A Skeptic Freemason - wtf?

[Aquila]

Is Michael Shermer a Freemason?

 

[ShadowSot]

As I recall, he's an atheist. So no. But why does that matter?

 

[Aquila]

As I recall, he's an atheist. So no. But why does that matter?

Because, as the "wtf" part of the title of this thread suggests, the secrecy aspect of Freemasonry invites suspicion about the honesty of Freemasonry's members who are also skeptics.

Where there is secrecy, there is power and control, and as Checkmite just said

There's no debate that secrecy adds intrigue;

; the intrigue is used within Freemasonry itself to keep people advancing up the grades (and consequently paying the dues which are dispersed to various charities). We can't blame anyone, in my opinion, for being suspicious of organizations which keep secrets - because for all we know, they could be using the secrecy for some sort of plot.

 

[ShadowSot]

Since it's made clear that the only secrets that Freemasons keep are about the rituals, which have been available to the public for well over a century, is there anything to this beyond the same logic that exists behind conspiracy theorists?

Because it's difficult to see how having such an open secret allows for power and control.

If we're going to devolve into conspiracy gab about Freemasons and Illuminati I'm dropping out, as I goot bored with that years ago.

 

[fitzgibbon]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I've heard that Freemasons protect their own.

You're wrong. A Mason is to help a brother if he falls onto hard times/needs assistance because he's infirm/etc.

A hypothetical example which is often given is that of a Freemason who has committed a crime. The example postulates that just as the judge is about to hand down a sentence for the crime, he learns that the criminal is a Freemason and gives him a lighter punishment, for even gets him off completely, making up a loophole in the laws.

Not likely at all. In fact, given the obligations we as Masons take it's far more likely the judge would mete out a harsher punishment if he knew the defendant was a Mason.

On this note, I have a question for Freemasons; would you still have joined your lodge if there was no secrecy involved? If you did not have to agree to keep passwords and ritual details secret, would the organization still have held the same appeal for you?

Certainly. The nominal 'secrecy' of Masonry was neither here nor there as concerns my reason for joining.

Fitz

 

[fitzgibbon]

I no longer have references, and if Fitzgibbon or Light in Darkness still post here three years later they might, but Masons are instructed to not shield fellow Masons from the law.

The Master Mason obligation specifically mentions this.

You do know the rituals and such have been published and available to the public for over a century now right?

IIRC, the first printed version of Masonic ritual was available in the mid-1720s and there've been many 'exposés' in the intervening centuries.

I was thinking about joining Freemasonry, and it wasn't the secrecy. I genuinely enjoy rituals and symbolism, and being part of something with a historical background.
The charity work is also a bonus.
Unfortunately most lodges require religious belief.

Mainstream or what's referred to as Regular Masonry requires a belief in a Supreme Creator but beyond that makes no inquiry into the specifics of someone's belief structure. The lodge I'm Master of has a mixture of all flavours of Christian, Jewish, Muslim & Sikh members, all hearing the same ritual and applying to their belief structure as they understand it.

There are some masonic bodies that have eliminated that requirement (most notable being the Grand Orient of France) and are consequently not recognised as being regular having abandoned one of the primary landmarks. However, just as faith, hope and charity are said to be the 3 principle rungs of Jacob's Ladder, I think it's telling that charity is considered the chief of the three as the person in possession of this in its most ample sense may justly be described as having arrived at the summit of Masonry.

HTH
Fitz

 

[ShadowSot]

Hey Fitz! Good to see you again.
Hopefully the years haven't dulled my memory to much.
Yeah, I remember the other lodges from my time on ATS, but they are rare and none local to my part of the world.
I might check them out if I'm ever near one but got a lot of things on my plate as always.

 

[Aquila]

Yes, that's been taken up since (at least) the 1700's, and religious groups don't have copyrwrites on their symbolism. Their useage far predates the Holocaust.
Freemasonry takes a lot from the Old Testament especially legends around the building of Solomon's temple.
It's strictly legendary, and isn''t intended to be taken literally.

Using the symbolism doesn't equal out to believing all things associated with the symbol. Especially when symbolism has changed meanings over time.
Maybe look into how Fremasonry uses the symbols, by asking a Mason about it?
Some of the symbolism was simply adopted for appearances, some was part of art, some because it just looked cool. Other were given new meanings as part of the rituals that Masons them into.
Freemasonry itself has some basic rituals and apart from requiring a belief in a Supreme Being (Grand Architect of the Universe) doesn't have any other supernatural baggage, a product of the time it was developed.
In my own experience Masons take the symbolism and internalize it themselves. It can be strictly symbolic and be simply a mnemonic device, or they may take a more mystical interpretation.

Perhaps someone could expand on the above. I'm very interested in astrology - just check the majority of my posts on this forum and you will see, and I'm also skeptical about it, in that it has failed to be validated in controlled tests. Apart from Michael Shermer's test with Jeffrey Armstrong, of course, which had a double-blind method. Therefore, I'm a bit confused at Masons studying astrological symbolism. What exactly do you guys see in astrology? Do you see it as a tool to better yourselves, or simply as a way of measuring the seasons?

 

[ShadowSot]

Or maybe they just grabbed the symbols and use them without astrological significance but instead have a unique Masonic interpretation of the symbol?
Don't look at it from a astrological point of view.
I have a copy of Morals and Dogma, which has several symbols and the authors interpretations of those symbols.

 

[fitzgibbon]

Hey Fitz! Good to see you again.
Hopefully the years haven't dulled my memory to much.
Yeah, I remember the other lodges from my time on ATS, but they are rare and none local to my part of the world.
I might check them out if I'm ever near one but got a lot of things on my plate as always.

Likewise. I'm here fairly frequently though usually answers have already been provided to questions and I tend to just read through threads that catch my interest.

As for those other GLs, I'm not surprised they're rare in your neck of the world. Good hunting.

Fitz

 

[catsmate]

Is Michael Shermer a Freemason?

I doubt it, have you asked him?.
Is he a skeptic?

As I recall, he's an atheist. So no. But why does that matter?

Agnostic I think.

Mainstream or what's referred to as Regular Masonry requires a belief in a Supreme Creator but beyond that makes no inquiry into the specifics of someone's belief structure. The lodge I'm Master of has a mixture of all flavours of Christian, Jewish, Muslim & Sikh members, all hearing the same ritual and applying to their belief structure as they understand it.

There are some masonic bodies that have eliminated that requirement (most notable being the Grand Orient of France) and are consequently not recognised as being regular having abandoned one of the primary landmarks. However, just as faith, hope and charity are said to be the 3 principle rungs of Jacob's Ladder, I think it's telling that charity is considered the chief of the three as the person in possession of this in its most ample sense may justly be described as having arrived at the summit of Masonry.

HTH
Fitz

Thank you.

 

[LightinDarkness]

Hello ShadowSot and Fitz, it has been a while! Most of this has been addressed but I thought I'd just add a few things...

On this note, I have a question for Freemasons; would you still have joined your lodge if there was no secrecy involved? If you did not have to agree to keep passwords and ritual details secret, would the organization still have held the same appeal for you?

Yes. As Fitz have explained, the pillars of the order have nothing to do with secrecy anyways. I wanted to be a member of group that emphasized brotherhood and charity, but charity in a way that was not audacious or very public. I have also believed that the best charity is that which is done in secret so that you do it for the good of the act, not for the public recognition. Its not always possible to do this - some of the really big charity Freemasonry does (like Shriners hospitals) has to be very public for tax and accounting reasons. But at my local lodge level, where possible, we try to do as much in a very discrete and anonymous way. And I enjoy that, and I also appreciate the work the larger charities do.

The purpose of the secrecy isn't really to keep the rituals secret to begin with - you can find them easily. The point is to show you are a man of his word (by keeping your vows of secrecy), which is an important quality to me.

Finally, I am an academic and have worked with other freemasons. The fact that we are freemasons would never lead us to fudge our data. None of the freemasons I have ever worked for (even outside academia) would be of such a moral characterize to ever abuse the brotherhood. That doesn't mean no bad apples exist, of course, but I've never encountered one and if I did they would be swiftly reported and dealt with.

 

[LightinDarkness]

The former, and the most obvious similarity is that some Freemason symbology is "borrowed" from the kabbalah, or Jewish mysticism. Not even the mystic side, just plain Judaism. I am Jewish, and have always found this intriguing, if not a little irritating. You know, we're still trying to recover from our parents surviving the Holocaust, only to see non-Jews using the symbols for their secret rituals.

I've also seen astrology symbols on the "Grand Arch" of Freemasonry. I thought skeptics designated astrology is woo??

http://www.grandchapterofwashington.org/images/20_ra_tracing_board6_s.jpg

http://www.grandchapterofwashington.org/images/20_ra_four_living_creatures_s.jpg

(above shows the 4 Fixed signs of the Zodiac)

Both images from:

http://www.grandchapterofwashington.org/20_grand_chapter_about.html

Freemasons are also recovering from surviving the holocaust, as they were one of the primary groups other than Jews that were targeted. So your comments are actually very rude and misinformed.

Freemasonry's symbols draw on a wide variety of religious and esoteric traditions. But nothing about them requires them to be believed as religious symbols. For me - there is nothing "wooish" about my interpretation of the symbols - they all represent philosophies or ethical principles that are important to the order. Some of those philosophies might be regarded as woo if you think any generic reference to deity is woo (Grand Architect of the Universe), but that is about as wooish as it gets.

One thing you have to remember about the symbols is that while there are ritual explanations, they are always vague/surface level and there more meaningful explanation is up to the individual. There is no astrology in freemasonry that I am aware of (although some Freemasons might believe in astrology), and in fact your interpretation of the grand arch is not something I would think even more esoteric masons would agree with. To me the zodiac is used as a proxy way of mentioning the cosmos/universe, simply because its more widely known and drawing a picture of the galaxy wouldn't be very pretty. It does not mean belief in astrology is at all a part of the ritual.

This should not be confused with what individual masons may believe, they are free to interpret use of the zodiac as they like although it is NOT the explanation given to them. Even some of the most esoteric masons, like Albert Pike, did not see any astrology in freemasonry. He wrote (as quoted from the below link):

I think that no speculations are more barren than those in regard to the astronomical character of the symbols of Masonry, except those about the Numbers and their combinations of the Kabalah. All that is said about Numbers in that lecture, if not mere jugglery, amounts to nothing .... The astronomical explanations of them, however plausible, would only show that they taught no truths, moral or religious. As to tricks played with Numbers, they only show what freaks of absurdity, if not insanity, the human intellect can indulge.

To read more about the links between freemasonry and astrology, go here: http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/anti-masonry/astrology_link.html. This grand lodge website is one of the more authoritative I've seen - what it says, I have found, is in general true for mainstream freemasonry in terms of its explanation of beliefs. Note it says:

References in masonic writings to the sun, the moon, the starry firmament and the blazing star combined with the fondness of masonic artists and architects for representations of zodiacs and star charts have led both non-masons, anti-masons, and a few freemasons, to believe that astrology is somehow an integral part of the history, if not the beliefs and practices of Freemasonry. But nowhere in the rituals or practices of Freemasonry is there any hint of astrology, or belief in divination.

 

[Checkmite]

Because, as the "wtf" part of the title of this thread suggests, the secrecy aspect of Freemasonry invites suspicion about the honesty of Freemasonry's members who are also skeptics.

I don't understand what you mean, here. Freemasons aren't told to keep their membership secret. Heck, you can put bumper stickers on your car, or wear a square-and-compasses ball cap if you want. If someone says they're not one, there's no compelling reason to suspect they secretly are one but are just hiding it. And since, as has repeatedly been explained, the "secret" components of Masonry are only those involving the ceremonial component of meetings, there's no reason to think that a Mason talking about something non-Masonic-ritual-related, like milk or astrophysics or horseback riding, might be lying about it for some secret Masonic purpose.

Where there is secrecy, there is power and control, and as Checkmite just said ; the intrigue is used within Freemasonry itself to keep people advancing up the grades (and consequently paying the dues which are dispersed to various charities). We can't blame anyone, in my opinion, for being suspicious of organizations which keep secrets - because for all we know, they could be using the secrecy for some sort of plot.

No, I can't blame anyone for being suspicious. And certainly groups of people have used Masonic or quasi-Masonic lodges to facilitate bad behavior in the past. However, I think there's enough public information - both online and freely offered by Freemasons ourselves - that suspicion of any given Freemason based solely on the fact that some things are ostensibly "secret" about Freemasonry isn't a very tenable position to take. Because you're wrong - where there's secrecy, there is the potential for power and control; and while "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", it sure as heck isn't evidence of presence.

Yes, there's initiation fees; and yes, there's small one-time fees for gaining degrees; and as in any such organization, there's annual dues. But there's a rather limited number of degrees to attain; and once you've got them all - there is no more "advancing". In fact, most Masons will tell you that numbers aside there's not actually any meaningful "advancing" past degree #3.

There's an interesting story to Freemasonry, and I won't deny that interest encourages getting more degrees for people who have the inclination; but this is no less innocuous than buying more of your favorite author's books because you enjoy them. There's certainly also people who aren't so interested in that aspect, who don't go for more degrees or join ancillary organizations, and they're not considered any less "Masonic" for it.

 

[fitzgibbon]

There's also the tendency of the suspicion-inclined to view Masonry as a single worldwide behemoth assuming a unified structure that oversees all things Masonic (kind of like a fraternal version of Coke or Procter and Gamble). The reality is that (at least in North America), there's no national governance insofar as concerns Craft Masonry (I can't speak to the side rites like Scottish or York Rite) and each sub-national government (state in the US, province in Canada) has an associated Grand Lodge which is solely responsible for, sets the ritual boundaries and expectations of regular Masonry within the limits of that governmental area. So there's the Grand Lodge of New York which governs Masonry within the bounds of the state of New York or in my case, the Grand Lodge of Canada in the Province of Ontario (try toasting Grand Lodge with that mouthful [but I digress] ). Within those boundaries, those Grand Lodges are solely responsible for what the non-Masonic world sees as Masonry. So any attempt at creating a worldwide Masonic cabal with nefarious intentions at its core would be an exercise that would make its proponents look on cat-herding as a far easier, more enjoyable task with a greater likelihood of success.

Yes, there's initiation fees; and yes, there's small one-time fees for gaining degrees; and as in any such organization, there's annual dues. But there's a rather limited number of degrees to attain; and once you've got them all - there is no more "advancing". In fact, most Masons will tell you that numbers aside there's not actually any meaningful "advancing" past degree #3.

Which takes the p*ss out of those who gainsay anything that contradicts their favourite anti-Masonic hobbyhorse with 'but you're not a 33rd degree Mason. You can't possibly know all the secrets'.

There's an interesting story to Freemasonry, and I won't deny that interest encourages getting more degrees for people who have the inclination; but this is no less innocuous than buying more of your favorite author's books because you enjoy them. There's certainly also people who aren't so interested in that aspect, who don't go for more degrees or join ancillary organizations, and they're not considered any less "Masonic" for it.

Personally, I'm interested but having decided to enter the officer run for my lodge I decided that the time investment there wouldn't in fairness to my wife & myself allow me to also do side rites as well until after I'm out of the Master's chair.

Fitz

 

[Checkmite]

There's also the tendency of the suspicion-inclined to view Masonry as a single worldwide behemoth assuming a unified structure that oversees all things Masonic (kind of like a fraternal version of Coke or Procter and Gamble). The reality is that (at least in North America), there's no national governance insofar as concerns Craft Masonry (I can't speak to the side rites like Scottish or York Rite) and each sub-national government (state in the US, province in Canada) has an associated Grand Lodge which is solely responsible for, sets the ritual boundaries and expectations of regular Masonry within the limits of that governmental area. So there's the Grand Lodge of New York which governs Masonry within the bounds of the state of New York or in my case, the Grand Lodge of Canada in the Province of Ontario (try toasting Grand Lodge with that mouthful [but I digress] ).

And these jurisdictional boundaries aren't just administrative fictions, either; there are differences of opinion between the various Grand Lodges, that in some cases can create substantial barriers.

Here's just one example, and one which I consider even somewhat embarrassing, but I'm not afraid to point it out. I joined a lodge in Ohio, a jurisdiction where the Grand Lodge recognizes its Prince Hall counterpart - there were in fact three visiting Prince Hall masons at my raising. However, I have since moved to another state, one in which the Grand Lodge does not recognize its Prince Hall counterpart. That fact has kept me from formally transferring my membership from my Ohio lodge to a local one - I can't do it in good conscience as long as that policy exists in this jurisdiction. So no, Freemasonry is by no means some monolithic lock-stepping congress. There are differences, sometimes profound ones.

 

[Aquila]

Just chiming in here again to ask you guys a question; do you have any backup to the theory that Albert Einstein was a Freemason?

I saw the claim made on one of those NWO conspiracy theory videos on YouTube, but I'm sorry I can't remember which one. This is not the one in which the claim was made, but some of the film clips in it are the same:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBVJQJsGcgc

 

[fitzgibbon]

Just chiming in here again to ask you guys a question; do you have any backup to the theory that Albert Einstein was a Freemason?

Love to claim him but the only famous Einstein I can find is Izzy.

HTH
Fitz

 

[ShadowSot]

Conspiracy theorists will make anybody famous into a member of whatever secret community out there.