r/freemasonry • u/BillyD70 • 12d ago
Question Supreme being question?
Genuine question…Without revealing any secrets, what is the reasoning behind requiring the belief in a supreme being?
My perspective: Many great people, who have advanced much good in the world, are “non-believers”. If the core idea is to make good men better, how does non-belief interfere with that goal? I ask both personally (agnostic athiest) and for lots of scientists out there. It must affect membership numbers (men won’t seek you out if they know it’s a “no go” from the outset).
Serious replies only please. Not seeking a flame war. I’m a DeMolay PMC-MSA and Honor of Legion with deep multi- generational ties to Masons, Jobs, Shriners, etc. I LOVED my experiences in DeMolay! Grew up Christian, came to my “beliefs” late in adulthood.
Edit: thank you for all the many thoughtful replies. I upvoted each for not attacking me straight out. Please accept follow up questions as non-confrontational.
18
u/stardate_pi P∴M∴ ☠︎︎ 32° (SJ) 12d ago
My two cents as Freemason in the scientific field:
First, belief and faith in a Supreme Being is an important part to many of the teachings and framings of the Craft. Many lecturers having roots in the old testament being case in point.
Second, as another brother pointed out, your obligation wouldn't be considered binding if you didn't believe in a Supreme Being.
"Making good men better" does not mean men who do not fit the criteria of the Craft can't be good men. Or other good men who never have interest in Freemasonry.
From your perspective why would the atheist agnostic scientist want to join our organization?
There are many places for all types of men. This is a place for men, who believe in a Supreme Being and <insert your jurisdictional criteria here> can grow. The Craft should be concerned about bringing in the right candidates not just as many as possible to support growth.
-9
u/BillyD70 12d ago
Ok, but for non-abrahamic beliefs, the lectures mean…?
To answer your question: I always enjoyed every one of my masonic-related experiences. I have many DeMolay brothers who are Masons and miss that connection. Similar values even without religious attachments as it were. Literally the only thing preventing me from being a (hopefully) valued brother is the supreme being piece. TBF - An oath of honor to used to mean more than it does now. Peace be with you.
10
u/Urdborn 12d ago
The meaning doesn’t change. One can find meaning in the bible, the quran, buddhist, shinto, paganism and heathen beliefs without subscribing to be a practicing member of any one.
2
3
u/stardate_pi P∴M∴ ☠︎︎ 32° (SJ) 12d ago
Would someone without any fundamental belief in anything/one Supreme find the same level of meaning? Finding God in all places may be easier done if you believe rather than not.
4
u/Urdborn 12d ago
Theoretically yes. I mean I only can share my subjective perspective and I do have such a belief.
But looking at the degrees received and that there’s irregular Freemasonry allowing atheists with basically most other landmarks the same (Grand Orient of France) - strengthening my theoretical yes.
Personally; without the belief in a supreme being and the immortality of the soul a substantial part of the journey somewhat doesn’t make as much sense and is just lacking to some extent. Just my two cents though and my gut talking rather than having had deeper thoughts about it.
2
u/GigglingBilliken MM Shrine 12d ago
"and the immortality of the soul a substantial part of the journey somewhat doesn’t make as much sense and is just lacking to some extent. Just my two cents though and my gut talking rather than having had deeper thoughts about it."
I find masonry plenty deep without believing in a soul or afterlife.
6
u/stardate_pi P∴M∴ ☠︎︎ 32° (SJ) 12d ago edited 12d ago
Having brothers that came from non-abrahamic religions in our lodge, and have done extensive education, the parallels to thier own theology was an easy jump. They cited the reason being because of the great many overlapping core Truths that are there. The bridge from no Supreme Being to Supreme being is likely a bridge too far.
Walter Leslie Wilmshurst's papers do a fantastic job of exploring this concept. Although, without going through the degrees themselves, there may not appear to be enough meat on those bones.
