Masonic myths and outright falsehood are continually spread concerning Freemasonry. This is an attempt to set and keep the history of the Craft straight.
Throughout the centuries Freemasonry has taught its valuable lessons through allegory and symbols. The man from Galilee used parables extensively and well. Many historians and better speakers constantly employ anecdotes to illustrate the points they want to make. These methods emphasize the search for truth in an interesting and factual manner.
Myths on the other hand, can be innocent or dangerous. They can be outright lies or the perpetuation of distortions handed down through the generations. Many of these were invented by Masonic writers and speakers to enhance the image of Freemasonry. Some of these corruptions have caused the Craft problems with creditable historians because they were outrageous lies.
Freemasonry, actually, requires no exaggeration to magnify its greatness. The simple truth is all that is required to tell its story. This is the reason for this page; to attempt to destroy the myths that have been prevalent, often for centuries, by telling the truth.
Myth: Freemasonry is a religion.
Fact: Absolutely false. This is one of several arguments employed by certain religious fanatics in an attempt to discredit Freemasonry. They quote Albert Pike and Henry Wilson Coil, among others, neither of whom was a man of the cloth, to "prove" their statements. Pike was not a researcher. Most of the hundreds of thousands of words he wrote came from his own mind, or the minds of others whom he never mentioned but with whom he agreed. Coil wrote millions of words about Freemasonry, and he was a lawyer and an excellent Masonic researcher. Most of the time the words of these and other writers are taken out of context to "prove" the thesis of the anti-Masons. Freemasonry's enemies conveniently ignore the thousands of Christian ministers, and some Rabbis, who prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Freemasonry, although religious is far from being a religion. Here are just three of these Doctors of Divinity who have proven the critics in error: Joseph Fort Newton, Norman Vincent Peal and Forrest D. Haggard.
Our purpose as freemasons is not that of a religion. Freemasonry lacks the basic elements of religion. Freemasonry is not a religion nor is it a substitute for religion.
- Freemasonry advocates no sectarian faith or practise.
- We seek no converts.
- We solicit no new members.
- We raise no money for religious purposes.
- We have no dogma or theology. Religious discussion is forbidden in a masonic lodge thereby eliminating the chance for any masonic dogma to form.
- It offers no sacraments and does not claim to lead to salvation by works, by secret knowledge, or by any other means. The secrets of Freemasonry are concerned with the modes of recognition only and not with the means of salvation.
- By any definition of religion accepted by our critics, we cannot qualify as a religion.
- Freemasonry supports religion. Freemasonry is far from indifferent to religion. Without interfering in religious practise, it expects each member to follow his own faith.
A man does not subscribe to a new religion, much less to an anti-Christian religion when he becomes a freemason, any more than when he joins any political party or community association. There is nothing in Freemasonry that is opposed to the religion he brings with him into the masonic lodge. Freemasonry does not assert nor does it teach that one religion is as good as another. Freemasonry admits men of all religions. Freemasons believe in religious freedom and that the relationship between the individual and his God is personal, private and sacred.
Freemasonry is a completely tolerant organization. When Freemasonry accepts a Christian, or a Jew, or a Buddhist, or a Mohammedan, it does not accept him as such, but accepts him as a man, worthy to be received into the masonic fraternity.
Freemasonry stands for the values that are supreme in the life of the church and expects each member to follow his own faith and to place his duty to God above all other duties. We are sure that a member who is true to the principles he learns in Freemasonry will be a better church member because of it.
Myth: Pope Clement XII condemned Freemasonry in 1738
Fact: THE POPE DIDN'T DO IT! There are many sources to prove Clement XII was not mentally or physically able to preside over his religious kingdom. What follows is based on information from several of these sources, particularly Papes, Rois, Franc-Macons: L'histoire de la franc-maconnerie des origines a nos jours (Popes, Kings, Freemasons: The History of Freemasonry from its origins to the present) by Charles V. Bokor, 1977. For the whole term of his papacy, Pope Clement XII was blind and sick. He didn't sign the Bull condemning Freemasonry that bore his name. His church has been living under false assumptions as far as it concerns this organization of friends and brothers.
Clement, was 78 when he assumed the papal throne on July 30, 1730, shortly after becoming seriously ill. His health continued to rapidly deteriorate. Within two years after assuming the papal throne he became completely blind. His hand had to be guided to the place where his signature was required on documents.
The pope reportedly said, when he heard about something his nephew and others did that made him unhappy: "Well, let them do as they wish, since they are the bosses anyway."
The suffering of the pope was graphically described by Boker, whose information from many authentic sources was carefully documented. Clement's gout was particularly severe causing him to practically lose his memory. Until his death he was, without question, senile. But it served the purposes of those surrounding him to keep him on the throne.
With the continual deterioration of Pope Clement, Cardinal Nerio Corsini ran the Holy See with tyrannical power. It was he who called together his cohorts to produce the condemnation of Freemasonry. Among these conspirators was the Chief Inquisitor of Florence. The dastardly deed was done on June 25, 1738. Bokor proves that none of these participants were theologians; none were knowledgeable about what they were asked to rubber stamp.
"You don't have to be very clever to see that a man who had been completely blind for six years, who had taken no part in Church business for even longer, who had been suffering from senile debility for two years, could not have been the one who drew up the Bull," writes Boker. "The fact is, he didn't even sign the Bull that was proclaimed in his name." Looking at a photo copy of the document only one name appears. And it's written in the calligraphic style of the balance of the document! Not a single name of those taking part in the atrocity appears anywhere on it!
