EU to Hold Atheist and Freemason Summit

EUobserver / EU to hold atheist and freemason summit

I'd like to thank Bro. Hodapp for bringing this article to my attention on his blog.

Well, here's a tricky one. Apparently, every year for the past five years, the European Union leaders have met with prominent religious leaders of the European Union. They attempt to open a dialog between the government and the concerns of its religious citizens. It's a noble act, although I don't know if it would fly over here, state side. 

Not unsurprisingly, various Atheists and humanist groups throughout the EU felt they should have a fair shake at sending delegates to meet with the same people, and I'm inclined to agree with them. If its right for the religious groups to do so, then its only right to give the non religious the same benefits. 

What I do have a problem with is this: The humanists groups are having a separate meeting from the religious groups (which is possibly a good thing) and the government has invited Freemasons to send delegates to the humanist meeting.

This is a delicate and possibly precarious situation. Most of those who aren't Freemasons don't realize that there are two pretty distinct forms of Freemasonry. That of Grand Lodge Freemasonry, which has its roots in England, and is considered mainstream Freemasonry, the Masonry you see in America, and that of Grand Orient Masonry, which has its origins in France, but has a foot hold in many of the mainland European countries (including Belgium), and is also referred to as Continental Freemasonry.

There are several significant differences between these two groups. Some of the bigger factors, however, are this:

Mainstream Freemasonry

Grand Orient Freemasonry

Requires a belief in Deity, but otherwise open to all religions, regardless of who your Deity is Only open to men Teaches that one should be a loyal citizen and subject to ones government Politics and religion are not to be discussed in an open lodge. These are considered personal matters, and Masonry will not interfere with specific beliefs, not tell you what you should believe.

Allows atheists to join Allows co-Masonry, that is, the initiation of women Often gets involved in government, attempts to lobby for influence in politics, openly makes politics statements. Also often inquires into a petitioners political beliefs. Many anti Catholic movements in Europe have had prominent Orient Masons involved in them, arguably fueling some of the bad blood between Masonry and Catholicism.

The two groups had a schisms in 1877, which hasn't been rectified, nor does it look like it will be rectified anytime in the near future.

Now the significance of this is Belgium, the country that (rightly) pushed for the atheist/humanist summit in the EU, has a Grand Orient in its country. The Grand Orient of Belgium has indeed opened an office in order to:

...lobby against the rising influence of religious organisations in the EU institutions.

"The masonic orders should practice politics in the positive sense of the term: So that despite their own partisan divisions, they speak out on the side of secularism and voice their disagreement with this or that governmental or European decision," Jean-Michel Quillardet, the former Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France, told Belgian daily Le Soir in an interview out on Wednesday (17 February).

And further:

"It is necessary to impose the universal idea of the Enlightenment, which consists of the notion that people are citizens and European citizens before being Jewish, black, Maghreb, homosexual, heterosexual." 

The second article as well, I found courtesy of Bro. Hodapp's blog.

So I think its safe to assume that it was the Grand Orient of Belgium and its political lobbying office that manage to get their foot in the door of this humanist summit and have the fraternity represented.

However, this poses a number of problems for Regular Freemasonry. Most people don't know that there are two different Masonic 'factions' as it were, and won't distinguish between the two. This is going to give the religious right fodder for the debates, now seeing Freemasons associated with an atheist/humanist summit, regardless of whether or not Regular lodges sent representatives.

If they do send representatives, the association would be true. If they don't, people won't recognize the difference.

It's further complicated by Regular Freemasonry's refusal to be involved in politics. Once again, I think this wise and that the lodges should maintain this rule. According to our traditions and beliefs, we should not be involved in politics. Indeed, some Grand Lodges consider the prohibition of discussion of religion and politics in the lodge as one of our Landmarks. Most regular Masons will tell you that political lobbying isn't something that we should be involved in.

However, if we stay out of the debate, then that means Continental (or Grand Orient) Masonry effectively speaks for all Masons. That isn't true at all, technically, but they will be the only Masons publicly voicing themselves in politics. Given how divergent Continental Masonry is from Regular, their lobbying could hurt Regular Masonry if we choose not to speak up for ourselves.

Yet if Regular Masonry was represented, how should it be done? At the humanist/atheist summit? Regular Masons are all men of a religious nature, though with much variation. I highly doubt Regular lodges would be particularly welcomed at that summit. If fact, I know they wouldn't. Just read this wonderful quote from the article:

"I find it rather odd," David Pollock, president of the European Humanist Federation, told EUobserver. "Some of the Grand Lodges are secularist organisations, and strongly for separation of church and state, but they also retain all sorts of gobbledygook and myths such as the Great Architect of the Universe."

And this, also from Mr. Pollock:

"Neither religious groups nor non-religious ones have any greater claim to taking up the time of commissioners."

"But sadly we lost that battle, and so with the atheist summit, at least we're being treated equally, although I'd rather if we were there along with the churches. Instead we're being bundled off with the Freemasons." 

But if we were to be represented at the religious summit, that would once again stir of the erroneous 'Masonry is a religion' nonsense that its detractors so often employ. Besides, we don't really belong there either. We prohibit the discussion of religion and politics, should we be discussing politics directly with the government and the religious leaders of the world? I think not.

So where does that leave us? Disenfranchised by our own virtues, with irregular Masonry putting on a public face that will reflect on all Masons, whether or not its 'right'. It's not a desirable situation to be in, I think, nor one easily solved. Always those Europeans, causing the problems.

---

As a side note, can anyone imagine the political upheaval here in America if the US Congress, the President, and a special commission set up by the government had an annual summit with religious leaders mandated by law? And then started meeting with atheist/humanist groups as well? I think cable news would explode by virtue of the furor on both sides of the debate. It would be epic and frightening at the same time. (Particularly with how charged politics have been lately.)