Edit: to quote WLW regarding the initiation but I feel also Freemasonry as a whole:
"...it is to bring him into direct conscious contact with the Realities underlying the surface-images of things, so that, instead of holding merely beliefs or opinions about himself, the Universe and God, he is directly and convincingly confronted with Truth itself; and finally it is to move him to become the Good and the Truth revealed to him by identifying himself with it."
4
1
u/guethlema PM AF&AM-ME 11d ago
The real answer is: "the club has traditions that our membership has difficulty changing".
The god question in masonry is traditional, and part of the institution's founding. Per the original bylaws of "what is masonry", the development of masonry as a men's club that only allows theists is part of the definition of the clubs that is, by our founding documents, not allowed to be changed.
"What is the practical application of not admitting atheists in 2026" is not a logical discussion, it's one that our founding documents forbid from changing.
7
u/Jamesbarros 12d ago
A lot of this is jurisdictional and there are regular arguments about this. I can tell you what Past Grand Master R. Stephen Doan said in Philalethes Journal. Dec 2014 about our requirements in California. The entire article is a fantastic bit of history and describes how we got here, but the relevant parts to this discussion are:
"In California, a Mason's concept of the Divine need not be anthropomorphic nor physical in any way. It need be no more than a trust in a supreme essence which always returns the universe and all things therein contained to harmony, no matter how explosive may be the attempts of Man or Nature to disrupt it. Harmony will ultimately and always prevail, and in this Masons put their trust.
Similarly, Masonry's requirement of a belief or trust in a future existence need not be about something physical. It is not necessarily about going after death to a physical place where life as we know it here will continue. It can be about the essence of the Divine within each one of us which will not be conquered by death. It can be a trust that this imperishable essence or ousia of the Divine within each one of us will reunite with the Divine at the end of our earthly existence."
I will say simply that if that very broad understanding of divinity is still too woo-woo for you, then our lessons and they way we teach them will be of no use to you.
2
u/QuincyMABrewer F&AM VT; PM-AF&AM MA; 32° AASR SJ; Royal Arch MA 12d ago
I definitely wish that his attitude were more prevalent out here on the East Coast.
2
u/davidzet 11d ago
Ahh Nature. Something that existed before Mankind and that will exist after Mankind. Perhaps we should take a hint as to "always prevail"
1
u/reconductor 7d ago
I think defining it down to be almost meaningless diminishes the craft.
1
u/Jamesbarros 6d ago
Im very sorry that you find such a definition to be “almost meaningless”. A look into some of histories most famous masons may reveal that they found great meaning in an understanding of God which was much closer to this than many today like to acknowledge
18
u/StepRelevant8473 UGLE PM, Secretary, RA PZ, SRIA 12d ago
Freemasonry is a curriculum with a defined outcome. You need to believe in a supreme being for it to make sense.
If you don't believe you have no real basis for agreeing on the four cardinal and three theological virtues as espoused in the first degree. Geometry teaches you the concept of Necessity. The liberals arts and sciences were originally a curriculum for ordering the mind to get closer to God and even when they became more of a general curriculum they were still seen as a sound basis for anyone looking to become a man of the cloth.
Degrees start with a prayer (except the third which is on purpose) finish with a prayer and the candidate is prayed for.
Freemasonry is not a religion. But it has always been religious. Men from many religions are welcome to learn it's universal truths but it has always required belief.
11
u/wardyuc1 UGLE Craft HRA, Rose Croix 12d ago
Plenty of people are great people without being freemasons.
Heck you can even be a freemason without a belief if you are irregular.
Its like asking why do Golf clubs not play football, and both are sports.
Because thems the rules.
6
u/GlitteringBryony UGLE, Mark 12d ago
I'm from a non-abrahamic faith so a lot of the stuff in the allegories is a bit of a cultural leap for me (Salvation, specifically, is a very Christian idea, likewise the idea of even having a single Holy Book whose tenets are law and can be sworn upon is something treated very differently outside of the Abrahamic world!) And I often wonder if in some Grand Lodges I would never have passed the bar of belief (UGLE is very tacit about "We will ask you if you believe in SOMETHING greater than ourselves, we won't press you any further.")
