The New Constitution Of The Order Of Freemasonry In France .

THE NEW CONSTITUTION OF THE ORDER OF FREEMASONRY IN FRANCE .

ZONDON , SATURDAY , JANUARY 21 , I 860 .

We extract the following- from the December issue of tire Journal des Initios , which , for the last few months , has conducted a brave and most laudable struggle against the spirit of atheism that sought to introduce itself into and sap the very

foundations on which Freemasonry has ever been based . We hail with delight the splendid result that has been attained by these champions of true religion—the utter failure of all the pernicious endeavours of the so-called " positivists" to bring about such modifications in the constitution of

French Masonry as would have eliminated , if not entirely destroyed , the essential character of our institution . Although the reports submitted to the Grand Orient on the proposed new constitution do not

exceed one hundred and twenty in number , the affirmation of God and the immortality of the soul will be maintained by an immense majority , notwithstanding all the endeavours that have been repeatedly made to discard these principles in the

name of absolute toleration , being the conditio sine qua notx of absolute liberty . A very satisfactory result has thus been obtained j but the idea of toleration , which necessarily possesses a powerful influence on every liberal mind , has been

strangely misconstrued , for toleration must always be one of the chief principles that entitle Masonry to public esteem , so long as it does not become a pretext for undermining the very foundations of social and moral order .

However , the fact must not be lost sight of that , amongst those brethren who adhere to the principle of divinity in the Order of Masonry , there are many who do not consider it indispensable , and want to maintain it merely out of respect for the Masonic

tradition . For the remainder , they would rather prefer absolute toleration . This error is the greatest evil that has arisen from the endeavours to obtain a change in the foundations of Masonry . It is , therefore , of the highest importance to

dispel this grave mistake . We beseech all unprejudiced minds to ask themselves whether toleration can involve the authority of demolishing the essential unity of an institution which nobody is allowed to join unless he take an oath of allegiance to , and be initiated in , the name of this very unity .

If they were to contend that they do not want any affirmation imposed upon them , we should be compelled to reply that such language must exclude them ; for no one can be admitted into the Order unless he has previously declared his desire to join the Craft of his own free will ..

If toleration permitted persons to 30 m an association for the purpose of destroying its foundations , no institution of a moral character could possibly exist . This is acknowledged by the dissentients themselves , who are very careful not

toadmit into their councils of management any but such men as profess their fundamental principles ; besides , their practices are a permanent proof of the necessity of this unity . Well , then , on what plea do they mean to

submit Masonry to an excess of toleration which they will not acknowledge in their own doings ? Why , instead of endeavouring to destroy an existing unity , do they not rather establish one on fundamental principles of their own ? In Masonry they

might have constituted certain unities in those lodges they superintend . Why have they not been satisfied with this result , instead of going into other Masonic communities to excite a contention , the object of which is to dissolve the organic unity

of the labour that used to be performed under theasigis of Masonic law . If the dissentients to the present system consider it necessary for their own purposes that the unity which has been established by the founder of their school should be preserved ,

why do they endeavour to demolish it in the case of other associations ? Is this what they term the inviolability of the sacred right of every man of establish a collective moral unity ? let alone the inviolability of man ' s individuality .

Have these parties ever been molested in their doings so long as they confined themselves to social groups of their own ? Certainly not . In these they live under the shelter of toleration ; and Freemasonry would repel any encroachment on their

rights by repudiating the very doctrines they profess . Freemasonry has only defended that grand moral unity they endeavoured to demolish . The power of this defence had to be in proportion to the power

of the aggression to be repelled—otherwise we should have been utterly devoid of moral courage . Our object is to draw the attention of all unprejudiced minds to these facts , for we strongly apprehend that , by an excess of toleration , the very foundation of moral truth would be undermined .