepts applications from men who are of good character, recommended by those within the fraternity, and who believe in one God. With the exception that one must be monotheistic, Freemasonry makes no distinction among the various religions when considering a man for membership, nor does it care about his political beliefs, wealth, or station in life.
Originally posted by Erbal
Augustus, do you have any evidence whatsoever that monotheism is an ENFORCED RULE?
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Erbal
Augustus, do you have any evidence whatsoever that monotheism is an ENFORCED RULE?
What else besides links to specific Grand Lodge requirements and Masonic jurisprudence constitutes 'evidence' in your opinion?
The links that I provided make it quite clear that a change in ones beliefs away from what is proscribed is grounds for immediate expulsion as this violates the constituion of the respective Grand Lodge. The Landmarks and Constitution are rules and if the rules are broken their are repercussions.
Originally posted by Erbal
Just a couple of quick and easy questions to make sure you and I are on the same page...
Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?
In the 1950s the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America upheld three "ancient Landmarks":
1.Monotheism — An unalterable and continuing belief in God.
2.The Volume of The Sacred Law — an essential part of the furniture of the Lodge.
3.Prohibition of the discussion of Religion and Politics (within the lodge).
Masonic Landmarks, by Bro. Michael A. Botelho.
Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?
Originally posted by Erbal
Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?
Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Erbal
Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?
No, there are variations in Constitutions, Landmarks (with the three I listed above being the exception), by-laws, rules, policies or practices.
For example, some jurisdicitons allow men that are between the ages of 18 to 21 while most adhere to 21. Others have variations to certain rules or by-laws that may not even be present in other jurisdictions. An example of this would be the method of communicating ritual, some jursidictions use a cipher while others are mouth-to-ear.
However, what I posted about the conference of Grand Masters in regards the three universally adopted Landmarks is used to determine mutual recognition and amity, not only with United States Grand Lodges but other lodges outside of the country.
Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?
As it is a universal Landmark it is enforceable, that is the purpose of the Landmarks.
Originally posted by Erbal
I want to know if you are claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions are actively and effectively enforcing monotheism, and not theism in general, as an unflinching requirement for regular Masonry?
PS: Is there any particular reason you waited 29 pages before once mentioning a conference of Grand Masters and 3 universally adopted landmarks?