PREFACE
This most unusual item is written primarily to give all interested persons complete information on the movement of the “French Masonic Incident”.
Many unusual factors are involved which will provoke the thinking of all Fraternal minded men. Opinions of opposite extremes will be developed. Little known information on the non-recognition status of (the) Grand Orient Masonry of France should be interesting.
The reasons for the action of the writer will be fully explained with the hope that full understanding will prevail.
William O. Greene
THE FRENCH MASONIC INCIDENT
Note: As all interested persons are informed of the European Tour made by the writer, we shall delete any reference to that incident except what background is deemed necessary to build up the story.
In composing the group of tourists, the World Council of Churches, through its representative, Dr. Jesse Jai McNeil, attempted to select a cross-section of (African-Americans) representing various phases of life as they live in America. This group included school teachers, a Y.M.C.A. Director, Ministers, Manufacturers, a Business college President and the writer, as representative of (African-American) Fraternalism, more especially Masonry.
In preparing to properly study the phases of interest peculiar to my representation, I wrote Harry A. Williamson, noted Masonic writer and authority, requesting of him letters of introduction to individuals who might give us the fraternal picture of the European Countries. Mr. Williamson very graciously complied and from his vast store of contacts provided an imposing list of people who would be glad to exchange views on the condition of Masonry in Europe and as practiced by men of color in these United States. Among them were two that have particular significance in this story.
On arriving in England we eventually presented our letter to Mr. Frederick Adams and, a thrilling exchange of Masonic matters ensued. Mr. Adams is a Masonic scholar, writer and Past Master of “Glittering Star” Lodge No. 322 A.F. and A.M. Masons of Ireland. This Lodge is reported to be the same lodge that INITIATED PRINCE HALL during a period when this military lodge was stationed in the United States. (The story of that incident is known by all well informed Prince Hall Masons.) We were well received by this English Mason and our pride in being able to feel the universality of brother-hood, as exemplified by this meeting, knew no bounds.
As part of his program to properly entertain, Mr. Adams invited me to visit the Grand Lodge Building of England the next day. Here was an indescribable moment of terrific intrinsic value. Here I would stand, walk and maybe view those ancient documents that established our Masonic Legitimacy. (Try, if you can, to visualize the tremendous emotional feeling created by this unparalleled incident). The next morning very early, I traveled to the Great Queen Street building much earlier than the appointed time. I took motion pictures of the exterior and other features of this important Masonic Edifice. I entered and was met by a door attendant who very graciously accepted my card and turned me over to the keeper of the Archives. This gentleman seemed excitedly anxious to show his fraternal interest and showed me through a great portion of the building. However, during his conversation, he made a statement which I quote as near verbatim as my memory will allow: “I am not like many white Mason who do not recognize you. I have recently viewed your Prince Hall records and I know all about you.” It was at that instant I sensed a premonition of some unpleasantness about to occur and told my guide of the building that, perhaps, we should return to the lobby as my host, Mr. Adams, might be waiting. We returned as Mr. Adams was entering the building. The door attendant who had been so gracious on my entry, informed Mr. Adams, “You and your guest are asked to go to the Grand Secretaries Office.” We entered the office and a clerk informed us that we would be unable to visit the building. He stated, “Mr. Greene does not belong to a Grand Lodge whose Constitution we recognize.” Mr. Adams was highly embarrassed and made vehement protest. I was humiliated beyond description. I did, however, immediately realize the technical factor of Constitutional recognition. I became suddenly aware that the Michigan Prince Hall Grand Lodge, or for that matter with one exception, no other Prince Hall Grand Lodge as far as I knew, had ever presented their Constitution to any European or English Grand Lodge for recognition since their erasure along with other Americans (white) Grand Lodges in 1813. Another interesting comment was made by some one in this office to the effect that during the war (World War II) Prince Hall Masons had been received by English Lodges; but since the War, the American Masons (white) had become disturbed and such Masonic courtesies as the right to visit are now denied to our Brethren.
In the preparation for this trip I had secured from several sources much literature on Prince Hall Masonry to be distributed wherever the occasion would be deemed proper. This certainly was a proper place. Therefore, I asked the clerk to please present to his Grand Secretary this package. The package consisted of “Negro Masonry in the United States” by Harold Van Buren Voorhis, a copy of “Prince Hall Primer” by Harry Williamson, and the “Prince Hall Year Book”. Then expressing regrets at having created an unfavorable incident, my chagrined host and I departed. Note: it is well to remember this incident for many reasons as in subsequent chapters a question will be posed on this incident.
The next Masonic experience and the basis for this item found me in receipt of the following message which reached at the Hague in Holland.
1314 Prospect Avenue
Bronx (59), N.Y.
June 21, 1951
Dear Brother Greene:
You will recall that one of the letters of introduction I gave you was addressed to Marius Lepage at 23 rue Andre-de-Loheac at Laval (Mayenne) France. In the mail today I receive an air mail letter from him which read as follows:
“I shall be glad to see our Bro. William O. Greene if he calls on me in Laval. If you have an opportunity to contact him swiftly, will you write to him that the annual feast of the Lodge “Volney”, in Laval, will take place next July 1st, at 9:15 A.M. If he could be there he would be received in the Lodge with the Honors he deserves as a Grand Master of Prince Hall Grand Lodge of the State of Michigan.
“He will see an initiation in the most regular ancient way, and there is no doubt that he would be interested with that ritual work.
”If you can contact him by air-mail, tell him too that I should like to receive a letter from him, because it happens sometimes that I am away from home. I should appreciate his presence at our feast. I told that to my Brethren, yesterday morning, at the meeting of our Lodge, and all of them would be very glad too.”
"Will you be so kind as to advise Brother Leage whether or not your itinerary will permit you to be in Laval on the date in question”
Trusting you had a pleasant sail across the Atlantic and with kind regards from us both, I am
Yours, etc.
Harry A. Williamson.
I was highly thrilled at this opportunity to see foreign Masonry in action. I accepted and notified my French host. I left my party in Amsterdam, Holland flew to Paris, from there by train to Laval. A reception committee of four members were waiting. They could speak no English and I could speak no French, but Masonry was able to allow an understanding to be developed between us. they presented me with the following note:
June 30, 1951
My Dear Brother:
Excuse me to have not waited for you until your train has come to Laval. But I have had so many thing to deal with for our feat that I feel somewhat exhausted.
I am very glad that you be here, and I am in a haste to make your visual acquaintance. Have a good sleep, and do not worry for anything.
At about 8:45 some brothers will call on you, in order to drive you to the Temple in their auto. If you are still in bed they will come back around 10:00.
