|
Post by auratorium on Oct 29, 2010 14:12:49 GMT
I'm wondering if a member of U.G.L.E. or AF&A.M. can shed some light for me on exactly what the requirement for belief in a Supreme Being in order to be accepted for membership in those obediences is. Obviously this excludes atheists but what about agnostics? What about someone who can conceive of a sort of Einsteinian/Spinozian pantheistic "divine" universe? Or is it more a situation where one is just asked the question and if one replies in the affirmative that is the end of the discussion? The simple reason is this: You swear an oath/obligation to YOUR Creator, not the lodge. If you do not have a Creator then the obligation is hollow and meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by logos on Nov 3, 2010 19:57:06 GMT
One fact to remember is that different Rites have different obligations. To judge as a whole without taking that into account would be flawed.
Also, Masonic jurisdictions are sovereign. Should one decide for themselves that belief is not a require, they are within their own rights and correct to do so.
|
|
|
Post by auratorium on Nov 4, 2010 1:54:01 GMT
One fact to remember is that different Rites have different obligations. To judge as a whole without taking that into account would be flawed. Also, Masonic jurisdictions are sovereign. Should one decide for themselves that belief is not a require, they are within their own rights and correct to do so. Quite right, you are. However, this question was specifically on why AF&AM masonry requires it. Why other forms of Masonry may or may not require it is best answered by masons from those bodies.
|
|
|
Post by logos on Nov 4, 2010 4:09:49 GMT
I was not aware that this was regarding one specific flavor of Freemasonry.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Nov 4, 2010 6:13:57 GMT
I was not aware that this was regarding one specific flavor of Freemasonry. The mistake is understandable, yet it was regarding 'one specific flavor of Freemasonry' according to the originating post: mike bishop wrote: "I'm wondering if a member of U.G.L.E. or AF&A.M. can shed some light for me on exactly what the requirement for belief in a Supreme Being in order to be accepted for membership in those obediences is."
|
|
|
Post by auratorium on Nov 5, 2010 15:09:40 GMT
I was not aware that this was regarding one specific flavor of Freemasonry. The mistake is understandable, yet it was regarding 'one specific flavor of Freemasonry' according to the originating post: mike bishop wrote: "I'm wondering if a member of U.G.L.E. or AF&A.M. can shed some light for me on exactly what the requirement for belief in a Supreme Being in order to be accepted for membership in those obediences is."Thank you Bro. KNO. Bro. Logos, no offense was intended at any masonic body or rite that does not require this belief. My explanation was on why UGLE amity lodges require it. Other bodies and rites, I assume, do not see it the same way and that is fine for them. Each has its' own flavor and requirements and those members are content with those requirements.
|
|
|
Post by irishmason on Nov 5, 2010 21:49:20 GMT
I think the question of a belief in a supreme being is the most difficult part of masonry and is very complex. It not only touches the most individual section of any individual life of a brother/sister but is causing unnecessary division between human beings or might even bring them into conflict. I know a lot of brethren/sisters who are dedicated and committed members of their parishes/ synagogues etc , I know members, who did not see a church inside for a couple of decades, others are not believing in the teachings of their churches, some even reject their teachings, others just faintly believe that there might something exist, which could be identified as a supreme being, there are others, being freemasons for a long time, who lost their faith, others lost not only their faith but also the belief in a supreme many years after becoming a freemason. Those who lost their faith and doubt that a supreme being is existing (and I admit I belong to that group) are we bad masons or have no right to be masons at all and can a lodge strip those of us off the membership “posthumously” or why is masonry excluding those, who would may be be an asset to masonry? Could masonry perhaps bring a member, who lost his faith and the belief in a supreme being, be brought back to a different point of view, while he/she is experiencing the fraternal spirit of a community? I think this is a very delicate topic, which causes a lot of conflict to many masons and it is a pity that it became such a monolithic and dogmatic part of masonry.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Nov 5, 2010 22:04:14 GMT
I think the concept of a Brotherhood of Mankind is a dogmatic and Monolithic part of Masonry. You can't prove its existence and there is far less evidence for its existence than an intelligent and ordered force behind the Universe, as displayed in the laws of physics and its subsets.
Why is a dogma ('dogma' properly understood as a teaching) such a bad thing? Freemasonry is, in part, about learning and expanding.
|
|
|
Post by irishmason on Nov 6, 2010 9:47:52 GMT
I dare to contradict:
Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted, or diverged from, by the practioner or believers.
That is why I am adogmatic, I am not eating, what is presented to me on a plate by somebody who wants me to eat what he has concocted.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Nov 6, 2010 14:16:26 GMT
That is not the definition held by most : Definition: 1. religious belief: a belief or set of beliefs that a religion holds to be true 2. group belief: a belief or set of beliefs that a political, philosophical, or moral group holds to be true
----------- 1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church. 2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine. 3. A principle or belief or a group of them -------------------- 1.a doctrine; tenet; belief 2.doctrines, tenets, or beliefs, collectively 3.a positive, arrogant assertion of opinion
There does not seem to be any reference to the dictatorial slant you put on the definition
|
|
|
Post by theoctavist on Nov 10, 2010 7:15:58 GMT
I personally feel genuine freedom of conscience should prevail for anyone seeking the Light and a belief in a Supreme Being should not be a prerequisite or a barrier for those wishing to become a Mason. And fortunately it isn't necessary with all GLs to profess such a belief. If I may speak freely.. I strongly disagree. If Masonry became a place whereby athiests, occultists, etc etc were freely admitted, I would no longer wish to be a part of it. One of the biggest draws to the craft to me was the premise that there is a Grand Architect. this is just a sad commentary on how man has, in his pathetic, insolent arrogance, turned his back on the Creator.. become more worldly. Shame.
|
|
|
Post by Leo on Nov 10, 2010 16:40:36 GMT
I personally feel genuine freedom of conscience should prevail for anyone seeking the Light and a belief in a Supreme Being should not be a prerequisite or a barrier for those wishing to become a Mason. And fortunately it isn't necessary with all GLs to profess such a belief. If I may speak freely.. I strongly disagree. If Masonry became a place whereby athiests, occultists, etc etc were freely admitted, I would no longer wish to be a part of it. One of the biggest draws to the craft to me was the premise that there is a Grand Architect. this is just a sad commentary on how man has, in his pathetic, insolent arrogance, turned his back on the Creator.. become more worldly. Shame. Well, you may disagree all you like, but the reality is that within Freemasonry there exists all the people you mention. In fact, such people have been involved in Masonry for 100s of years. And despite what you may hear or read to the contrary Freemasonry is not the domain of a few GLs in the world whose membership support the limited world view you seem to wish for. Within Freemasonry we have GLs and GOs that welcome people of all faiths and none. Now, whether you or your GL accept this or not is of little consequence to those 100s of 1000s around the world who practice their Masonry. I appreciate you are new here so will inform you on this occasion that this forum is for all Freemasons regardless of the type of Freemasonry they practice or which GL they are from or affiliated to, whether they be, men, women, atheist, etc. Please keep this in mind when posting.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Nov 11, 2010 22:29:59 GMT
If I may speak freely.. I strongly disagree. If Masonry became a place whereby athiests, occultists, etc etc were freely admitted, I would no longer wish to be a part of it. One of the biggest draws to the craft to me was the premise that there is a Grand Architect. this is just a sad commentary on how man has, in his pathetic, insolent arrogance, turned his back on the Creator.. become more worldly. Shame. Well, you may disagree all you like, but the reality is that within Freemasonry there exists all the people you mention. In fact, such people have been involved in Masonry for 100s of years. And despite what you may hear or read to the contrary Freemasonry is not the domain of a few GLs in the world whose membership support the limited world view you seem to wish for. Within Freemasonry we have GLs and GOs that welcome people of all faiths and none. Now, whether you or your GL accept this or not is of little consequence to those 100s of 1000s around the world who practice their Masonry. I appreciate you are new here so will inform you on this occasion that this forum is for all Freemasons regardless of the type of Freemasonry they practice or which GL they are from or affiliated to, whether they be, men, women, atheist, etc. Please keep this in mind when posting. I believe you will find the majority of Masonic Grand Lodges require a belief in a Supreme Being and I for one am thankful for that. It is my belief that unless you can put your hand on your heart and know you are giving your word to your God then the rest of any obligation becomes meaningless. My Opinion thats all. I am afraid this original poster seems to have an inability to understand what certain words mean. Please look up Occult and see that the majority of the definitions you will find will be hidden, hidden from view, understood by few etc. You seem to be afraid of words which is a great shame considering this is a discussion Forum!
|
|
|
Post by Leo on Nov 11, 2010 22:42:34 GMT
It is my belief that unless you can put your hand on your heart and know you are giving your word to your God then the rest of any obligation becomes meaningless. My Opinion thats all. Your opinion is shared by many, but not all. There are Masons who've taken their Obligation without invoking a Supreme Being and believe it to be as valid as any who have professed such a belief.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Nov 12, 2010 8:59:11 GMT
It is my belief that unless you can put your hand on your heart and know you are giving your word to your God then the rest of any obligation becomes meaningless. My Opinion thats all. Your opinion is shared by many, but not all. There are Masons who've taken their Obligation without invoking a Supreme Being and believe it to be as valid as any who have professed such a belief. Yes Leo you are quite correct, but (and this is my opinion only) I do not believe they can be proper Freemasons, I have no pronblem accepting women, mixed etc however I personally believe for an obligation to mean anything it must mean something to the person taking it. An Athiest by definition does not believe. I would never want to sit in a Lodge with someone who does not believe. Again I reitterate this is my opinion only.
|
|
|
Post by irishmason on Nov 12, 2010 13:14:32 GMT
..................... I would never want to sit in a Lodge with someone who does not believe. ....................... There are as many different types of atheists as there are different types of masons. what is an atheist? There are numerous definitions. Say, a youngster has been abused by a priest. He lost all his faith, will never attend any church service, rejects religion...he wants to join a lodge, tells his proposer that he cannot believe..and he will not be accepted by the brethren, because you do not want to sit with him in a lodge? ? A lot of people lost their faith due to traumatic experience, how can you make a judgement. do you think you are better or a better mason, because you have the luck to be able to believe?
