-
Articles/Ads
Article FREEMASONRY AND ITS OPPONENTS. ← Page 2 of 3 Article FREEMASONRY AND ITS OPPONENTS. Page 2 of 3 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Freemasonry And Its Opponents.
" Thus , after we have tried to grasp this idea of universal benevolence , to place before our minds all the world in aprons , or to conceive some countless deputations from all nations marching to some monster hall on some monster festival , in coats , or skins , hats or turbans . Hottentots and Turks , arm in arm , the natives of Paddigton and Japan , of Pimlico and Peru . When Ave come
doAvn after these conceptions , to a feAV matters-of-fact details as to the means of carrying out so magnificent a design , Ave find very little machinery provided for the purpose , beyond flags and orations , compasses and ¦ waiters , dish-co \ ers and Avhite wands . It all ends in being social as it is called . This universal benevolence is no more than one of the bubbles of sentiment , a mere
hollow phrase , an unmeaning motto , painted on banners , aud mouthed by after-dinner orators . "It is true that Freemasons plume themselves on their charities , but their charity is of that peculiar kind which begins afc home , and there ends . The body helps itself ; the members pay , and tho members receive . And Avhen we consider the habits Avhich such a bodis almost sure
y to form among the middling clases , of whom it is chiefly composed , the support of a school and an almshouse is but a small atonement for the mischief which it most probably works . We are convinced much private ruin and derangement of affairs will ahvays be found to follow the course of a society which , whatever its high sounding professions may bo , is neither more nor less than a
convivial club . Such bodies are especial snares to the tradesmen of large towns . "My next extract ( if you permit ) shall expose the dangerous and false system of religions ( if such it may be called ) which Freemasonry . embodies and encourages among its members . —I am , Sir , yours sincerely , " CATHOLIOUS . "
To the first part of the observations of the Bishop , who , by-the-bye , only wrote the article to depreciate the services of a fellow-clergyman Avith whom he did not altogether agree on points of doctrine , and whom , in the fullness of his charity , he attacked for being a Ereemason , we have but little to answer ( his objections
having beenfrequentlyrefuted in these and other pages ) , as it merely consists of a series of generalities which would be equally applicable to every society , or combination of men in the kingdom , AvhateA-er their designation , be it learned or otherwise , for there are no societies in which there are not drones as well as
Avorking bees , and who do not think as much of tho annual feasts as even Ereemasons . Do the bishops object to good dinners ? "We fear not , if Ave may
judge by the number of fashionable parties—Lord Mayor ' s entertainments , & c , at Avhich they appear . Are they ashamed to be seen at annual festivals in the cause of charity ? Certainly nofc . And there are none of these festivals which are so widely advertised , so perseveringly brought before the imblie , or
more successful than those of the Sons of the Clergy —the Eriends of the Clergy Association—the Clergy Orphan Pund , & c , and we hold it to be to the credit of the bishops and the higher dignitaries in fche Church , that they do take an active interest in
institutions intended to support the decayed members and the orphan children of the less fortunate of their profession , for in the Church ( asin all other professions ) there are many blanks to but comparatively lew prizes .
Freemasonry And Its Opponents.
And if ifc be right that the members of the Church should sometimes dine together ancl subscribe their monies for the benefit of the poorer brethren of their Craft—can it be Avrong for Ereemasons to do the same ? And be it remembered we do not go hat in hand to all the world to support our Charities , being
perfectly content to rest upon our means . and our OAVU exertions . " Universal benevolence , " we are informed by the worthy Bishop " must end in profession , " because " Ave cannofc ask all the world to dinner . " —bufc did not the Bishop know that the ordination service enjoins " the practice of hospitality and other good
works , and yet no one would ever suppose that that was meant to imply that every member of the flock or indeed every clergyman was to be continually asked to dinner at the Bishop ' s table ; and whether we are clothed in " Aprons Masonic , " or " Aprons episcopal , " Ave apprehend it would make little difference as to all
fche world coining to any given dinner " if they can . " Then vre are told that fche Ereemasons' charity "begins at home and there ends—the body helps itself ; the members pay ancl the members receive . " - Is it nofc so with clerical charities , the " members pay and the members receive , " but they haA'e the advantage
of large and munificent support from others who are not of the cloth . In making- these observations , however , Ave by no means wish to infer thafc the clergy , either in the higher or lower grades , confine their
charity Avithin themselves , knowing full well how anxious and painstaking are the large majority of that body to minister to the wants and alleviate the miseries of the poorer of their parishioners ; and that , alas , in too many instances , when they are themselves but barely removed above the bitter pangs of poverty .
Neither does the true Ereemason confine his charity within the circle of his own craft ; for there is not a charity on the land whose list of subscribers does not contain the names of many , very many Ereemasons in their private character of citizens , which they
never sink in that of Masonry . But even supposing thafc Ereemasons were no better than a self-supporting "club , " who can say in this utilitarian-age fchafc it
is nofc beneficial—that it does not implant in its members habits of forethought and of providence ; and if , in after life—Avhen misfortune has overtaken perhaps one in three hundred of those who have subscribed towards a fund —• the Ereemason becomes a recipient of aid from his brethren , he can
do so with the greater satisfaction , knowing that he contributed towards the creation of that fund , in the days of his prosperity ; and the brethren have the gratification of feeling that in contributing towards the happiness of a brother , in his declining years , they
not only do so without sacrificing- his independence and self-esteem , but at the same time they relieve the other members of the community from a duty which .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Freemasonry And Its Opponents.