Fraternally and affectionately yours
Marius Lepage 33°
The reception into the meeting of this Lodge was a magnificent experience. All honors were bestowed according to our rank. An apron was presented and we were able to view an Entered Apprentice degree, after which a lavish banquet was spread at the local hotel. These Masons noted their knowledge of the non-recognition pattern prevailing in our Masonic relationship with American Masons (white). They were very emphatic in their attempt to make comparison between the Frenchman’s lack of prejudice and the American attitude. Following the experience, a new idea built on comparative Masonic practices between English, American and French Masons developed. Naturally, having been subjected to the distasteful experience of the two former groups, and having the desire as a Man, and incidentally, a Mason, to be recognized first as a Man without any distinction of being anything other than a first class citizen of the United States; and in the latter instance, being received and respected because of my legality and regularity as a Mason, I was and still am very grateful to the Frenchman of Volney Lodge. The matter of status of this Lodge and its non-recognition by the American and British Lodges was of little moment, for certainly with the information I had at my disposal; with implicit faith in the Masonic wisdom and integrity of the person responsible for this important visit, Brother Harry Williamson; I had little cause to suspect that this chance visit would have an impact on any sort of Masonry or potential repercussions that may effect the position of Prince Hall Masons. I am further left to believe that many of my readers, if placed in the same position, would have reacted in like manner.
The following letter was sent to my wife:
23, rue Andr’e de Loheac. LAVAL
(Mayenne), France
July 11, 1951
My Dear Brother, dear Madam,
When this letter will reach your home, I think you will not yet be back, my Brother. So, it will be the first thing from France which will hail you when coming back in.
It will remind you of the day you were in Laval, and tell you of our fraternal and sincere love. Be it a token of that most glorious day, when the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Michigan (Prince Hall) was amongst his French Brethren.
With my best regard to Mrs. Greene, and my very affectionate thoughts to my Brother Greene, and to say nothing of the baby, Veronica would be so glad to make acquaintance. To you all, from Marius, wife and daughters and all the Brethren of the Lodge.
Marius Lepage 33°
P.S. I have sent a snapshot to Bro. Williamson
On my return to our Country, I have noted in many instances the attitude of the French people and the Masonic cordiality of the Volney Masons. I like-wise told an acquaintance, Mr. Fairbain Smith, editor of the Michigan Masonic World, a friend of Prince Hall Masonry, about the French and English experience. He showed concern at the English incident, and merely stated that American Grand Lodges (white) did not recognize the Grand Orient of France’s Masonic Fraternity. The reason advanced, “they (referring to the Grand Orient) do not have an open Bible on their altars.” At this juncture, I ask you, the reader. DO YOU KNOW THE BACKGROUND OF THE CONTROVERSY REGARDING THE BIBLE AND THE GRAND ORIENT OF FRANCE? I venture to say that fewer than 25 Prince Hall Masons know the background. Recently Bro. Williamson has compiled and written a very enlightening article on the subject. Excerpts from this article will be forwarded.
On my return in an exchange of letters with my affable host in France, I invited him to attend the 87th Session of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Michigan. He accepted and all arrangements were made for this Historical Event. In talking this matter over with Masons of significant standing, I found that they all felt as I did, that this would be a signal achievement for several reasons. Many have signified their interest by accepting invitations to attend the session and witness the unusual event. Incidentally, this is not the first incident of visitation by Masons of the Grand Orient to a Prince Hall Jurisdiction. Masonic History records that:
A special Session of the Grand Lodge of New York was held October 31, 1855, at which time Brother Auses Pallez was guest and conferred several degrees upon Grand Master James Barnett by authority of the Grand Orient of France.
Likewise, at a Special Session of the same Prince Hall Body bearing the title of the “United Grand Lodge of New York” was called to receive and welcome Ill. Marconis de Nigre of the Grand Orient. Other relationships are recorded and if one is interested, may be found in our Histories.
Unfortunately, somewhere, somehow, great concern had developed over the effect this visit of Bro. Lepage might have on the relationships existing between the Prince Hall and the American White Fraternity. This writer acknowledges the unofficial relationships existing between individuals of both fraternities. We further believe there does exist a sincere effort to erase the line of recognition that now obtains. It is, however, extremely difficult for me to understand the extreme concern evidenced by the thought that the visit of a “non-recognized” member of the Grand Orient might make to a group commonly referred to as a “Clandestine Body,” and so designated by the law appearing in the codes of many White Bodies that reads in essence: “Any body of men practicing Masonry in the same jurisdiction not under obedience to said Body were to be considered Clandestine.” Why would this cause any concern on the part of anyone not directly affected?
In the inception of the idea to promote this invitation to our French friend, I knew that certain types of interest would be developed, for in the span of my Masonic experience, other incidents not particularly germane to this matter, but basically founded on the question of color or race, had given me the idea of the prospects of these potential interests, pro and con. I felt, however, that the visitation of Lepage, manifesting certain beliefs we have about Brother-hood about the External qualifications recommending one of our art, and our oft expressed but seldom witnessed functioning of Universal Brotherhood, would raise the Morale of the Clandestine beleaguered, the officially non-recognized (from the American Masonic (white) point of view), Prince Hall Mason. And, as has been heretofore stated, I sought the opinion of Masons of the Prince Hall Family and with but one exception they agreed to the principle of the action. The exception being Harry Williamson who cited the possibility of our white friends being disturbed. He likewise explained the America and British view points on the Grand Orient, the facts he had collected on the “Bible” and Grand Orient Masonry. In evaluating the whole project, I came to the conclusion that the incident would be of great value to Prince Hall Masonry.
Many weeks, much correspondence and a lot of planning had passed. It appeared that all was well and this exciting historical event would soon take place. But this was not to be!
Early Saturday morning, March 29, 1952, I received a long distance telephone call from the President of the Grand Masters Conference citing that the visitation had caused great alarm among our White Masonic Friends and that many Prince Hall Grand Masters were fearful that we Prince Hall Masons may be subjected to a severe loss of respect from those liberal White Masonic Elements who were trying so diligently to better the relationships between the two American Bodies, White and Prince Hall. It was further stated that although he, President Hall, had planned to visit the Michigan Grand Lodge and witness the event, that his presence may give the wrong impression of official recognition of a relationship between Prince Hall Masons and the Grand Orient of France. I was further informed that Leaders of other Bodies of Masons were disturbed about the effect on their Bodies, or rather, on their relationships with the friends of Prince Hall Masonry.
We are very aware of the fine spirit of friendliness existing between the Scottish Rite Bodies of the Northern Jurisdiction and of the great progress being made by Ill. George Crawford in nurturing this friendship for the good of Prince Hall Masonry. So, we felt it necessary to contact Ill. Crawford to get his opinion and advice. We were able to make this important contact and Ill. Crawford substantiated the information and fears of President Hall and, his advice was to cancel the visit of French Mason Lepage. He also noted having had considerable correspondence, telephone and personal discussion on the matter. He stated, it was not his policy to interfere in the actions of any Body of Masonry not coming under his direct administration. However, he really felt that any recognition made of the Grand Orient of France would seriously impair, or may even do irreparable harm to Prince Hall Masonry including in his thought that this act might offend the Grand Lodge of England. (Please refresh your memory on my embarrassment at the hands of the English Grand Lodge).
Our next contact was made to the source from which all of the experiences, contacts, and situation had come, Harry A. Williamson. I told him of the excitement, the concern, etc., and asked his advice. He too suggested that I immediately cancel the visit. At this juncture, I found myself perplexed no end. I now summarize my feeling at this point.
Summarization
1. Why (as it seemed) was pressure being exerted to forestall this visit from taking place?
2. Why were Prince Hall Masons so turned around from their previously indicated approval of the event?
3. Why were the little known facts regarding the reasons for non-recognition policies of the American and British Masonic Bodies so important at this precise moment?
4. How much irreparable damage might be done to White and Prince Hall relationship?
Was there not a chance that this incident transcended pure Masonic interest and entered the field of the Race question?
What should I do now? Should I stubbornly stick to my .personal opinion or the rightness of my action? Should I gamble and go through with my plans to save face? What effect would this have on Michigan Prince Hall Masons, their standing in the fraternal family? What should I do now?
Another disturbing factor developed from the interest of certain Masons living in Canada, who through Marius Lepage, were informed of his proposed visit and wrote their elation on the purpose of the visit. An abundance of correspondence had been exchanged on the event. So high has been the interest of one Canadian Mason that he accepted full responsibility for the expense of Lepage, from his arrival in Montreal, his transportation to and from Detroit. In order to show the attitude of the Canadian Mason, more copies of a Masonic Publication, “The Masonic Light”, have been sent me. When one considers the fact that these Masons are on the list of recognized (White recognition) Grand Lodges and to read their opinions, it is startling to say the least.
Another attitude of the American Grand Lodges toward the Grand Orient of France is to be found in the March 1950, number of Masonic Light, published at Montreal, Quebec.
In an editorial preface to a contribution upon the subject the Editor of that periodical commented as follows:
“Recently, one of the leading Masonic periodicals published in France, ‘LaChain D’Union,’ affirmed that while belief in the Supreme Being, and the absence in the Lodge of the V.S.L. (Volume of Sacred Law) were invoked as a pretext for with holding recognition to the Grand Orient of France and the Grand Lodge de France, S.R. (Scottish Rite) who impose neither of these Landmarks. The real reason why American Masonry frowned upon the French Grand Bodies was solely because these Bodies, carrying out the fundamental principles expressed by Anderson in his ‘Constitutions’ as to who can belong to Masonry, they did not impose race barriers, whereas, the Americans refuse admission to those men, no matter how worthy, who belong to the Negro race.”
“Though we consider the banning of Negroes from our Lodges to be a violation of Masonry as we understand it, we had never conceived that this race question could underlie refusal of recognition to the two great French Grand Bodies by our American Brethren. We have wished to know, from authentic documents, how deep were the anti-Negro sentiments in the Grand Bodies in the United States that might justify the conclusions of Brother Julien in the April issue of ‘La Chaine D’ Union’ (Paris, France) to the effect that whereas the higher principles were invoked as reasons for the excommunication of our French Brethren, the real reason was the fact that French Masonry faithfully followed the principles laid down by Anderson and did not recognize race or color as a reason for excluding a man from Masonry and that this attitude displeased some American Grand Bodies - not all, evidently, since we know that Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island would readily recognize the regularity of Prince Hall Bodies if they dared follow their inclination.”
While we realize the opinions expressed in this article and other similar articles, must be considered those of the authors, we cannot be unmindful of the fact that unless these Canadian Masons were not expressing the sentiments of their Jurisdiction, they certainly would not be permitted to express them through a medium that is read around the Globe.
My position, my opinions (personal and as Grand Master) and my actions, I shall attempt to clearly explain the following lines:
My Position:
It appears that my position in doing what I had attempted to do, for the good of Prince Hall Masonry, is not accepted as it was when first introduced to the Craft.
My Opinion (Personal)
I feel the contribution I had wished to make in this matter, with those underlying reasons, are as sound now as when they were conceived. I feel that in the matter of the “Bible” and its many interpretations and purposes as they pertain to American Masonry and the Grand Orient etc., that serious questioning of the comparative respects are very formidable. I wonder is it consistent with the (Christian) Masonic concept - use the book of Holy Scriptures which denotes the “Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of man” and then ignore its full meaning; or to practice by Precept and Example the Spiritual meaning of brotherhood without its presence. I feel that I have fully understood the lesson of Time, Patience and Perseverance. I feel that in the social change taking place in our world that the Time to definitely know the status and position of Black men in the American Masonic Scene has just about run out. I know my Patience for the old hackneyed philosophies of “how far Negroes have come since their emancipation” and other similar thoughts “traveling in parallel line,” “separate but equal,” and “regular” but “Non-recognized” is threadbare. I personally feel that my people in every phase of life have reached the end of pacified Perseverance, and our contritributions to the Community effort of the American Way of Life should entitle us to al unreserved recognition’s in the spirit of the theory of Democracy. I feel that some of the representatives of Prince Hall Masonry have been gripped by fears unfounded when viewed in the light of right. For certainly, they have all experience the distasteful position of second rate citizenship which encompasses even their Masonic Life. Their apparent fear of reprisal, for that’s what it amounts to, contradicts many of their actions in the field of obtaining unequivocal rights for Negroes.
My personal opinion, based on the discriminatory experience I have suffered Masonically here and abroad, (remember the Grand Lodge of England Incident) plus those I meet in my daily efforts to gain my Inalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, in contrast to the fine experience created by the French Masons of Volney Lodge under obedience to the Grand Orient of France, and the non-prejudiced people of that Country, is that here again I must accept the lower status of a Negro American, incidentally, a Negro Mason.