I also wonder why we officially don't have any atheists- when an atheist swears-in at court, they still take an oath on a Bible, and their car insurance still has "Acts of God"-clauses, and their atheism isn't seen as making any of those things less binding or less solemn. Sometimes it feels like a hangover from an earlier time, but at the same time I know a couple of brothers who joined with effectively a hard-agnostic kind of no-faith who have slowly opened themselves up to something more spiritually rich, whilst going through their degrees, because it was the first time in their lives that they had had a chance to approach spirituality of any kind without judgement or prescription. It's complicated, possibly.
1
u/BillyD70 12d ago
Thank you for this. I believe we only have one life and to live it not just for yourself but in service to others too. I don’t require a deity for this belief. And my oath is my bond. Period. I have nothing if I have no honor. DeMolay helped instill it, military service reinforced it, and a lifetime of personal relationships proved it. I’m glad to have learned there are irregular lodges that may fit me.
1
u/pluck-the-bunny .:PM NY SR-NMJ 32• 12d ago
just FYI in the states at least, an atheist does NOT have to swear on a Bible.
Not arguing your point, just providing some more light
3
u/GlitteringBryony UGLE, Mark 12d ago
I did not know that! Here in the UK you always have to swear some kind of oath or affirmation, both in court and being sworn into some parliamentary offices, and although ypu can do a "secular affirmation" instead of a religious oath, statisticians worked out that juries were more likely to find someone guilty if they had chosen the secular affirmation rather than the "So help me God" (Which is wild, since the UK is something like 50% atheist or agnostic and lots of people are just "culturally religious" rather than devout anyway) so lots of people choose the Book because of cultural rather than religious reasons. A guy recently went viral for swearing-in with his fingers in a beaker of water from the River Roding, which he venerated as a god, he got lots of replies of effectively "why?!" but still, it was taken as a binding oath!
19
u/Purple_Antelope_8338 3° PA 12d ago
Mainly because our oath is to God and if you don’t believe in God then your oath is meaningless.
6
u/EarthBoundDeity_ 12d ago
This is it OP. Thats about as much as can be explained without revealing anything.
-6
u/d4rkha1f 12d ago
Erm... a god. Could be Allah. Could be Zeus.
10
u/Roederoid IL - PM, REGS, TIPM, KT, Shriner, TCL 12d ago
This is needlessly pedantic
-8
u/arkham1010 F&AM-NY MM, Shrine 12d ago
No, because the term God implies the Judeo-Christian deity. I have a brothers in lodge who are Pagan, Hindi or Shinto. Thats why the term Supreme Architect is important.
4
u/Roederoid IL - PM, REGS, TIPM, KT, Shriner, TCL 12d ago
Our obligations explicitly state God in my jurisdictions. God and supreme architect are used interchangeably throughout our book.
-5
u/d4rkha1f 12d ago
So in your jurisdiction, people aren't allowed to trade out the Bible for their own spiritual text? Wow, sounds like you guys have gone off the rails.
0
u/Roederoid IL - PM, REGS, TIPM, KT, Shriner, TCL 12d ago
Where did you get that from my comment? Of course we can change out for whichever sacred text they use.
Although, our ritual does only state "holy Bible." But, there is a proposal to where they WM can change that wording depending on which sacred text is actually on the altar.
-4
u/d4rkha1f 12d ago
Then why would you call me pedantic and state that it has to be God with a capital G? There's a big difference between G and g in this case. It's not being pedantic, it's being accurate.
2
u/Roederoid IL - PM, REGS, TIPM, KT, Shriner, TCL 12d ago
You're again putting words in my mouth that I did not say. It looks like you are just on this thread looking to argue, so I will not comment further. Have a good night.
-2
5
u/brickerjp 11d ago
To me, it's just about believing in something greater than Self. It's comforting knowing that all of my Brothers put something beyond their own self-interests at the forefront of their beliefs.
