               FREEMASONRY UNDER ATTACK

             -by- Robert R. Collins, Jr.

   Previous to becoming a Freemason I thought the only 
opposition  to our Fraternity came from  the  Catholic 
Church.  I had never heard of the "Morgan  Affair"  or 
the  Anti-Masonic  Party.  Growing up,  Masons  in  my 
neighborhood  were always held in the highest  esteem. 
Since  becoming a Mason I have been surprised  at  the 
opposition that has arisen against us. Let me add that 
since  becoming a member I have had no cause to  alter 
my childhood opinion of this great institution.
   Alas, there are those who still would try to divide 
and  destroy us. The latest in our country is on  Rev. 
John Ankerberg who, along with a renegade Past  Master 
from a Maryland Lodge, attempted to smear our image on 
a public TV channel.
   This  paper does not concern just one  minister  or 
even  Masonry in our own country, but it is about  the 
Methodist  Conference  in  Great  Britain,  which  has 
recently  taken  us  to  task.  In  July  1986,  while 
visiting  the Wesley Memorial Chapel on City  Road  in 
London,  my attention was attracted to  the  following 
headline  in  the weekly  publication,  The  Methodist 
Recorder:  "Masons:  Report  Not  Blanket  Rejection." 
After  reading the article my appetite was whetted  to 
look deeper into this matter.
   Although our philanthropy is well known in both our 
country   and   Great   Britain   for   our   generous 
contributions  to various charities, for  our  English 
brethren are no less generous than we, yet we alone of 
all fraternal organizations are viewed with  suspicion 
and  distrust.  This seems to be  more  pronounced  in 
England  in  the  general  public,  as  well  as   the 
Methodist  Church.  Some of the ill will  directed  at 
Freemasonry  can  no doubt be traced to the  book  The 
Brotherhood written by Stephen Knight and published in 
1983. This purported expos of our order has certainly 
had its impact on British society.
   The  issue  of Masonic influence on  the  Methodist 
Church  was raised at the 1984 Conference by  a  small 
synod  from Cornwall. Some of the  so-called  evidence 

                         -19-
was that the church had a duty to protect its  members 
from heresy, no matter where it came from. Mr. Michael 
Prowting, a Methodist minister stated: "Our people are 
confused and need some guidance." The charge was  also 
made  that in Masonic liturgy were prayers to  Lucifer 
and Jesus Christ was among a list of prophets and that 
Methodists were disturbed when well-known Masons  were 
proposed  for circuit and local  church  appointments. 
This seemed to be the crux on which the inquiry was to 
be established.
   The  report  was remanded to the  Faith  and  Order 
Committee for a thorough investigation of the charges, 
and  a  recommendation  to be presented  at  the  1985 
Conference.  Dr.  David Stacey, the  convener  of  the 
committee  noted that secrecy did not exist. There  is 
much  printed matter concerning Masonry if one  wishes 
to  avail  themselves  of  it.  He  seemed  less  than 
enthusiastic  to  carry out the work  needed  for  the 
report.  Since his committee was broke, he  asked  the 
question  about  where was the money  coming  from  to 
finance the effort?
   Obviously  the  money was made  available  and  Dr. 
Stacey  and his committee did present a  very  lengthy 
report,  "Guidance to Methodists on  Freemasonry,"  at 
the 1985 Conference. It is evident from the report the 
committee  availed itself of several books about,  and 
some  probably  by, Freemasons. To its credit  it  did 
communicate  with  the  Grand  Secretary  in  England, 
Commander Higham, for his input into its deliberations 
and to correct any errors of fact that might occur.
   The   report  that  was  presented  to   the   1985 
Conference  consisted of 24 separate articles,  and  I 
will  list each one here. Several of them were  in  no 
way  critical of our fraternity. They pointed out  our 
three great principles of Brotherly Love, Relief,  and 
Truth,  that  our members must believe  in  a  Supreme 
Being and be of good report. They speak of our respect 
for the laws of the land in which we live and work and 
of our generosity in giving to Masonic and non-Masonic 
charities.  The also acknowledge our  condemnation  of 
trying  to  promote our own interests or  that  of  of 
brothers by reason of our Masonic affiliation, and yet 
that is one of the charges leveled against us by  much 

                         -20-
of British society.
   Article  9 condemns us as being  discriminatory  in 
our  membership because it is restricted to  men  only 
and is not opened to those who are handicapped,  while 
in  the  same breath they acknowledge that  they  have 
been   given   evidence  of   lodges   which   include 
handicapped  members  and men of different  races  and 
religions.
   Article 10 alleges that church business,  including 
the stationing of ministers, is discussed and  decided 
in  lodge meetings. The Grand Secretary refuted  this, 
because  in  English Lodges, as well as our  own,  the 
discussion of religion and politics is not allowed.
   Article   11   says  that  suspicions   about   the 
fraternity  abound  because of the  excessive  secrecy 
practiced by the society. One of their peeves is  that 
there  are no public lists of members or lodges.  This 
nefarious charge is negated by the availability of any 
number of books on Freemasonry, by the cooperation  of 
Commander  Higham, and since 1799 no secret  societies 
have  been permitted by law to meet in Great  Britain, 
and until twenty years ago a listing of the membership 
had to be presented annually to the police.
   Articles   13-15  takes  the  Fraternity  to   task 
concerning  the oaths we are required to  take.  While 
acknowledging that the oaths are of such a nature that 
they would never be inflicted, they are disturbed that 
solemn  words and phrases are used just to add  colour 
to penalties and obligations that cannot be  enforced. 
They  acknowledge that in 1964 an alternative form  of 
the  oath was approved by Grand Lodge in  response  to 
Masonic  concerns;  in it the candidate vows  only  to 
bear in mind the traditional penalties. This form  has 
not been widely adopted. By innuendo they assert  that 
our Masonic membership takes precedence over all other 
commitments, including our Christian commitments.  Our 
English  brethren deny this charge as vociferously  as 
each of here would do.
   Articles  17-21  are  concerned  with   theological 
questions  raised  by our ritualistic work.  They  are 
fearful that although we claim not to be a religion or 
a religious movement, yet they see a great danger that 
Freemasonry may compete strongly with Christianity and 

                         -21-
that  a  Freemason may find himself  compromising  his 
Christian  beliefs. The strongest objection they  make 
is in Article 20 over the use in the Royal Arch Degree 
of  the name of the Supreme Being,  "Jahbulon."  Their 
contention  is  that this word is a clear  example  of 
syncretism,  and attempt to unite different  religions 
in one, which Christians cannot accept. They aver that 
the word is a composite of Gods of different religions
the  explanation  of  which, modern  scholars  say  is 
wrong.
   Brother  Ronald  Harris,  in  his  letter  to   the 
President  of the Methodist Conference, gives  a  much 
deeper meaning to the word, which the Faith and  Order 
Committee  failed  to explain to  the  Conference.  He 
explained  that the word was built on the name of  God 
in  four  languages:  Chaldean,  Hebrew,  Syriac,  and 
Eqyptian. "Jah" is the Chaldean name for God. "Bul" is 
a  Syriac  word  meaning Lord, All  Powerful,  and  is 
compounded to mean Lord of Heaven and on High. "ON" is 
an  Egyptian word signifying Father of All, and it  is 
also  Hebrew  for might and power.  It  expresses  the 
omnipotence   of   the  Father  of  All.   All   these 
significations are collected thus: "I Am and Shall Be; 
Lord in Heaven and on High; Father of All."
   Article  22 flatly asserts that  Methodists  should 
not become Freemasons.
   Article 23 recognizes that there are many loyal and 
sincere   Methodists   who   are   Freemasons,   whose 
commitment  to Christ is unquestioned and who  see  no 
incompatibility in their membership of the church  and 
the  fraternity.  They recommend that  Methodists  who 
choose  to  remain Freemasons should,  on  appropriate 
occasions, declare their membership in order to remove 
suspicion and distrust.
   Article   24  states  that  Freemasons  lodges   or 
meetings  for  Masonic  purposes  cannot  be  held  on 
Methodist premises. If a Freemasons' lodge requests  a 
service to be held on Methodist premises, the trustees 
may either with-hold permission or grant permission on 
the  following conditions: 1. The service will be  one 
of  public Christian worship, held in accordance  with 
Methodist  practice;  2. The contents of  the  service 
shall be first seen and approved by the Superintendent 