My opinion (as Grand Master of Prince Hall Masons for Michigan)
It was my unemotional opinion as Administrator of the Masonic Destinies of the Prince Hall Fraternity of Michigan, that regardless of my personal position, I must protect the integrity and position of the Craft. Therefore, feeling that for the moment, using as a criterion the divergence of opinion of the Prince Hall Jurisdiction of America which might effect our solidarity, that I must not jeopardize their (the Michigan Craft) relationship with either their White Masonic Friends or the Sister Jurisdiction of our group.
This moment, using as a criterion the divergence of opinion of the Prince Hall Jurisdiction of America which might affect our solidarity, that I must not jeopardize their (the Michigan Craft) relationship with either their White Masonic Friends or the Sister Jurisdiction of our group.
My actions on the matter have been:
1. To cable a request to Marius Lepage, asking that he cancel his trip for the time being.
2. To prepare this statement so that all Prince Hall Jurisdictions may be assured that Michigan will do nothing to impair their relationships with their white friends.
3. It is my fervent hope that the information gained from these pages regarding this problem of foreign recognition etc., will be studied in light of our present non-world wide recognized positions and be prepared to do something about their lowly estate on the World Masonic Scenes.
In closing may I pray that in the final analysis, the G.A.T.O.U. , who in his ineffable wisdom knows and controls all things, will in his way imbue all of our minds with the understanding and proper sense of directions in this and all of our actions.
Fraternally yours,
William O. Greene.
Grand Master
THE COUNCIL OF THE GRAND ORIENT OF FRANCE
TO THE GRAND MASTERS OF ALL MASONIC POWERS
WHO RECOGNIZE THE ABSOLUTE LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE
Very Respected Grand Master:
The Free Masonry has as its aim “to unite persons who without her, would remain strangers among themselves” in order to become the “Center of the Union” (Constitution of Anderson 1723). Every Free Mason is essentially an apostle of concord between all men.
The Grand Orient of France believes that this mission requires not only a high moral value, but also an absolute liberty of conscience.
The Grand Orient of France is cognizant of the fact that the first duties of our Order, admitted only half hearitly, the Liberty of conscience.. But it thinks that the reservations formulated at the beginning of the 18th century should not enslave the humanity of the 20th century, and that if our societies do not follow in the steps of human progress, they betray the very intentions of their founders.
Because it is progressive, our Free Masonry could not make any concessions as far as the principles of complete liberty of the spirit, of the absolute liberty of conscience are concerned.
A Free Masonry which intends to accomplish all its missions should not reject any of the moral values capable to make it stronger.
Race, social situations, political ideals, economic conceptions, spiritual quests, religious beliefs, all the faiths, all the varieties, must be united in the will to reach a personal elevation and general concord. Only the cohesion of all moral values may help humanity to express itself in a climate of serenity.
Rules of exclusion remain, but they do not come from us. We would consider ourselves guilty had we created such rules.
We are convinced that the Masonic Powers who do not admit this absolute liberty of conscience and of the spirit, are imperfectly informed, and it is our duty to assist them on the way towards the pure light.
With this in mind, we are inviting you to join us in a kind of Federation in order to insure the triumph of the true Masonic ideal.
Please accept, very Respected Grand Master, the expression of our fraternal sentiments.
For the Council of the Grand Orient of France
Grand Master
(signed) Paul Chevalier
(Translation)
GRAND ORIENT OF FRANCE
SOVEREIGN SYMBOLIC POWER (AUTHORITY)
To Brother Williamson
Etc.
Dear Brother Williamson,
Brother Lepage has sent me your letter and requested me to answer it, in my capacity of Grand Secretary of the Grand Orient of France. The Annual Communication (of the G.O.) is being held now; I was able only to consult reliably authoritative (or reliable) but not officially the members of the Executive Board of the Order, but I think I am expressing their general opinion.
Brother Lapage received one of your members in a formal meeting at Laval. Such a noble gesture of the fraternity should not be blamed (censured). (He means they consider it to have been quite all right).
But two questions present themselves to us.
1.) Can other presiding officers (Masters) in our country (France) do the same thing as Brother Lepage did?
2.) Can Brothers of the Grand Orient of France accept (the invitation) to be received in America in your Lodges?
It is my opinion that the Grand Orient of France can only consider as legitimate a Masonic Power if it (the Masonic Authority) admits (to) the principles expressed in the Constitution of the Grand Orient of France, (and) in particular, in the second and third paragraphs of the First Article.
We cite these paragraphs: “It (French Freemasonry) has for (its) principles mutual tolerance, respect for others and for one’s self absolute liberty of conscience: considering metaphysical (applies to religion) conceptions as being exclusive (a part of the exclusive) world of individual appreciation of its (the G.O.’s of France) members, it refuses any (or all) dogmatic affirmation.”
In case that your Order does not admit these Fundamental Principles, we would be to hold only profane (not Masonic) relations with you, but particularly amicable ones; and we could not receive you in our Communications nor accept (the invitation) to go to your Communications. On the contrary (or in the contrary case) - (if you accept these Principles) we will be glad to develop our human and Masonic friendship to the maximums.
I will be honored with your response and will examine with great sympathy the points of view that you will express.
Very fraternally yours,
(signed) Doctor Paul Chevallier
Professor, School of Medicine
University of Paris (the Sorbonne)
NOTE:
The matter between the parenthesis are the comments of the translator.
The translator, who is a Mason, also says:
Some of the above is underlined, for it seems to contain the part which caused the Grand Lodge of England to withdraw fellowship in 1878. The language implies a man’s religion to be no barrier, and even a lack of it.”
To which may be added: The lack of religion is no barrier to membership in the Grand Orient.
Williamson.
1314 Prospect Ave.,
Bronx (59) N.Y.,
January 1, 1952.
Dr. Paul Chevallier, Grand Secretary
Grand Orient of France,
16, rue Cadet,
Paris (IX), France
My dear Brother Chevallier:
I am pleased to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of November 27, 1951, and hope that since your letter was mailed, the items which were forwarded some weeks ago may have been received and found of such interest.
The contents of your letter have provided much food for thought and in my weak way shall comment upon the same as best I can.
Have noted the reference to the Obligatory Book which is Anderson’s 1723 Constitution, also, that you observe the text as a matter of tradition rather than of fundamental value, also, it is one of the volumes used by Lodges under the Jurisdiction of the Grand Orient.
One readily understand there are some aspects of Ancient Craft Masonry as observed in the 20th century which are not in keeping with either the sentiments or practices which prevailed in the 18th. However, it must be conceded some of the such were established in the 18th century and the early portion of the 19th, which are now impossible of change in any form; this is particularly applicable to the form of Masonic procedure as prevails on this side of the Atlantic.
Organized Masonry as we understand it over here began with the founding of the Grand Lodge of England in 1717, and of course all the English-speaking Grand Lodges throughout the world are the descendants thereof either directly or indirectly, and naturally these have adhered closely to the patterns set forth by the parent, although in the United States a marked variation in both thought and procedure in many instances are evident.
In the American Charges there is the admonition that a Mason was to be of the religion of the country in which he resided. Later, the admonition was changed so he might adopt any form of religious belief which might be foreign to that prevailing in that country. Was it not a fact the religion of the country whoever it might have been, contained a belief in the existence of a Supreme Being? Is it true that the language of the Ancient Charge, No. 1, “Concerning God and Religion,” did not indicate there had been any deviation from that belief?
In view of the foregoing it is required among the English-speaking grand bodies that every candidate must be obligated upon a Volume of Sacred Law. It is the rule that the Volume of Sacred Law shall be that Book which represents to the candidate his conception of the same, otherwise, his obligations would be completely devoid of value.
The Prince Hall Fraternity follows the American system of requiring that a copy of the Holy Bible must be upon the Altar of every lodge; it is referred to as the “Great Light” and not the Volume of Sacred Law and of course the particular designation is immaterial; the contents and purposes are identical.
Personally, I have absolutely no criticism of that regulation but I have, for quite a period, entertained the notion that a copy of the Volume of Sacred Law of other outstanding religious faiths should likewise repose upon the Alters of our Lodge, not under the likelihood that a Mason of some non-Christian faith might seek admission as a visitor but rather the presence of these Volumes would fully exemplify the “universality” of our Masonic institution; to restrict the requirement to the Holy Bible alone not only presupposes that freemasonry is exclusively a Christian fraternity but it loses that atmosphere of “universality.”
The custom of Lodges in India displaying various Books of the Law upon the Altar does not indicate the “universality” of the Craft out there; the custom prevails merely because of the variety of religious faiths in the country.
In your communication you refer to the “Facultative Book, “ and I am frank to advise I am unable to understand your conception of such a volume, because, in asserting the meaning of the word “facultative,” my dictionary says: “Endowing with power or authority but not making its exercise obligatory; rending optional; contingent.”
In view of the above definition, permit me to ask the question. What validity will a volume possess when obligating a candidate thereon, if it allows him to either adhere to or discard its admonitions? It is possible to make an obligation effective if it is not taken upon something possessing fundamentally?
In compliance with your request I shall prepare a brief outline pertaining to the origin and subsequent progress of Freemasonry among the citizens of color in the United States and the same will be forwarded in due course.
Copies of our correspondence are being submitted to the President of the Conference of Prince Hall Grand Masters for consideration at the session to be held this coming May, that the members thereof will have something concrete to discuss.
With my very best wishes of the compliments of the new year and kindest personal regards, I am,
Sincerely and fraternally,
(signed) Harry A. Williamson.
Translation of letter from Dr. Paul Chevellier of the
Grand Orient of France dated November 27, 1951.
My Dear Brother Williamson:
Only recently I received your so friendly letter and I am happy that our relations continue in this precious atmosphere of perfect and fraternal cordiality. I shall read with great interest, and assuredly with great profit, the works which you announce and which I have not yet received. If you are able to add to that a detailed history of your Prince Hall Grand Lodge it will be a precious item for the Library of the Grand Orient of France.
I shall study with the greatest care and communicate in their entirety to the Council of the Order of the Grand Orient of France the points of view which are expressed, on our respective ideals and our relations with you, at the Conference of the Prince Hall Grand Masters next May.
You asked me what books are on our Altars, and the same time as the symbolic tools. There is an obligatory book and a facultative (meaning one that can be used or not) book.
OBLIGATORY BOOK. It is obligatory, the Book of Constitutions of Anderson, 1723 edition, that is to say the book that defines perfectly, from its origin, the aim and the essential means of Freemasonry. Assuredly certain phrases of these constitutions explain themselves in terms of the customs of the end of the 18th century, and, more especially, by English customs, and some of these phrases today have the effect of anachronisms. We conserved, nevertheless, the entire text through respect for tradition.
To the 1723 Constitutions of Anderson we add the Constitution of the Grand Orient of France.
FACULTATIVE BOOK. The same as each Freemason possesses absolute liberty of conscience, each Lodge possess the right to work in the rite (religious) it prefers. For that which concerns us here, each Lodge has the right to place or not place the bible on its Altars (eventually, the Koran, or any other books of religious tradition).
If we refuse to make the Bible obligatory it is because the Grand Lodge of England has given to its presence that significance that every Mason adhere to a monotheistic religious system. Or, that obligation is contrary to that fundamental article of our Constitution, that each Mason is free to his own religious, philosophical, social and political opinions, that is to say his liberty of conscience is absolute. It is because the Grand Lodge of England refuses to its adherents this liberty of conscience that we do not consider it as plainly Masonic.
Recently, certain ones among us considered to make obligatory the placing of the Bible on the Altar. From all evidence this would only be imposed after a solemn declaration by our consent affirming that it would only have the sense of a respect for traditions, and that it would obligate no one to be restrained in that which would be his liberty of thought. The project has been abandoned after a very serious historical study. In effect, at its beginning, freemasonry did no work on the Bible, and the introduction of the Bible on the Altar is relatively recent.
Here, very dear Brother Williamson, in all frankness, is our position on the question of the Bible. It is well understood that I write you my own personal opinion and that I will submit to the Council of the Order of the Grand Orient of France our exchange of views when I shall be in possession of the official authorization of the reunion (meeting) of the Prince Hall Grand Masters.
I beg of you to accept the expression of my very fraternal sentiments.
(signed) Paul Chevallier
LETTER TO GRAND MASTER
JNO. G. LEWIS, JR OF THE
PRINCE HALL GRAND LODGE OF LOUISIANA
BY HARRY A. WILLIAMSON
1314 Prospect Ave.,
New York City,
July 16, 1952
Dear Brother Lewis:
If rumors which are in circulation are reliable, it seems that when Bro. Greene of Michigan extended an invitation to Bro. Marius Lepage of Lavel, France, to visit his Grand Lodge last spring, certain of our so-called leaders deemed the project as a very fine gesture, until, certain other of our leaders contacted the former leader and spread the word that the visit of the French Brother might destroy much of the alleged good feeling now prevailing in some quarters among the whites toward our Masonic group, and our leaders did not hesitate to change their mind and frowned upon Bro. Greene’s plan.
As I have written to several of my Brethren, and perhaps to you, had I been in Bro. Greene’s position I would have carried my plan to completion with full knowledge that those who did not approve of it had not the slightest knowledge of the matters involved. After my plan had been carried out I would have gone into battle with those Prince Hall Masons who labor under the impression there has been such a great change in the general attitude of the white Craft toward our group and compelled them to produce evidence to sustain their claim.
I direct your attention to the items upon the attached sheet. These are of comparative recent date and will amply illustrate that the claim of a change in attitude is absolutely false insofar as the majority of the white grand bodies are concerned. Further, I doubt that any white Grand Lodge will dare to attempt to follow the 1947 action of Massachusetts during the next generation. As old and staid as Massachusetts is, she did not dare to continue to resist the unfavorable reaction forthcoming from various sections, and you may recall that in her retraction in 1949, Massachusetts stated in no unmistakable language that when it comes to peace and harmony in the white Craft over the question of Prince Hall Masonry, the latter would be cast aside.
I have no sympathy with certain of our so-called Masonic leaders who appear to be very ready to follow some suggestions put forth by members of the white Craft. It is true our Fraternity has many white friends within the white Order; personally, I have a number of such friends for whom I maintain the highest regard and have been fortunate to be in very intimate relationship, but when it comes to the white Order as a whole, I positively refuse to “toddy” to it in any manner whatever.
Insofar as the Grand Orient of France is concerned, the very fact that some of our so-called Masonic leaders heartily endorsed Bro. Greene’s action and then when some white Masons expressed their opinions, our leaders immediately turned tail and ran, indicating very clearly they had not the slightest knowledge of the matters between the Grand Orient and the English-speaking grand bodies. If they had such knowledge (accurate) they would not have turned their backs on Bro. Greene.
My investigations have convinced me that when it comes to adherence to the true precepts of Freemasonry, the Grand Orient of France stands heads and shoulders above any of the English-speaking jurisdictions particularly those in America.
The white American grand bodies refuse to recognize the Grand Orient upon the allegation that the latter has removed the Volume of Sacred Law from the Altars of its Lodges and yet these, like the Grand Lodge of England are unable to prove the presence of the Bible as an ancient regulation. You will note I have touched upon this fact in my digest of the subject of which you have a copy.
Similarly, the white grand bodies refuse to declare that we are a regularly constituted Masonic Fraternity merely upon the fact of the color of our skin and irrespective of the fact that we, like themselves make use of the Volume of Sacred Law. I ask is there any vestige of consistency in this attitude when they refuse to admit men of color into their organization thereby declaring to the world that American Freemasonry is a white man’s institution in direct conflict with the teachings of the ritual as observed in all English-speaking grand jurisdictions. In the face of this, it appears there are some among us who wish to kiss the boots of the white Fraternity for a crumb thrown from their table. The above is, in my opinion, the grossest kind of hypocrisy.
Let us suppose the Prince Hall Craft should enter into fraternal relations with the Grand Orient of France, I ask in what manner could the white American Order deprive us of what we already have, and which we did not attain through any kindness on the part of the latter. How could they in the future deprive us of anything Masonic in character or benefit when, as a fact, the average white Mason is not interested in any of the technicalities as are raised from time to time by their leaders; this I know from actual experience from Brethren both high and low in the respective jurisdictions.
Perhaps you may not agree with some of my expressions and my general attitude as may refer to our “certain leaders,” but we should investigate and determine the facts for ourselves and not be led around by the nose by well disposed white Masons. Let us stand upon our own feet and issue as many declaration as to our course in the matter.
It is an unfortunate fact that the white grand bodies do not hesitate to “ape” the Grand Lodge of England in various matters, when as an actual fact the Masonry in England is of exceedingly “aristocratic” and does not contain the “democratic” attitude as found over here. An examination of the Constitution of England will prove such for its whole structure is based upon the “nobility” as against the conception of the “common man,” Happily there are some English Masons who resent the personnel structure of their grand body but of course they can never make any change due to tight control that the aristocracy has upon the Institution.
I have wondered why the subject of the Grand Orient was not permitted to be placed before the recent session of our Grand Master’s Conference; the impression prevails that certain of its officers were afraid to handle such a warm subject and if such is true, I must say I am greatly disappointed in them, because, it is my understanding the Conference is for the exact purpose of discussing all matters pertaining to the future of Prince Hall Masonry.
You will observe I am very much interested and somewhat wrought up over the reaction of the honest effort of Bro. Greene to do something which he thought would be of great benefit to our Craft and which he would not have attempted at this time had he been familiar with the situation from its historical standpoint or without consultation with those of his own Brethren who not only were versed with the subject but whose minds are not bound by insurmountable technicalities.
In proposing the idea of a bureau of information I felt I had something worth while to offer but it seems that those who are limited in connections wish to handle something completely outside of their ability to handle in a manner to renown to our Craft. The result is of no surprise to me.
With very kind regards, I am,
Yours sincerely and fraternally,
(signed) Harry A. Williamson.
NOTES OF FREEMASONRY IN FRANCE
by
Harry A. Williamson
For many years the English-speaking grand bodies have maintained a non-intercourse attitude toward the several Masonic institutions in France. Considerable discussion upon the subject has appeared in numerous American Craft periodicals over the years, notable, in issues of ‘The Freemasons’ Monthly magazine of Boston, Mass., between 1843 and 1873, wherein there are at the very least, twenty-seven contributions pertaining to the Grande Orient de France and the Supreme Council de France, also, relative to a Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite in Louisiana.
It is the impression of this writer the latter organization is the one now operating within the State of Louisiana as its headquarters and with units in several of the other states. Originally, consisting of foreign speaking Freemasons, it was allegedly established in the City of New Orleans on October 17, 1839, because the “United Supreme Council for the Western Hemisphere” of which Elias Hicks of New York was the Grand Commander, was “slumbering,” and so the organizers of the Louisiana body declared it to be the only authority for the Scottish Rite in the United States, completely ignoring the so-called Mother Supreme Council which had been erected at Charleston many years previous. The Louisiana body was incorporated under the laws of the state on March 16, 1870, as the “Supreme Council of Louisiana.”
The first Grand Commander of the New Orleans organization was Orazio de Attelia, Marquis de Santangelo, who, allegedly, was created a thirty-third degree Mason by Joseph Cerneau on November 16, 1827. On the 16th of October, 1949, this society celebrated its 110th anniversary at the First African Baptist Church in New Orleans, a copy of the program for the occasion being in the possession of this writer.
It was during the Grand Commandership of Eugene Chassaignac, that about 1867, this Supreme Council began to admit persons of the Negro race to membership and while at this date several of the officers appear to possess names of foreign origin, it must be presumed that by this time (1950), the membership of the jurisdiction must be predominantly, if not all, Negroid.