Freemasonry, if Pope Clement knew anything about it, was never condemned by him. The hierarchy of the Roman Church has been aware of this deception for more than two and one half centuries. Many Roman Catholic theologians and educators have been asked if they could refute the above. None would, or could, touch this subject.
If succeeding Popes had know who the lackies were who did the dastardly deed, would they have jumped on the bandwagon from 1751 onwards? Would they have condemned an organization that believes in the Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God, an organization that has done nothing but good throughout the ages? The "bull" was the work of the Inquisition -- not Pope Clement XII!
Myth: Freemasons are satanists, because in their Lodges they do not pray to Jesus Christ, but to a generic God
Fact: What rubbish, Freemasonry encompasses all religions. Just because we do not pray to one specific being does not make us satanic. If you follow their logic that we Masons are satanist because we do not pray to Jesus then all Canadians must be satanist because their National Anthem, which in itself is a prayer has the line, "God keep our Land," not Jesus keep our Land. All Americans who sing "God Bless America" which also in itself is a prayer, must be satanic because they do not sing Jesus Bless America, every American who Pledges Allegiance to The Flag, "One Country under God" not One Country under Jesus, must also be a satanist. Why even all Englishmen, must be satanic because they sing "God Save the Queen," not Jesus save the Queen. Anyone who has been a witness in court and who has sworn to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, "So help me God" must also be satanic, because they do not say So help me Jesus. To say we Masons are satanic is pure rubbish.
In order to become a Mason, one must profess a belief in a Supreme Being. While someone might want to argue that Satan could be considered "Supreme", the fact of the matter is that the entire process of application would discourage someone with behavior which is so deviate from societal norms.
Or what about the variation on that theme: that it's the 33rd Degree (Scottish Rite) Masons who practice Satanism? Or maybe it's some other (undefined) 'high ranking Masons', then. Again, your 'manure detector' should be smelling something pretty foul. Men who spend year after year, decade after decade believing that Freemasonry is morally upright suddenly find they are expected to change their entire belief set to worship Satan just because they've been given some honor or made part of a special group? How silly is that? And, moreso, just how many do you think wouldn't scream to the rooftops about such stupidity?
Myth: Freemasons are worshipping a man rather than Jesus
Fact: The charges are - simply - foolish. The Master of a Lodge - who, when addressed, is given the honorific title of "Worshipful Master" - presides over the meeting of Masons. His duties in the functioning of a lodge are quite similar to that of the President of the local chapter/branch of any other state or provincial organization except as explained below.
Religious Intolerants try to make much out of the title "Worshipful" arguing in turn that Masons:
- are required to do the Master's bidding in all things;
- are worshipping a man rather than Jesus;
- or/and are part of some sort of cult where a 'worshipful master' presides.
At the outset, let's be very clear: the term is one of respect and has nothing whatsoever to do with 'worshipping' of an individual. It is an ancient word usage with a meaning similar to the honorific "Your Honor". Use of the word 'worshipful' continues today in titles such as "The Worshipful Lord Mayor of Dublin" - who is not worshipped in the traditional sense nor is he necessarily a secular Lord - and is certainly not a Lord in a religious sense by anyone's stretch of imagination.
Masons are required to obey the Master of a Lodge as much as but no more than any member of any voluntary association or organization is required to obey the President of that organization. There is nothing more and nothing less involved. Can the President of the local softball club order you to go out and commit murder? Of course not - and neither can the Master of a Lodge! Can s/he direct how you should live your daily life? Of course not. Would he or she compel you to do anything against your religious beliefs or patriotic intentions? Hardly....
What about that claim that Masons are "worshipping" a man rather than Jesus - as some of our more dogmatic "religious intolerants" would assert? Just as you wouldn't worship the president of the local homeowners group, neither would any Mason "worship" the person who is essentially the "president" of their lodge. Considered rationally, it's a total non-issue. It is, however, one of the hooks religious intolerants will try in order to damage Freemasonry's reputation.
Myth: Freemasonry is a secret society.
Fact: Unequivocally false. This is widely stated and believed, even by Freemasons. Many Masons believe this so strongly they won't even talk to their wives and families about the Craft. Many writers of yesteryear helped promote this error. Our ritualists have added to the belief. The critics of Freemasonry want the world to believe in this secrecy because they have little else on which to stand. Yet by no stretch of the imagination can Masonry be termed a secret organization. If it was, no outsiders would even know it exists. Anything that is known is not secret. Without question there are many secret organizations throughout the world, but only men and women within those circles are familiar with them. Most, if not all, ritualistic religions have conclaves (literally: rooms locked with a key from outsiders). Should these be condemned along with Freemasonry? Secret means: "Kept from general knowledge or view; kept hidden; operating in a clandestine manner"; and on and on. Secret groups meet in places known only to the few. Freemasons meet in places clearly marked for the public to see. Secret outfits never record anything that might become public property. All Masonic functions are fully recorded, proceedings can be read by the general public, thousands of books have been written and published about Freemasonry, millions of words about the Craft come off printing presses every year.
Members of secret bands never advertise their affiliation; Freemasons proudly wear the Square and Compasses and other emblems. There are NO SECRETS in Freemasonry. There are several excellent Masonic libraries such as the one in Lexington, but non-Masons rarely visit them. The so-called secrets in Freemasonry have been "revealed" over and over again in books that can be found in any library or large bookstore. With the coming of television these secrets, often distorted, have gone into the homes of millions of people. So let us dispel the myth that Freemasonry is a "secret Organization." It isn't. It never has been. (NOTE: Several Freemasons are so concerned with the statements made in their churches about Masonic secrecy they asked for help in answering their critics. This is an attempt to help them.)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar