Tonight, while reading a thick secret Masonic book left to me by my departed Master Mason grandfather, who reached the 32nd degree (Master of the Royal Secret) on June 16, 1944, I became curious if I might be able to start a Science-Based Masonic lodge. It appears not… but things do change.
At this time in history, an atheistic Freemason must hide his true beliefs according to this:
I'm an atheist Freemason (they'd expel me if they knew)
Is it possible to reconcile being a confirmed atheist with participating in a religious organisation?
People usually think Masons are either a bunch of old farts with their trousers rolled up, or evil genuises bent on world domination. Dan Brown, in his otherwise execrable Lost Symbol, described us fairly and with a sneaking admiration (though in this country we don't do anything like locking ourselves in cupboards with skulls). It's a way of meeting people (well, men) on a basis of immediate friendship. It teaches a moral code: integrity, fidelity, benevolence etc. It raises a *lot* of money for charity. It offers a chance to perform ceremonies. Why does it need to be religious?
Every candidate for initiation is asked "Do you believe in a Supreme Being?". When I was asked this, I replied "Yes", and meant it — nothing further is ever asked or expected. At the time I was a wishy-washy not-quite-a-Christian, like many other members I've met. People from any faith are welcome, and oaths of secrecy and fidelity are taken on a bible, or other holy book if appropriate (requests for Darwin or Dawkins wouldn't be well received!). Each meeting involves prayers to the generic "Great Architect of the Universe" to look favourably upon the organisation and its members, and to keep us steadfast in our oaths. I question whether any passing God would trouble Himself to shine His rays upon a bunch of men waffling on in coloured aprons, but this low-key interventionism is woven in. The secrets themselves serve no purpose other than identification, aren't hard to find on google, and really aren't interesting in their own right.
Moral teachings are a central part of the ceremonies, in which the "candidate" (new member) is taught various lessons about how to be a better man. There are some wonderful moments in these ceremonies, which are genuine once-in-a-lifetime experiences, and I can honestly say that they've had a very real and positive effect on my conduct in everyday life. One key point they hold that I utterly reject is that God is the moral compass and fount of all goodness.
I derive a lot of enjoyment from performing the ceremonies. They involve learning large tracts of dignified, old-fashioned dialogue and monologue, and performing them in such a way as to give the candidate a memorable and impressive experience. Any frustrated actor would revel in this. Amateur pageantry is also an important part, and for anyone who enjoys watching the pomp and circumstance of a royal wedding, military parade, or a high church service, this is good fun to take part in. Some of the buildings are nothing short of magnificent and it's a privilege to use them. Alas, those small parts of the ceremony which reflect the religious underpinning engender in me feelings of hypocrisy; I've filled various offices which involve leading short prayers. It feels dirty — perhaps more so than mumbling the Lord's Prayer at a wedding, though there is no logical reason for this to be the case. Is it any different from being in a church and not agreeing with the letter of everything being said? Maybe it's the difference between being an atheist church-goer and an atheist priest.
Why do I do this? It's fun. It fills a gap which I think church fills in the lives of the religious — community, morality, ceremony etc. I agree strongly with the intent of its teachings, even though I reject the jump from "being nice to people is good" to "God is good and He wants you to be nice to people". Given the don't-ask-don't-tell policy after the initial interview (religion and politics are taboo subjects on account of being too divisive), all that's required is a certain amount of finger-crossing and keeping my mouth shut. It's a price to pay, but the benefits (strictly non-pecuniary!) of membership far outweigh this price.
There's no secular equivalent, alas — society is still to emerge fully from the assumption that all good people are religious, and all religious people are good, and Freemasonry is lagging far behind. In my opinion, the religion could be removed from Freemasonry to no loss, but I'm probably in the minority.
You may call me a hyprocrite, and you may very well be right. So be it. I've made a significant positive contribution to a number of lodges over a number of years, and they to me. I have every hope this will continue.
Of course, if I had successfully formed an Non-Religious Masonic lodge bent on proving that moral behavior is a human right, a human creation, and a universally human struggle, I couldn’t tell you about it.
My grandfather only said one thing about the Masons to me… Ever. It seemed totally random to me at the time because I didn’t know he was one. He said that if anyone ever tells you the Masons asked him to join, they were lying. You have to go to them.