It is claimed the interdiction against the two French Masonic groups previously mentioned, is based primarily upon the fact that the Grand Orient had, many years ago, removed the Holy Bible or Volume of Sacred Law from the Altars of its Lodges; it had eliminated the expression in a belief in God from its Obligations and, had established some Lodges in the State of Pennsylvania.
However, let us search for another explanation for the attitude of the American Grand Lodges as will be noted in the March 1950, number of Masonic Light published at Montreal, Quebec. In the Editorial Preface to a contribution submitted at the request of the editor of this periodical, one finds the following comment:
“Recently one of the leading Masonic periodicals published in France, ‘La Chaine d’Union,’affirmed that while belief in a Supreme Being, and the absence in the Lodge of the V.S.O. were invoked as a pretext of withholding recognition to the Grand Orient de France and the Grand Loge de France (S.R.) who imposed neither of these landmarks, the real reason why American Masonry frowned upon the French Grand Bodies was solely because these Bodies, carry out the fundamental principles expressed by Anderson in his ‘Constitutions’ as to who can belong to Masonry, they did not impose race barriers, whereas the Americans refuse admission to those men, no matter how worthy, who belong to the negro race.”
* * * * *
“Though we consider the banning of Negroes from our Lodges to be a violation of Masonry as we understand it, we had never conceived that this race question could underlie the refusal of recognition to the two great French Grand Bodies by our American Brethren. We have wished to know, from authentic documents, how deep were the anti-Negro sentiments in the Grand Bodies in the United States that might justify the conclusions of Brother Julien in the April issue of ‘La Chaine d’Union’ (Paris, France) to the effect that whereas the higher principles were invoked as reasons for the excommunication of our French Brethren, the real reason was the fact that French Masonry faithfully followed the principles laid down by Anderson and did not recognize race or color as a reason for excluding a man from Masonry and that this attitude displeased some American Grand Bodies - not all, evidently, since we know that Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island would readily recognize the regularity of Prince Hall Bodies if they dared follow their inclination.”
In the issue of The New England Craftsman of Boston, Mass., for November, 1917, and page 52, Owen Scott, a Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Illinois, discusses “Why French Masonry Is Not Recognized,” and he gives the following as constituting the reason for such interdictions:
1. In 1869, the Grand Orient “visited one of the fundamentals of Masonic regularity,” by establishing Lodges in Louisiana and that “This was sufficient ground for American Grand Lodges to declare non-intercourse with France.”
2. That in 1877, the Grand Orient had “amended its constitution so that recognition of, or a belief in God was eliminated,” also, the Bible had been removed from the Altars of the Lodges under its jurisdiction, thus accusing French Masonry of being “a mere association for ethical and political purposes.”
It is one of the fundamentals of Freemasonry that men of every country, “sect and opinion” are eligible to enter its fold, then, why do all the English-speaking Grand Lodges deliberately attempt to “Christianize” the Fraternity, thus destroying completely its boasted “universality?”
The American Grand Lodges require the presence of the Holy Bible upon the Alters of its Lodges, but, nowhere do any of these require the presence of the Volume of Scared Law of any one or all of the various religious sects that may be represented in the membership of many of their Lodges. Why not such a requirement to make American Masonry consistent?
The Illinois Past Grand Master stated further that Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Switzerland, Central and South American Grand Lodges had all “followed in the atheistic wake of France,” and that, with the exception of the bodies in the British Isles and Holy land, “there is no legitimate Masonry in Europe.” That holier than thou attitude.
That gentlemen is quoted as follows:
“Just prior to the beginning of the great war now devastating the earth, there was an attempt made to organize a legitimate Masonic Grand Lodge. This was known as the National Grand Lodge of France. It was so insignificant in its genesis that it promised little in restoring Gallic Masonry to its good standing throughout the fraternal world. In fact this new venture was more English than French in its inception and methods of organization.”
In other words, the above movement, insofar as the jurisdictions in the United States were concerned, was a direct and deliberate violation of their so-called American Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, Consistency, indeed thou are a jewel.
Upon the caption of “Masonic Relations with French Masons,” the New England Craftsman, of Boston, Mass., for October 1917, carried a two and a half page unsigned contribution upon this subject and through it one learns that What there Trestleboard quotes from a proceedings of the Grand Lodge of New York, in which appears the statement the Grand Lodge of Rhode Island had, in 1874, after an investigation, declared that, because, the Grand Orient of France had recognized a Supreme Council in Louisiana, the former had violated “the well established law of the supremacy of Grand Lodges within their respective jurisdictions,” irrespective of the fact no such law is recognized anywhere else throughout the Masonic world. In other words, that actions of the Grand Orient was tantamount to a violation of that so-called American Doctrine of Exclusive Territorial jurisdiction which is a piece of anti-Negro Masonic buncombe used with effect against the Prince Hall Order.
It seems the suggestion for the above procedure came from Frederic Desmons, who was the President of the Council of the Order or the Grand Master of the Grand Orient, and a few of his comments are presented, and coming from a Protestant clergyman, they are of special interest:
“Let us leave to churches and theologians the discussion of dogmas. Let us leave to accredited church authorities the formation of systems. Let Masonry continue to be what she ought to be, an institution open to progress of every sort, welcoming all moral ideas, all liberal ideas, all large and liberal aspirations. Let us never descent into the arena of theological discussions, which discussions have never, believe me, resulted in anything but troubles and persecutions. Let Masonry take care not to aim to be an organized church, a council, or a synod, for all church organization, all councils and all synods have been violent and persecuting, because they have all taken dogmas as their base, which base is in its nature essentially inquisitorial and intolerant. Let Masonry soar majestically above all questions of churches and sects; let her tower in her height and grandeur above all their discussions; let her be the shelter for all brave and noble spirits, for all conscientious and disinterested seekers after truth, and finally for all the victims of despotism and intolerance.”
This clergyman and the presiding officer of the Grand Orient continues when he said:
“The action of the Grand Orient, however, met with a storm of disapproval from many Grand Lodges and much intemperate talk have been indulged in by men of narrow vision and prejudiced mind, who have denounced all French Masonry, whether of the Grand Orient of France or of the Grand Lodge of France, as being atheistical, irregular and clandestine.
“Opposed to this views were many well known Masons who did not lose faith in French Masonry and who have believed that the action taken was not because of a disbelief in a Supreme Power, but because of conditions existing, not easily understood except by the French Mason.”