                         -22-
and 3. It shall be conducted by a person appointed  by 
the Superintendent.
   This  then  is a condensed version of  the  charges 
voiced against the Craft. From the tone of some of the 
speakers  favoring the adoption of the  report,  their 
prejudice was apparent. They believed the worst  about 
us and I think nothing would alter their opinion.
   There were a number of memorials that were received 
for consideration at the 1986 Conference from  various 
Circuits  opposing  the report, but the  Committee  on 
Memorials   rejected  each  one  out-of-hand  as   not 
containing  an accurate representation of the  report. 
The  only thing that I can find that was  accepted  by 
the  Memorials Committee was one resolution  contained 
in a memorial from the Doncaster Circuit. That  reads: 
"While   declaring  that  the  report   does   express 
reservations  about Methodists becoming and  remaining 
Freemasons,  it should not be interpreted  as  stating 
that Freemasonry is not compatible with membership  of 
The  Methodist  Church." The committee  accepted  this 
part   of   the   memorial  as   being   an   accurate 
interpretation of the intent of the report as a whole.
   Needless   to  say,  the  debate  on  this   report 
attracted  a lot of attention from the news  media  as 
well  as observers from other denominations  in  Great 
Britain.  The  Methodist Conference in Ireland  had  a 
similar  report to consider. It refused to  adopt  the 
report,  but it did agree to the following  amendment: 
"Whilst  recognizing the privilege of members  of  the 
Methodist  Church in Ireland to exercise the right  of 
individual  conscience in joining any organization  or 
society  outside the church, the Conference would  ask 
all  Methodists to ensure that membership of any  such 
organization  or  society does  not  compromise  their 
commitment to Christ and His Church."
   The United Reform Church issued a lengthy report of 
its   own  in  which  it  detailed  the   origins   of 
Freemasonry.  It was by no means a derogatory  report. 
It acknowledged the integrity of those who are  Masons 
and  of  their charitable works, noting that  in  this 
respect  they put many of their fellow  Christians  to 
shame.  On the other hand, the report noted  that  the 
lack  of understanding was not entirely the  fault  of 

                         -23-
those  outside the Craft. Secrecy is bound  to  create 
suspicion however found, and it is in the interests of 
Masons to make clear how far their obligation to  keep 
secrets in supposed to go. 
   The  Grand Secretary welcomed the report  from  the 
United  Reform  Church saying: "The  report  is  open-
minded. It shows that, although there is still a  need 
for  better understanding between Freemasons and  non-
masons  in the United Reform Church, there is  nothing 
incompatible between Freemasonry and Christianity."
   A  motion  was  introduced  asking  Unitarians   to 
examine  their consciences as to the compatibility  of 
being  a  Freemason and a Unitarian. This  motion  was 
soundly  defeated as being against the free  tradition 
of the Assembly.
   The  General  Synod of the Church  of  England  has 
appointed a working group to inquire into  Freemasonry 
and  Christianity.  The  Grand  Master,  while  deeply 
disappointed  at  this development,  was  nevertheless 
encouraged  at first reports, which confirm  that  the 
group  is  open-minded  and  intent  on  testing   any 
evidence  which may be offered. He feels that  Masonry 
will get a fair hearing from this church. It might  be 
noted here that this committee has on it two clergymen 
who  are  also  Masons.  [The  report  was   extremely 
derogatory  and  has touched off a nasty  debate  that 
will last for years to come. Editor.]
  When  I  first  communicated  with  Brother   Ronald 
Harris,  the  Secretary of "The  Methodist  Freemason" 
organization, I asked him three questions: 1. What has 
been  the  short-term effects of this  resolution?  2. 
What  might be the long-term result? 3. What  response 
might  be  expected from the Craft? His answer  to  my 
first   question  was  that  it  wouldn't  have   much 
influence  on  members  of the pew  because  the  vast 
majority  did not know or care about what goes  on  at 
Conference.  He  injected  the opinion  here  that  he 
believed  it was the left-wing elements in the  church 
who sought to be delegates to the Conference and  whom 
today  he thought formed a majority. He only knows  of 
one Brother who has left the fraternity as a result of 
the the report, but he knows of several who have  left 
the church.

