p. 60 | FREEMASONRY by James White

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 14, 1868

FREEMASONRY

By James White

We have received a request by letter not to publish Prof. Finney's articles from the Independent on Freemasonry, the writer assigning as a reason that we have some good friends and supporters in that neighborhood who are Masons. But again we have received some very urgent requests to publish them, from some whose interest in the cause is beyond a doubt—who have devoted their lives to its service. Whom shall we please? We do not see in the statement above referred to, a sufficient reason for breaking our promise to our readers. The Independent must have very many Masons among its supporters, yet we see no hint of a demur against its publishing on this subject. The Sabbath Recorder re-publishes these articles; doubtless many other papers do. Why should the readers of the Review be deprived of the privilege of reading them?

We confess to a feeling of opposition to all such institutions, and the reason assigned for the above request does not raise them in our esteem. For,

1. Masonry is not a sacred institution—it is not a religious institution; for some of the most inveterate infidels in our knowledge are prominent Masons. On what, then, is this high claim founded that it should be above investigation?

2. It is often asserted that Masonry is exclusive in its nature, and leads to intolerance and bigotry. If this is true it is evil; if it is not true, why does it forbid a candid examination of its claims?

3. Prof. Finney has taken three degrees—which are all there are in Masonry proper—and is thus qualified to speak of its merits or demerits. His position and reputation for many years past entitle his testimony to respect. Why should he not be heard with candor and patience?

4. Will any of our friends cease to be our friends because we publish on this subject? If so, is it not sufficient evidence that they love an institution which includes infidels and those of notoriously immoral lives in its brotherhood more than the fellowship of the remnant who are preparing for the Lord's coming?

5. We have carefully read Prof. