WHOSE GOD?

73 Who or what is the Great Architect of the Universe (First Degree); the Grand Geometrician (Second Degree); the Most High.. .the Almighty and Eternal God (Third Degree); the Supreme Being? It has been noted earlier (para. 30) that the evidence of the Grand Lodge to the Working Group introduces a confusion here by speaking in one place of belief in ‘a’ Supreme Being and in another of belief in ‘the’ Supreme Being, and revealing the fundamental problem which must face any organisation, secular or ecclesiastical, which attempts to join men of any religion in a single organisation at the heart of which is a common ritual. Given the objective of causing offence to none, it was inevitable that the prayers of the Masonic ritual should involve a Divine Name which would not offend those of non-Christian Faiths: ‘The names used for the Supreme Being enable men of different faiths to join in prayer (to God as each sees Him) without the terms of the prayer causing dissension among them. There is no separate Masonic God; a Freemason s God remains the God of the religion he professes’ (Leaflet Freemasonry and Religion published by the Board for General Purposes). The pamphlet continues: ‘Freemasons meet in common respect for the Supreme Being as He remains Supreme for their individual religions, and it is no art of Freemasonry to join religions together...

74 Before exploring the hazards, real, potential or imagined, of adopting such a view of Freemasonry’s ritual activities it needs to be said that Freemasonry has been trying for more than two hundred years to find a solution to a problem not always candidly faced by Christian Churches of the present day when they attempt to organise or participate in "inter-faith" services. How is this to be accomplished without testifying to the pre-eminence of Christ as God’s revelation of himself to his world? How is "offence" to members of other faiths to be avoided without minimalising the claims of Christianity? Critical commentators on the quality of Masonic ritual have to examine the extent to high Christian Churches are today themselves prepared to uphold publicly the traditional view that Christianity is not just one religion among many but the religion necessary to salvation. The Working Group are well aware of the criticisms that are levelled at Christian Churches’ "inter-faith" services.

75 This having been said, Freemasonry itself has no obligation to support the claims of traditional Christianity. It is not and does not claim to be a Christian, even a religious organisation: all it asks is that any and all its members have a belief in ‘a’ or ‘the’ Supreme Being. It is up to its members to face the fact that although they understand the nature of the God to which prayers are addressed, although they may be conscious of addressing their God and their Brother addressing his in the course of the rituals, the simultaneous worship of the Great Architect at least implies, if it does not actually convey, indifferentism to the claims of distinct religions.

76 The Working Group’s evidence contains a number of letters which illustrate the well-known fact that it is possible to have a belief in God (and thus be an acceptable candidate for membership of the Craft) and yet have no personal commitment — to be an "uncommitted Christian". These letters are from men who have subsequently been "converted" to Christ, and have reacted by withdrawing from Freemasonry, finding its rituals inadequate and spiritually damaging. (cf. Appendix X.)

77 Other letters from both laity and clergy state that in the sometimes many years they have been members of the Craft, they have never felt that there was any incompatibility between their faith and their Freemasonry.

78 It is important to recognise that these contrasting experiences of Freemasonry do exist. Freemasons may understand themselves either to be addressing the God of their own religion or to be addressing the God of different religions under one neutral name. Each position has its own theological problems. Like a good many other organisations, what Freemasonry offers and what its members take from it could depend on factors more personal than the official statements of its aims and objects can either envisage or control.