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Nov 12, 2010 13:59:55 GMT
Irishmason
You have put forward a very good point, perhaps if you were a little less agressive it would of been better but a good point none the less.
I will only say that in every thing I do in life and whatever rules I try to follow I would hope that I could be flexible. In the situation you make then I would hope that I could see through this young persons problems and hope that one day he could believe again. However I would happily point him in the direction of a GL that is happy to accept Atheists not because I would not want to sit in Lodge with him but because those are my GL's rules and I have obligated myself to accept them.
It is an unfortunate fact that when we have discussions on Forums it is normally about generalisation, and by doing this you take away the special case scenario. There will always be special cases, however I would prefer to err on the side of requiring belief in the hope that a hardened Athiest who basically says about any thing of beauty "Its all a load of bollocks!" is kept out, than letting in someone who through lifes misfortune has been inadvertently turned into an athiest.
Lastly Irishmason, I quantify this post with the same thing I did the last one I made, this is my opinion only, others have to express or make up thier own ones. You will not however get me to agree with you by trying to make me feel guilty!
|
|
|
Post by Leo on Nov 12, 2010 14:04:31 GMT
Yes Leo you are quite correct, but (and this is my opinion only) I do not believe they can be proper Freemasons, I have no pronblem accepting women, mixed etc however I personally believe for an obligation to mean anything it must mean something to the person taking it. An Athiest by definition does not believe. I would never want to sit in a Lodge with someone who does not believe. Again I reitterate this is my opinion only. Then fortunately for those Masons who are atheist such as Paris Fred and countless others, or any Mason who doesn't mind sitting in lodge with them your opinion is of little consequence. However, to suggest someone is less a Mason because they do not share a particular belief is a very arrogant statement to make, especially from someone who is an admin of this forum and knowing full well it was set up for ALL Masons regardless of affiliation to use and be treated equally. Yet, now, after about six years you make this statement in the knowledge your comments will be seen as insulting to thousands of brethren from those GLs or Grand Orients that do not require such beliefs from their members. I am, to be perfectly frank really disappointed to read these comments from you, Chris. From someone else yes, but not you as I believed you to be above such limited understanding.
|
|
|
Post by asiinja on Nov 12, 2010 14:07:48 GMT
I think that beleaving in yourself and in the good of mankind should be enough. A supreme being is mostly a distraction to make sure people behave well.
Some examples are various hells, even boudism has it. Those who do not live a pure and good life will be punished.
So I see how some could say that it is better to beleave in something then to obay something because you fear it.
Think about it it counts for many people and it might even count for you and you may not even know it.
I do beleave that religion or the beleave in a supreme being have been the pillars of our modern society ( this beeing a good or a bad thing, i won't judge )
They once said, you are not here to judge but to be judged.
I defy: I am here to judge myself, that is true wisdom, the man that knows himself is a powerfull one.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Nov 12, 2010 15:34:20 GMT
Yes Leo you are quite correct, but (and this is my opinion only) I do not believe they can be proper Freemasons, I have no pronblem accepting women, mixed etc however I personally believe for an obligation to mean anything it must mean something to the person taking it. An Athiest by definition does not believe. I would never want to sit in a Lodge with someone who does not believe. Again I reitterate this is my opinion only. Then fortunately for those Masons who are atheist such as Paris Fred and countless others, or any Mason who doesn't mind sitting in lodge with them your opinion is of little consequence. However, to suggest someone is less a Mason because they do not share a particular belief is a very arrogant statement to make, especially from someone who is an admin of this forum and knowing full well it was set up for ALL Masons regardless of affiliation to use and be treated equally. Yet, now, after about six years you make this statement in the knowledge your comments will be seen as insulting to thousands of brethren from those GLs or Grand Orients that do not require such beliefs from their members. I am, to be perfectly frank really disappointed to read these comments from you, Chris. From someone else yes, but not you as I believed you to be above such limited understanding. Leo This is a discussion Forum, we discuss things! I have quantified both of my post on this subject by saying this is my opinion only. Would you prefer I did not say what I believe? I am sorry if you feel I am wrong. I have never once said anywhere that Athiests cannot post on this Forum or have equally valid opinions about Freemasonry, indeed I respect Paris Fred for the knowledge he holds. I am slightly amazed at your as well as Irishmasons posts replying to mine. I thought these Forums were all about sharing our opinions? How many times have we stated everyone is entitled to a view no matter whet obedience they belong too? There is a giant leap from my percsonal belief however narrow you feel it is and ne stating they are not real masons etc etc. I would suggest you either read my posts as my opinion only rather than policy of this Forum or imposing rules to the Forum which I am not doing! Next you will be telling me I cannot post anything if it desagrees with your personal view of things!
|
|