Sermonising In Masonry.

SERMONISING IN MASONRY .

BT BRO . JACOB NORTON .

I NOT only approve of the leader in the 18 th June FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE , that too much sermonising is done in Masonry , but must add , that the "too much" began with the very first sermon . The author of Lone Livers was the earliest model of Masonio sertnonisers : be wns opposed to religions discussion , but he himself assumed that lauding his own religion wns all right . Bro . Whytehead , however , thinks that we onght to have more Masonic

termomsmg . He says : — " The Germans have lone fonnd out that something more tbar mere ritual is requisite for success ; and their Lodges are often a scene of amiable discussions of scientific questions and discoveries , which though quite apart , in the ordinary sense , from modern Freemasonry , do not transgress the religions and political boundary lines . "

The lecturer on science may avoid transgressing on the religious boundary line , but not so with Masonic sertnonisers . Out of hundreds of Masonic sermons delivered in Lodges , or printed in Masonio Journals , precious few are minus sectarianism . These sertnonisers assume that their religion , and their religion only is the true religion , and care not for the feelings of other

religionists . Take for instance the works of Hutchinson and Oliver , we find that they are mere sectarian sermons interlarded with a little Masonry . The result produced by those anthors made many question whether a Jew can understand the significance of Masonic teaching P and hence , a few years since , some writers have even questioned whether Jews should be admitted into tbe

Masonio fraternity ; and to such an extent have American Masonic luminaries been impressed with the notion that Masonry is a Christian institution , and that Jews are merely tolerated for the purpose of impressing them with Christian dogmas , that as a rule the Lodge prayers here are purely Christian . The Saints John are introduced as eminent Christian Masons , in the ceremonies of

opening and closing the Lodge , at the admission of a candidate , in the OB , & c , & c . But that is not all . At the raising of a candidate in Providence , Bbode Island , he is told that the ceremony represents the resnrection of Christ . In Texas ( hey have expelled a brother because he disbelieved in the inspiration of the Bible , and in Ohio they recently passed a law

similar to that of the Grand Lodge of Texas . Now , as the Bible comprises the Old and New Testaments , and as the Jews disbelieve in the inspiration of the latter , they ought to be expelled too , but , for some reason unknown to . me , I believe they are still to be tolerated . Such is our Masonic consistency ! Bnt their inconsistency does not stop there . If belief in the

inspiration of the Bible , or of the Old Testament only , is to be a test for admission into Masonry , the candidate ought to be questioned , at least before he pays fifty dollars for the Masonic privileges , whether he believes in the Bible , and if he shonld answer in the negative , they should not take his money . But , no ! be is merely asked the usual question , as to whom he puts his trust in , and when

an affirmative answer is given by him , he is assured , " on the word and honour of a gentleman and Mason , that there is nothing in Masonry to interfere with his religious belief , " & o . Bnt when afterwards it is found that he does not believe in the inspiration of the Bible , then he is expelled , but the Lodge sticks to his fifty dollars . Now , is not such practice a mere fraud ? But ah ! say they , " in a

Christian country we have a right to assume that everybody believes in the Bible . " But why do not they assume that in a Christian country everybody believes in God ? Belief in the Bible implies belief in God , but belief in God does nofc necessarily imply belief in the Bible . But it is of no use reasoning with them ; Bro . Hughan endeavoured to reason with them , and a Eeverend gentleman

replied , thus : " It is the Grand Lodge of Ohio that maintains the true and genuine landmarks of Moses , Solomon , and the holy Saints John , and thus offers the cosmopolitan basis for nobler thinking and living , and fulfils its sacred and glorious mission , and not those who calmly extract its life in order to make it conform to the very effete moral

system wade by men . That very Ohio Rev . sermoniser may sincerely believe that Moses , Solomon , and the holy Saints John were Masons , and that they established Masonic landmarks , but when he undertakes to intimate that Ohio Masonry is placed upon a " cosmopolitan basis , " I must como to tbe conclusion that he is ignorant of the meaning of

cosmopolitan , or that he is a mere perverter and quibbler , and such is indeed the case with all Christianising Masons . Dogma is their great principal object , and they care nothing for truth or justice . I have examined all the English Masonic Magazines from 1793 to 1881 : they contain hundreds of sermons and sectarian contributions ;

Bs a whole they are mere repetitions , " sleep walking , " as Bro . Woodford calls it ; and when an original one appears , it is usually trash y . Take for instance the sermonising oration in 4 th June , issue or this paper ; is it not from beginning to end a mere tissue of pompous sectarian flummery ? and is nofc the whole of it very ridiculous ? Wellthere is no accounting for taste . Bro . Whytehead has not

, had enonfjh of that kind of stuff , and he wants more of it . Let us , therefore , for once appeal to reason ; it is said , that " a tree is knowt by its fruits . " Bro . Whytehead mnst not therefore feel offended at roy comparing the fruit of Jewish and Christian orthodoxy . In doinj / 80 J I ahull not meddle with tbe question , whether this or that

religion is true , but shall merely compare the peculiar characteristic * ° » the two orthodoxies . By orthodox , I mean those who are acquainted with one side of the question only , and who either cannot , w » l not , or rlaie not reason . Well then , 1 st . No Jew ever insulted a Christian with the remark , that he would go to hell if he did nofc become a Jew . Nor have Jews ever

Sermonising In Masonry.

wasted their money for maintaining missionaries , and for printing tracts for the purpose of Judaising their Christian neighbours . Indeed , the most orthodox Jew does nofc believe thafc a good Christian would go to hell for his belief . But Christians have again and again insulted Jews with the above remark , and have spent , and are spending thousands of pounds annuall y for the nseless purpose of converting Jews .