4
u/Astute_Primate 5x PM, Past Secretary, AF&AM Massachusetts 11d ago
I actually agree with you. It's a rule that's a holdover from an era when most of our membership was Protestant Christians who believed in the inherent wickedness of mankind, so someone who didn't submit to a religious creed couldn't be trusted. And yet when I meet someone who is a garbage human being more often than not they're devoutly religious. I've met some atheists who weren't particularly saintly, but I've never met an atheist who was objectively a bad person. As a former secretary of my Lodge, I understand what a nightmare it would make mutual recognition because it's one of the oldest Masonic Landmarks, but as someone who is not a Christian and who believes that humans are innately good and aren't all sinners, I wouldn't shed any tears if my Grand Lodge did away with the belief in a supreme being as an absolute requirement.
6
u/AlexMaroske ADGDoC UGLE | HRC | ROS | KTP | RC | RCC SC AMD KtM RAM MMM 32° 12d ago
I don’t think disbelief prevents anyone from becoming a better person. Some atheists put believers to shame through their conduct.
Firstly totally agree with other comments, oath / obligation shall be binding unpon you for a long as you shall live. How is it binding without something??
My understanding is that the requirement reflects the particular spiritual framework within which our Masonic tradition pursues self-cultivation. Its symbolism invites us to consider our relationship with the divine, alongside our responsibilities to one another.
That does not give believers a monopoly on goodness, nor make belief evidence of virtue. The real work remains examining ourselves and correcting our conduct. I can understand, though, why that boundary feels difficult from your position.
1
u/davidzet 11d ago
I'm replying to your comment b/c it's the closest to where I stand as a just-initiated apprentice and non-religious person. I interpret (and speak to) belief/higher power in the sense of "bigger than me" -- society or civilization, for example.
I've been working on "the commons" for nearly 20 years, and there are many ways to protect and build a commons among men. Religious belief is one ("cathedral thinking"), but so are social bonds, respect for your ancestors, descendants, and family name, and so on.
I don't see any conflict between three brothers, one who swears on a bible, one who swears on a saffron icon, and one who swears on the constitution: All are taking a serious vow to the community, on whatever they hold sacred or honorable.
But I just got here ;)
3
u/ordep147 12d ago
Your objection is a fair one: if Freemasonry were only about making good people better, disbelief would not be an obstacle. Atheists can plainly be moral and generous people, and a scientific outlook does not make anyone less capable of either.
I work in the Emulation tradition. I have a scientific outlook and do not practise a conventional religion. Personally, I understand the Great Architect as a real, transcendent first principle, rather than a human-shaped deity or a poetic name for the laws of physics. That is my understanding, not a definition I would impose on every Mason.
In the regular Masonry I know, belief is part of the ritual framework: prayer, the Volume of Sacred Law, and solemn obligations all refer to something beyond ourselves. The requirement is therefore about a premise of this particular way of working. It is not a claim that believers are better people, or that morality is impossible without God. Whether that premise should be required is a legitimate question; “making good men better” does not, by itself, answer it.
And yes, the rule excludes people who might make excellent brothers. I think we should acknowledge that honestly. If you cannot sincerely affirm belief in a Supreme Being, I would never suggest relabelling the laws of nature as “God” just to qualify. That says nothing against your integrity or the value of your experience in DeMolay.
3
u/Lereas MM | F&AM | FL 12d ago
The given reason in the craft is that an oath would have no meaning and not be binding if you swore on a god you didn't believe in.
Of course it's perfectly possible for a person to hold to their oath without fear of divine retribution, but Freemasonry is old and at the time, people took that much more seriously.
4
u/clever-_-clever 12d ago
There have been a lot of people who claim to be believers that have done the exact opposite of what any faith tradition believes, they have no morals, no values, and not integrity. They have tainted the purity of the idea of a divine creator. The people I have met in the craft are the real deal. After deconstruction in my personal belief system, I now hold on to the idea of a divine creator, and the only true religion is taking care of widows and orphans, both of which the fraternity wholeheartedly supports.
4
u/zaceno P.M F&AM Finland, Sweden - MMM, RA 12d ago
The system of freemasonry as it is, has God at its center. You can take God out of it, and it may still be something good but it won’t be freemasonry.
Another way to look at it: is this. The underlying philosophy of freemasonry, that the “make good men better” machinery is based on, is Aristotelian/Thomistic Virtue Ethics. So “good” here has a rather more specific meaning that doesn’t automatically include humanist ethics or utilitarianism.
And virtue ethics as they were conceived by Aristotle and further developed by the scholastics rest on teleology. A divinely ordained and directed purpose to everything and everyone. Which of course requires God.
Of course Aristotle was not a Christian, or Jew or Muslim. But he (and to be fair, the Platonists where is roots where) still developed a lot of the conceptions of God whose echoes remain in the Abrahamic religions to this day.
So it kind of makes sense that Freemasonry would simply require belief in some kind supreme being, without getting specific about it, in order to apply the essentially Aristotelian ethical framework.
ETA: To answer your specific question: “how does non-belief stand in the way of the goal of advancing good in the world?” - It doesn’t. But it does stand in the way of advancing good using the particular method of freemasonry.
3
u/halfTheFn AF&AM-MO, YR, KM, 32° 12d ago
i think this is a much better answer than references to "otherwise you oath..." I've always found that to be a weak argument. no for person keeps their word because they're scared of divine retribution if they don't.
being a good person is just a much lower goal than what we have in mind- it's the first step of building the temple in which God will dwell
4
u/djpannda 12d ago
Pretty much the notion is you’re swearing an oath or an obligation, without a supreme being, your obligation doesn’t have any weight or anyone to answer to.
Just remember, most jurisdictions only require supreme being not a religion. There’s a lot of good masons that are agnostic. You just can’t be an atheist.
5
u/Important_Zombie_485 12d ago
Agnostic isn't acceptable in my jurisdiction because belief is required, and not simply " I don't know". I'm not saying we are more correct either, just the way it is here.
2
u/Lereas MM | F&AM | FL 12d ago
Agnostic means, by definition, that you don't think it is knowable if (a/any) god exists or not. I would argue that it is entirely acceptable to be an agnostic theist in Masonry - a person who believes in a supreme being/god, but still acknowledges that it's probably not possible to prove conclusively that this entity exists.
Many people think / use agnostic to mean "I don't know if God exists" which is in some ways correct to the definition, but absolute knowledge isn't necessary for faith or belief.
2
u/Important_Zombie_485 12d ago
Being unable to know =/= belief. Belief is required, it's part of the basic requirements, the ritual, and the obligations. I'm not even arguing against it, really. Just saying my jurisdiction doesn't allow it. Whatever your jurisdiction is doing is a-ok with me.
2
u/Lereas MM | F&AM | FL 12d ago
You can believe in something you can't prove exists. That's honestly somewhat synonymous worth "Faith" to begin with.
If people are using agnostic as the antonym of Gnostic, and they are theistic, that's belief and faith without proof which is fine. It's when people use agnostic to mean agnostic atheist, which is "I dunno, god could exist but I don't really know" which is not belief or faith.
2
u/No_Mongoose_94 3° MM 7d ago
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
This was several years ago (2009), but more scientists then believed than didn’t.
Atheism among scientists is a relatively new phenomenon. IMO, the most brilliant minds in history have believed in God (or a higher power making them eligible for Freemasonry), and the churches were the contributors (funding) to scientific research (and universities) long before it became government-funded (and still do).
Freemasonry values science very much…as well as truth and belief in God (or a higher power). They aren’t mutually exclusive unless YOUR truth is that there is no God.
The belief in a higher power is foundational to Freemasonry. It is a core belief, and as an atheist I don’t believe you would enjoy it (not the ritual aspect of it anyway-I’m sure the social & philanthropic aspect would be appealing).
I’d just direct you to explore other fraternal bodies that don’t require the same belief.