" Thus , after we have tried to grasp this idea of universal benevolence , to place before our minds all the world in aprons , or to conceive some countless deputations from all nations marching to some monster hall on some monster festival , in coats , or skins , hats or turbans . Hottentots and Turks , arm in arm , the natives of Paddigton and Japan , of Pimlico and Peru . When Ave come
doAvn after these conceptions , to a feAV matters-of-fact details as to the means of carrying out so magnificent a design , Ave find very little machinery provided for the purpose , beyond flags and orations , compasses and ¦ waiters , dish-co \ ers and Avhite wands . It all ends in being social as it is called . This universal benevolence is no more than one of the bubbles of sentiment , a mere
hollow phrase , an unmeaning motto , painted on banners , aud mouthed by after-dinner orators . "It is true that Freemasons plume themselves on their charities , but their charity is of that peculiar kind which begins afc home , and there ends . The body helps itself ; the members pay , and tho members receive . And Avhen we consider the habits Avhich such a bodis almost sure
y to form among the middling clases , of whom it is chiefly composed , the support of a school and an almshouse is but a small atonement for the mischief which it most probably works . We are convinced much private ruin and derangement of affairs will ahvays be found to follow the course of a society which , whatever its high sounding professions may bo , is neither more nor less than a
convivial club . Such bodies are especial snares to the tradesmen of large towns . "My next extract ( if you permit ) shall expose the dangerous and false system of religions ( if such it may be called ) which Freemasonry . embodies and encourages among its members . —I am , Sir , yours sincerely , " CATHOLIOUS . "
To the first part of the observations of the Bishop , who , by-the-bye , only wrote the article to depreciate the services of a fellow-clergyman Avith whom he did not altogether agree on points of doctrine , and whom , in the fullness of his charity , he attacked for being a Ereemason , we have but little to answer ( his objections
having beenfrequentlyrefuted in these and other pages ) , as it merely consists of a series of generalities which would be equally applicable to every society , or combination of men in the kingdom , AvhateA-er their designation , be it learned or otherwise , for there are no societies in which there are not drones as well as
Avorking bees , and who do not think as much of tho annual feasts as even Ereemasons . Do the bishops object to good dinners ? "We fear not , if Ave may
judge by the number of fashionable parties—Lord Mayor ' s entertainments , & c , at Avhich they appear . Are they ashamed to be seen at annual festivals in the cause of charity ? Certainly nofc . And there are none of these festivals which are so widely advertised , so perseveringly brought before the imblie , or
more successful than those of the Sons of the Clergy —the Eriends of the Clergy Association—the Clergy Orphan Pund , & c , and we hold it to be to the credit of the bishops and the higher dignitaries in fche Church , that they do take an active interest in
institutions intended to support the decayed members and the orphan children of the less fortunate of their profession , for in the Church ( asin all other professions ) there are many blanks to but comparatively lew prizes .
Freemasonry And Its Opponents.
And if ifc be right that the members of the Church should sometimes dine together ancl subscribe their monies for the benefit of the poorer brethren of their Craft—can it be Avrong for Ereemasons to do the same ? And be it remembered we do not go hat in hand to all the world to support our Charities , being
perfectly content to rest upon our means . and our OAVU exertions . " Universal benevolence , " we are informed by the worthy Bishop " must end in profession , " because " Ave cannofc ask all the world to dinner . " —bufc did not the Bishop know that the ordination service enjoins " the practice of hospitality and other good
works , and yet no one would ever suppose that that was meant to imply that every member of the flock or indeed every clergyman was to be continually asked to dinner at the Bishop ' s table ; and whether we are clothed in " Aprons Masonic , " or " Aprons episcopal , " Ave apprehend it would make little difference as to all
fche world coining to any given dinner " if they can . " Then vre are told that fche Ereemasons' charity "begins at home and there ends—the body helps itself ; the members pay ancl the members receive . " - Is it nofc so with clerical charities , the " members pay and the members receive , " but they haA'e the advantage
of large and munificent support from others who are not of the cloth . In making- these observations , however , Ave by no means wish to infer thafc the clergy , either in the higher or lower grades , confine their
charity Avithin themselves , knowing full well how anxious and painstaking are the large majority of that body to minister to the wants and alleviate the miseries of the poorer of their parishioners ; and that , alas , in too many instances , when they are themselves but barely removed above the bitter pangs of poverty .
Neither does the true Ereemason confine his charity within the circle of his own craft ; for there is not a charity on the land whose list of subscribers does not contain the names of many , very many Ereemasons in their private character of citizens , which they
never sink in that of Masonry . But even supposing thafc Ereemasons were no better than a self-supporting "club , " who can say in this utilitarian-age fchafc it
is nofc beneficial—that it does not implant in its members habits of forethought and of providence ; and if , in after life—Avhen misfortune has overtaken perhaps one in three hundred of those who have subscribed towards a fund —• the Ereemason becomes a recipient of aid from his brethren , he can
do so with the greater satisfaction , knowing that he contributed towards the creation of that fund , in the days of his prosperity ; and the brethren have the gratification of feeling that in contributing towards the happiness of a brother , in his declining years , they
not only do so without sacrificing- his independence and self-esteem , but at the same time they relieve the other members of the community from a duty which .