It was during the First World War when thousands of American Freemasons were to be found in the American Expeditionary Forces, that some sort of a face-saving gesture on the part of American Jurisdictions was made to French Masonry and this magazine quotes from records of the Grand Lodge of New York, thusely:
“Full liberty was given to all New York Masons in France to hold Masonic intercourse with French Masons and visit their Lodges. the question of formal exchange of Representatives between the Grand Lodges of France and New York was referred to the Committee on Correspondence to report next may.”
The foregoing action had been based upon an appeal to the American Grand Lodges from the “Rite Ecossais Ancien Accepte Grand Lodge de France” under the date of July 20, 1917 and which reads in full as follows:
“The landing in our country of the vanguard of your army, which is crossing the ocean to unite with us in the great struggle for the freedom of the world, is an event of momentous import. It has aroused within us the thought that it is highly desirable that our ancient institution, which has always stood for liberty, should celebrate this manifestation of brotherhood by a drawing together of the bonds of fraternal esteem and affection which unite Freemasons all over the world.
“With this thought in our minds we are writing to extend to your Grand Lodge an invitation to enter into official relations with us, and to cement those relations by an exchange of Representatives.
“The Grand Lodge of France was constituted in 1804 by the Supreme Council 33d, for France and the French colonies to administer and control the lodges working the three degrees of craft Masonry. In 1904, as the result of friendly negotiations with the Supreme Council, our Grand Lodge became a sovereign and independent body.
“As an integral part of the A. & A. S. C. , our Masonic principles are those common to the Rite in general as set forth in the declaration of the Convention of Lausanne of 1875. We have 136 Lodges working under our jurisdiction, among them one, Anglo-Saxon 343, which works in English and the members of which are almost exclusively British and American.
“In the hope that you will agree with us that such a union as we propose will appear all the more in harmony with the ideals of our order, if realized in the hour when the brethren of our two countries are shedding their lifeblood in common for the triumph of justice and civilization.
“We are yours faithfully and fraternally.”
An examination of the 1947 edition of the international Masonic Lodge directory, there is no indication that any of the American bodies could have responded to that appeal, because none list the Grand Orient as being recognized by them, and one may well wonder what the reaction of the Committee on Correspondence of New York was, in connection with its previous action of permitting fraternization between its members and French Masons.
With further reference to this subject there is a communication which was forwarded to the Grand Lodge of Maine by Albert J. Kruger a Freemason in Belgium and its can be found in the December, 1905, number of the New England Freemason of Boston, Mass., under the caption of “Justification of the Grand Orient of France.”
This communication consists of two and one half pages; very interesting in that it treats directly of what Freemasons in both Belgium and France have had to endure and space will permit of only two excerpts, viz:
“Our French brethren say (and it is but too true) that the influence of the priests over the human minds is gained largely by the obligatory confessions to which they subject their adherents and whom they compel to recognize them (the priests) as the authorized medium between themselves and their God., claiming to be invested with power to give absolution if they think fit, or condemn to everlasting suffering.
“The Catholic priests have ever been the privileged teachers of the human race, pretending that the only happiness and salvation of mankind can be found in what they teach, but have they taught lessons of love, peace on earth and good will to man with the same purity as Freemasonry? The hatred and fanaticism they have awakened, the cruelty, the tears, the ignorance they have caused, defines description and can only be understood by those who had direct experience of the iniquities of which such priests are capable, and they do all professedly in the name of religion and of the faith.
“The Church of Rome, in her opposition to liberty of thought and tolerance in religion, has always been the enemy of Freemasonry. She hates our noble institution, because it if founded on liberty of thought and tolerance in religion, knowing nothing of distinctive dogmas or conflicting creeds, having truth for its center.”
* * * *
“Acknowledging the Grand Orient of France is guilty of certain unmasonic actions, which deserve criticism, but, in consideration of the fact that the French Masons are battling against the same common enemy of Freemasonry as their Belgian brethren, the latter cannot but be in sympathy with their French brethren. Who are fighting so manfully for freedom of thought and action, for themselves and their children.”
The one great fact is, that French Masonry, for the protection and perpetuation of the ideals of a free people, was compelled by force of circumstances to engage in what English-speaking Masons might have termed as “government politics” in order to completely destroy the great power and fear of clericalism which prevailed throughout France in a not so long ago period in her history, for with a Cardinal high in the councils of government, the people were being crushed under the heal of the Popes of Rome.
Americans have never experienced such conditions, there, Masons here have been unable to thoroughly understand nor appreciate the situation of the Freemasons in France.
That Belgian Mason further outlines the attitude and actions of the Roman Catholic Church when he wrote:
“In both France and Belgium the enemies of light and liberty are very strong and numerous, perhaps more so in Belgium, where a clerical government has held reins for years, and where ignorance and fanaticism possess most formidable strongholds. In Belgium, of course, Masonry is not recognized officially, and the Belgian Masons find themselves continually at war with said enemies; individual Masons are opposed almost in every phase of their existence.
“If the Catholic priests were less intolerant and less tyrannical, free thinkers would not exist. The standpoint which the Masons have taken in the different Catholic countries can only be explained as an expression of a counteraction against the priesthood.”
One reads in the proceedings of many of the American jurisdictions the glowing expressions regarding the purposes of and benefits to be derived through membership in the Masonic Order and those same proceedings likewise amply illustrate how far are their “practices” from their “professions,” all of which proves that in some areas in the United States Freemasonry is nothing more than “sounding brass.”
There is not a ritual in use in any American grand jurisdiction but teaches that all mankind, irrespective of race, creed or color, is a part of God’s great human family, also, one reads much about “Brotherhood Week” and “Bible Week” in some of the jurisdictions, but what significance do these have in the average Freemasons? Like the Obligations taken by them at the Altar, such are more matters of form and a necessary part of the initiation ceremony so what do they matter in the end? Are they nothing more than meaningless words? Just think this over.
The question is now asked why do not the American Grand Lodges and those in English speaking jurisdictions elsewhere throughout the world, declare non-intercourse with the Grand Lodge of Sweden for its deliberate violation of one of the most important fundamentals in Ancient Craft Masonry, because, that grand body will not:
(a) Permit the initiation into Lodges of a man who is a non-professing Christian, or, in plain words, one who is not identified with some Christian religion.
(b) Allow a non-Christian Freemason to be even a visitor to a Lodge in that country.
American Freemasonry, what have you to say to this? Are not those regulations a deliberate violation of the principle of “universality” in Freemasonry, likewise, do they present “sufficient ground” for a declaration of non-intercourse with the Grand Lodge of Sweden?
It is doubtful there is a single American Grand Lodge possessing sufficient moral courage to take such a step.