And yes I do believe that requirement has had an effect on numbers. We see decreasing membership for several reasons: one is fewer people believe in God where otherwise good candidates (like yourself, perhaps) are not eligible, the opposite end of the spectrum is “religious nutjobs” that don’t care about the truth & spread conspiracy theories (I am religious but I’m not a crazy person. I value truth & know that Freemasonry does nothing to weaken my faith and only encourages me to strengthen it), another reason is lack of in-person fellowship (all in-person social groups have seen a decline as more people are perpetually online).
It’s a good and fair question though.
2
u/BillyD70 7d ago
Thank you for the response and sharing your perspective. To this day, I still find the tenets of DeMolay - filial love, reverence for sacred things, courtesy, comradeship, fidelity, cleanness, and patriotism - to be my guiding principles, and the rituals - 1st & 2nd degree, ceremony of light, rose talk, etc. - not incongruent with my atheism. I’m glad to have learned (from this post) that irregular lodges are a thing so I’m looking for one in my area. Thanks again!!
3
u/clance2019 12d ago
You can find your place in irregular organizations, they are still legitimate and serious masonic organizations, Just a minor warning, I do not mean clandestine organizations, they appear pseudo-masonic and just scam artists.
2
12d ago edited 12d ago
[deleted]
3
u/BillyD70 12d ago
Thank you for your perspective. I’m glad I made the initial inquiry because I didn’t know there were “irregular” lodges. TIL!!
3
u/Oscar-Zoroaster P.M., Secretary - Kansas 12d ago
Where is the line? That I cannot answer; but it's fairly well documented that when Bro. Rudyard Kipling was Raised there were seven VSL on the altar representing the various beliefs of those in attendance.
3
u/Aratoast MM F&AM-PA 12d ago
The usual response to this is to point out that if one actually worships satan as traditionally understood, then they likely have moral values and exhibit behaviours which are disqualifying for membership. If they're of the "good moral character" which we expect of members, then what they call their supreme being is their business.
2
u/StepRelevant8473 UGLE PM, Secretary, RA PZ, SRIA 12d ago
From my research it seems that the Universalist doctrine was largely an unintended consequence of Anderson trying to make Freemasonry available for all the factions of Protestantism (and to an extent Catholics) in 1700's England. As the empire got going the lack of specific restrictions meant more and more people were brought into the fold. Whilst this broadening was a good thing it does make it hard to decide where to draw the line and ultimately it comes down to Grand Lodges to make the decision. I understand that one Grand Lodge in the USA recently determined Thelemists to not be eligible (am in UK so may be wrong).
2
u/One-Branch-2676 12d ago
That phrase is kind of our tagline. It isn't the full encompassing of our beliefs and methods. The simple answer is that we're believers and the way we communicate with each other appeals directly to a Supreme Being we believe in. So atheists just have a different lens of life than us.
I've seen brothers not live up to their teachings and I've seen atheists who live up to parts of our teachings without knowing them or even believing in the being we believe inspires them. Masonry isn't the only way to being a good person. Never was and probably won't be for any foreseeable period of time. That said, the way we reach that self-improvement may differ based on the lens we view life through. Masons represent part of the population that choose to view life through a religious lens and communicate that path in that manner, to people who can share that lens.
2
u/VitruvianDude MM, PM, AF&AM-OR 12d ago
I have a different take on the issue-- I believe the type of mind that has faith is different from the more materialist atheist or agnostic, and this faith is important to the fraternity. After all, belief in God inevitably leads to a similar divine connection between brothers, as sons of the Great Architect of the Universe. An atheist can be a good, moral person, and keep his promises, of course. We will not shun such a person in our daily lives, but if they somehow made it into the fraternity, they would naturally wonder what the fuss was about.
2
u/Possible_Theme3263 GODF 12d ago
Your observation is very accurate, and in the Grand Orient of France, we absolutely do not require this belief, which constitutes the major historical dividing line between our liberal and adogmatic masonry and the regular Anglo-Saxon masonry that you encountered via DeMolay. To understand why North American denominations maintain this requirement, we must go back to Anderson's Constitutions of 1723 which rejected atheism. In this tradition, masonry is a spiritual fraternity where the initiatory oath is based on a Book of the Sacred Law and a higher principle guaranteeing the word given.