                         -24-
   Questions  2 and 3 he answers thus: "The  long-term 
effect?  I  think the report will be  forgotten  until 
someone chooses to raise it again, unless we are  seen 
to  make  a stand and there is a  movement  now  which 
emanates from Grand Lodge to the effect that we should 
stand up and be seen. Previous policy had always  been 
finger on lip."
   Needless  to say the emergence of the  organization 
"The  Methodist Freemasons" is a direct result of  the 
report adopted by the 1985 Methodist Conference. While 
the organization serves to unite Methodist  Freemasons 
and  afford  them a forum in which  to  express  their 
views   and  opinions,  its  primary  purpose  is   to 
eventually  have  this  report  rescinded.  It  is  my 
opinion,  from  the articles I have read,  written  by 
Brother  Harris  and  his  fervor  in  pursuing   this 
situation,  that  the  Conference  has  a  very   able 
adversary,  with  the  tenacity of  a  fabled  English 
Bulldog, to contend with.
   Freemasonry   has  not  always  been  anathema   to 
Methodism.  Some  of the irony noted here is  that  in 
1917  the  Epworth  Lodge was  founded  expressly  for 
Methodists.  It  was  formed  principally  to   afford 
Methodist ministers the opportunity to go through  the 
chairs. There are now eight associated Epworth Lodges. 
Brother  Samuel  Wesley was the first  Grand  Organist 
from  1812-17. There were several prominent Masons  in 
the Irish branch of the Wesley family, one of whom was 
Garret Wesley, the First Earl of Mornington. He wanted 
to make Charles Wesley his heir but was turned down by 
Charles'  father. Had this adoption been allowed,  one 
could speculate that the great hymn writer might  well 
have become a member of the Craft.
   Sharing John Wesley's tomb in the graveyard of  the 
Wesleyan  Memorial  Chapel in London is  the  man  who 
wrote the hymn that is used as an ode in English Royal 
Arch  Masonry. Last but not least, gracing  the  south 
wall  of  this  Citadel of Methodism  is  a  beautiful 
stained  glass window, a gift from the  Freemasons  of 
Great  Britain to the memory of the men and  women  of 
the  British Empire who gave their lives in the  First 
World War.
   I will close by quoting the last paragraph from  an 

                         -25-
address by Brother Richard Tydeman, P.G.C.: "Long  may 
the  historic  and honorable  connection  between  the 
Church  and the Craft continue. May our religion  help 
us  to  see the importance of the Third  Dimension  of 
Life  in its true proportion and may  Freemasonry,  by 
remaining  true to its principles, inspire  the  world 
with  reverence and love for that Great  Architect  of 
the Universe, by whom and for whom alone, we build our 
churches and our lives, by whose love we are sustained 
and by whose Hand we are guided. To Him, be all Honor, 
Glory, Dominion and Praise, henceforth and evermore."

































                         -26-
 