And 2 nd . No Jewish Mason had ever invented lying legends for the purpose of establishing high Jewish Masonic degrees ; and if such an attempt had been made by a Jew I venture to assert ; thafc he conld not find Jews foolish enough to take stock in hia concern . But any number of Christian Masons have invented lying legends , and have manufactured high Christian Masonic degrees , and

Christian orthodoxies have not only taken stock in them , bufc they are even ready to swear that they are ancient Masonic degrees . Now , with these facts before me , can I be blamed for coming to tha conclusion thafc the most rigid orthodox Jew is not as ill-mannered , and is not as void of common sense , as the orthodoxies of Christianity are ?

Masonio sermonisers , in Lodges and in the press , talk often about " Christian morality , " " ChriFfcian virtues , " and Christian what nofc Now , I can very well understand the meaning of Christian dogmas , namely : dogmas which Christianity originated , and which are believed by Christians only . But when they talk abonfc Christian ¦ morality or virtues , they simply talk nonsense ; because Christianity has never originated a solitary practical virtue , or moral precept ;

the phrase " Christian virtues , " Ac , ia , therefore , simply absurd . For instance , " faith , hope , and charity , " are called Christian virtues , bnt in the first place , " faith in God , and hope in immortality , " existed before Christianity ; and charity was also enjoined long before then : these are therefore not Christian virtues ! And , second , faith and hope are nofc virtues afc all , and it is nonsense to call them so .

Dogmatic theology has repeatedly changed , and ifc is constantly subject to change : the belief of the last generation is nofc tha belief of the present , and future generations may again differ in belief from us . Thus , ifc was once universally believed that the dictum of the Church was the word of God , and Protestants changed this to that of the Bible being the word of God ; but as no two

persons understand certain parts in the Bible alike , hence every Protestant sect has its own word of God . Besides which , scientifio discoveries helped to undermine the dogma of the inspiration of the Bible . Thus , the Encyclopcodia Britannica of 1795 or 6 denounced as rank infidels all those who disbelieved in the Masonic cosmogony and that the world was older than five or six thousands years . But

the supplement of the next edition of thafc work taught the opposite theory ; hence the heterodoxy of 1795 became orthodoxy in 1828 . Other illustrations might be furnished to the same effect . But I shall here merely call attention to the latest , —the very latest theological earthquake . I mean the revised New Testament . For about two hundred and seventy years , English speaking Protestants sermonised

that every word in the King James's version of the New Testament was a word of God , bufc the revised edition of thafc work shows thafc thousands of words in the old New Testament are not the words of God . * The American Baptists have got np a revised New Testament of their own , in which baptism in water instead of by water is their word of God . And as numerous alterations proposed by the American

branch of the New Testament revisers were not adopted by the English revisers , they are now getting up here an American revised New Testament . We shall soon , therefore , have the Catholic , the King James , the new English revision , the American Baptist ' s revi . sion , and an American revision of New Testaments . A . nd who can say which of these five versions shall be called the Word of God ?

Yefc that is not all . I heard the Bev . Bro . Savage say in his pulpit that , of about sixteen hundred New Testament manuscripts still exist , ing , some of them are complete and others are mere fragments ; that in those 1600 MS . there are noless than one hundred and fifty thousand variations . Who then knows whether , in a few years hence , a few dozen more versions of the New Testament may not appear , and

which of those versions will Masons place on the Masonio altar as their Word of God ? But something more is coming . And here I shall for the first time trespass on a religious boundary line—I mean the coming revised Old Testament . Suppose now that we should find in Isaiah ch . vii ., verse 14 of thafc edition , not , " behold a virgin shall conceive , " but , behold the

young woman beaveth , or the young woman has conceived , or the young woman is pregnant;—for either of tbe above translations would accord with the Hebrew text in Isaiah . Suppose the correct rendering should be found in the forthcoming Old Testament , what would then become of the -inspiration of the author of the Gospel according to St . Matthew ?

On taking all the above facts into consideration , I feel therefore justified in warning our Grand Lodges thafc if they sincerely mean to perpetuate onr Institution upon a cosmopolitan basis ; if their aim is to banish hypocrisy from our midst ; if they want the Craft to shun find avoid religious disputations ; in short , if they desire that harmony

instead of discord should prevail among the Masonic brotherhood ; then they must pnt a stop to all kind of sectarian sermonising in Lodges , and also in the Masonic press . Masons should be privileged 'o believe- or disbelieve in this or thafc dogma , bufc they shonld be strictly prohibited from pestering each other with religious dogmas i nside as well as outside the Lodge , under any pretence whatever .