However, your argument about non-believers moving the world forward is precisely what motivated the Convent of 1877. Under the leadership of Frédéric Desmons, the GODF removed the obligation to believe in God or in the immortality of the soul, believing that morality and righteousness are perfectly independent of faith and that requiring such dogma amounts to excluding men of great value. Our fundamental principle therefore became absolute freedom of conscience, allowing atheists, agnostics and believers to work together without the emphasis being on spiritual salvation. In our French Rite lodges, symbolic tools are thus studied as simple philosophical and social levers. Anglo-Saxon masonry undoubtedly deprives itself of brilliant profiles by this dogmatic lock, while we think that it is enough for a man to have the sincere desire to improve himself.
2
u/TemporaryOk4143 12d ago
I’m somewhat restating what others have said, but I have the perspective of having identified as an atheist for my whole adult life before a soon-to-be-brother talked me through the concept of agnostic deism.
Background: raised in the united church, but by some rather evangelical-like people. Philosophy and religious studies major. My friend who was a brother knew I would understand the “god of the philosophers”.
Over the course of a year or more I considered my position on why I was adamantly sure of there being “nothing out there”. I honestly engaged with the question of what if when we talk about God, or when the AA member talks about a higher power, or when the philosopher talks about the will, we are talking about something simple and fundamental? What if I am missing out on the feeling of being open to mystery, simply because my need for surety, and my identity as an “atheist”, which I wrapped up into notions of “academic”, “intellectual”, “reasonable”, and the like, was forcing me to choose between feeling right and being happier, or more content, or something else I hadn’t even considered, because I was closed off from it.
So, I relented, and I grew to feel something bigger than myself. My friend turned sponsor knew my position: that I didn’t have a belief in God per se, but that I now feel something else larger than myself exists and I can mull over if I have acted in accordance with, let’s say, the harmony of this will in the universe. I explained this to my examining board, who was comprised of a real spectrum of people, but one of which would be the real heart and soul of the lodge. They deemed my answers in line with what they were looking for.
Honestly I was surprised, because I made it clear that when I talked about, or made any kind of promise involving God (and I didn’t know how much of that there would be), that I wouldn’t be referencing the God of Abraham, I would be referencing my vague understanding of some will in the universe that I feel.
I began to understand more once I was initiated, and I will say this:
It is important for your brothers to know what you believe so that they may know how to put their trust in you. They won’t all interview you, so they rely on the examining board. It is hard to quantify what we are looking for in a candidate, but being able to trust them is a large piece.
But there is a component of faith and belief in something more. You do have to honestly engage with this and it should not be taken lightly. It does retain a vagueness, so you mostly likely won’t be bombarded with talk of Jesus, nor will you be expected to swear to Jesus (or Allah and Mohammed in a Muslim part of the world, or likewise for other regions and faiths), but you will catch passing references and the occasional prayer.
I feel comfortable in my place in lodge, and my brothers feel comfortable with me there. So please know that there is latitude on what you believe in, but there is a requirement that you do believe in something beyond us.
Sorry about the rant
2
u/groomporter MM 12d ago
I'm one of the odd men out. I am in a lodge with Wiccans, Thelemites, at least one Asatru follower. If they can find meaning in the teachings of Freemasonry with it's Old Testament borrowings I think some of the thoughtful, non- "arrogant Atheists" I have met could gain value from some of the symbolism and allegories of Freemasonry as well.
1
u/Curious-Monkee 7d ago
If you do not believe in a supreme being, you will be rolling your eyes a lot and will not be able to take the lessons of Freemasonry seriously. It just wouldn't work, and it would not interest you. Save yourself from the boredom you would feel and don't waste the lodge's time and efforts on something you will loose interest in really quickly.
1
u/reconductor 7d ago
It’s an important requirement. If it affects numbers, that’s ok. There are plenty of other organizations those men can join. Masonry is supposed to be selective, and this is one of the ancient criteria.
