QSA Members Forum
For Masonic Research
"Politics and Religion - Do we have to be silent or do we have to act?"
Politics and Religion - Do we have to be silent or do we have to act?
Review of a Paper published in the
Newsletter of the Großloge der Alten Freien und Angenommenen Maurer von Deutschland
(by Bro. Vincent Lombardo)
Please note: this page is best viewed with Google Chrome (Zoomed at 150%)
Many questions and soul-searching have preoccupied the Freemasons in all generations regarding the tenet prohibiting any dealings concerning politics and religion within the lodge room, viva voce, and even in writing. At the beginning of the 18th century, this prohibition was due to the real danger of losing one's life or lose the permission to assemble and practice the Craft (by the Speculative Masons), tolerated by governments based on genuine or pretended associative rights granted from time immemorial to the (Operative) Masons, of which the Speculative ones claimed to be the descendants. The Enlightenment expanded the speculative activity of the Freemasons into the practice of Charity, gaining favor and luster among both those governing and the governed. In recent times, and presently, the Speculative side has in most Masonic lands disappeared, while the Charitable one, together with a heightened sense of civic, moral, and human duty has found favor and championship among the Freemasons, especially in Germany.
The question Bro. Wolfgang Kreis, the author of Paper, poses to his Brethren is valid and pressing: how can we succeed in better helping the unfortunates of our world, if we are not permitted to discuss in our lodges policies (politics and religion) related to their misfortunes?
Let us let Bro. Kreis speak for himself:
Müssen wir schweigen oder müssen wir handeln?
(Do we have to be silent, or do we have to act?)
It's dark around me. Occasionally I see bright spots break open. The sky clears up. I see isolated groups of people discussing. They talk about freedom, equality, brotherhood, freedom of the press, human rights. They call themselves Freemasons and they want to change the world.
They meet hidden — in secret, because the ruling power sees them as a danger. A danger to their privileges, their influences, their positions and machinations. But the Freemasons meet anyway and one of them, an Anglican priest [Presbyterian Minister], describes in his Old Duties the image of the Freemasons that is supposed to calm the rulers. And he succeeded for the most part.
The Freemasons succeeded. Ideas prepared in silence can be found today in the constitutions and laws of free democracies. Of course, it wasn't the Freemasons alone, but they did their part and helped to enlighten society a little and give people the opportunity to free themselves from their immaturity.
With a few exceptions, lodges as a whole did not speak up. Individual Brethren, who have dedicated themselves wholeheartedly and with all their might to mankind, acted, just as we all promised to do it as apprentices when we were initiated. This is what the Masons of the founding generation of modern Freemasonry thought. And how does it look today? How can we live up to our pledge today?
It is not up to any individual brother, nor lodge, and not even grand lodge to dictate to the individual brother what he has to get involved in and also not how he has to do it. That he should do something can be demanded of him, although there is of course no control. The lodge can and should give us brethren the necessary space and time to reflect on our commitment, to think through and develop our half-baked ideas with the other brethren. When it comes to the topics that are then discussed, there must be no taboo, if we take the motivations and ideas of our founding fathers seriously.
I have heard several times from my brethren that politics and religion are not allowed to be discussed in lodges. Even as an apprentice, this statement irritated me. How am I supposed to live freedom, equality, brotherhood, tolerance and philanthropy as a Freemason, and how should I work for it, if I am not allowed to talk about these topics in the Lodge? My irritation cleared as I read the Old Charges. There is no word there that we are not allowed to talk about politics and religion in the lodge. — We mustn't argue about it, and that is something completely different. Talking about politics and religion, exchanging ideas without getting into each other's hair and arguing is, of course, not always easy, but that is exactly what we Freemasons want and should learn in the lodges, and put tolerance and philanthropy above differences of opinion. What's so bad about a brother who disagrees with me? He remains my dear brother still.
It's all about the discourse, the exchange, the learning, then we are much better equipped to do justice to our commitment outside the lodge.
If we don't want to talk about religion, we can simply hide it. But is this also possible with politics? The immediate question is what politics in this sense is. For me, it is what concerns us all as a community, as a society and what we as democrats should, indeed must, deal with is political, so that our free democracy is preserved. This is how I understand the phrase "to conscientiously fulfill my duties to my family, my community, my country and the community of all people" in the obligation.
Let's take the current issue of refugees coming to Europe. — Is that a humanitarian issue or a political one? Can they even be separated? We help out of humanitarian convictions, but this help also has political and social consequences. Can politics, as a topic, be left out of the lodge? — May we remain silent when attempts are made to undo the achievements of the Enlightenment? Each brother can only answer this question for himself, and then perhaps draw appropriate conclusions.
What is the reality of political abstinence in the lodges? What can we find in our work plans? Here are a few topics: "Right-wing extremism," "The threat to the natural basis of existence is wrong", "Europe, a community of values?", "Refugee crisis", "Euthanasia", "The TTIP free trade agreement." I think these are political issues, and our work plans show us that political issues have de facto arrived in our lodges and we can deal with them very well.
The first part of my initial question "Do we have to be silent, or do we have to act?" Is answered. We don't have to be silent. We can do it. But we don't have to. We have a choice.
But do we have to act?
In our ritual we are challenged to prove ourselves as Freemasons. That would answer the question in the affirmative. But what does that mean in concrete terms, "to prove oneself as a Freemason?" The ritual goes on to say: "Defend against injustice where it shows itself. Never turn your back on need and misery. "That is a bit more concrete, but what exactly is injustice? When can we speak of need and misery? On the one hand, these terms are timeless, but on the other hand, they are also dependent on the zeitgeist, i.e., with variable meanings.
If we want to look at these terms realistically and pragmatically, i.e. no third-hand definitions, but want to bring in our own individual meaning out of conviction, then, in my opinion, a discourse on these terms is necessary. Here the brethren offer themselves to lead this discourse in a profitable way for all involved. Then we can act afterwards. Whether alone, with several brethren, or as a lodge as a whole, that will depend on the situation. The how will also emerge.
I think our work would only be half done if we didn't act. However, the ritual also warns us by telling us "to be watchful over yourselves." Vigilant so that we remain true to our ideals and values and do not overshoot the mark.
So mote it be.