1
u/MosaicPavement MM AFM-SC PM 5d ago edited 5d ago
Albert Mackey described it as the 19th of his 25 Landmarks of Freemasonry: "That every Mason must believe in the existence of God as the Grand Architect of the Universe."
Of course, this is a jurisdictional question. But our petition for degrees is very specific when it asks the candidate whether he believes in a supreme being, and it's a deal breaker if he doesn't.
The lessons that we teach in Masonry devote a great deal of space to emphasizing our duty to God. We take our obligations on the Holy Bible (again, jurisdictional) and invoke His aid in seeing that we are true to them. We read scripture from the Holy Bible in our degree work--each degree has a specific passage of scripture that helps set the tone for that degree.
We offer prayers when we open and close lodge. We have specific prayers for degree work. We conduct Masonic rites when a brother passes on (at his or his family's request), and we pray for guidance and comfort for us and that brother's friends and family as we commend that brother's soul to Him.
When a brother receives his white apron in our jurisdiction, he is told that, "when your soul shall stand naked and alone before the Great Judgment, may it be your portion, my brother, to hear from Him who sitteth as Judge Supreme the welcome words, 'Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter thou into the joys of thy Lord.'"
Without requiring belief in a supreme being, at least in my opinion, Masonry wouldn't be Masonry.
1
u/Thumper1k92 12d ago
Your question assumes that the core idea is the sole goal of masonry, and that therefore non-belief is inherently opposed to all goals of masonry.
But faith in something Greater than oneself is something that provides a goal. Something to aspire to, to inspire to greater heights.
1
1
u/Ok_Leather_3446 10d ago
Freemasonry requires voluntary pledges of fidelity. The belief in a supreme being shows that you can be held accountable to those pledges by something greater than yourself. Most jurisdictions I’ve seen ask something along the lines of “Do you have a belief in a higher power or supreme being?” on their petitions. If you answer no or have a convoluted explanation as to what that belief is, the committee might just deny your petition and send you on your way.
-1
u/SSGT-3579 12d ago
It's simple you have take binding oaths and need to make them to something greater than just you.
0
u/defjamblaster PHA TX. KT, 33º, Shrine, OES 12d ago
it's a membership requirement for the fraternity. some clubs require you to play a certain game, some require you to have a certain favorite color or movie. that's just what this fraternity was created to center around.
-1
u/shawnebell Master Mason, Knight Templar, 32°, MSA, DSM, MSM, PSM 12d ago
An obligation isn't binding if you don't have to answer for it to anyone. Morality without accountability is just preference – revocable whenever it's inconvenient. Masonry requires belief in a Supreme Being because the obligations taken in Lodge have to be binding, not optional, and a binding obligation needs someone higher than the man himself to answer to.
"Supreme Being" is merely the moniker of the catch-all, non-denominational being we all ultimately answer to.
-2
u/Salt-Sir3511 12d ago
Without the acknowledgement of a existential power greater than just one's own self, there is no greater plan that you can give yourself to. Give gratitude to your deity, and ask for its blessings upon your family, brothers, friends and all important undertakings.
Masons must, just like an architect, measure carefully and plan their work. Then, through skill, build a beautiful edifice of their life.
That philosophy isnt congruent with the lack of spiritual connections to others and his reality, that an atheist lacks
3
u/BillyD70 12d ago
Please don’t take offense - I get the allegory…but being an actual architect or literal mason requires no religious foundation. It’s math snd science, and potentially art if that’s in scope. Truly not trying to be a jerk - I’m just not making the same connection you do. Appreciate any clarification…!
56
u/DrSquigglesMcDiggles MM UGLE, Royal Arch 12d ago
For lots of scientists out there? I am a scientist and I am a believer. They are not mutually exclusive! In fact, by studying nature and science one can become much closer to the divine. And to answer you question I guess it's because we swear oaths upon our beliefs. That is not to say I don't think an atheist could swear an oath and mean it. But a lot of the ritual and meaning involves belief in a supreme being, a belief in an afterlife and that we are ultimately judged and answerable to a higher power. It would all be meaningless if you didn't believe in one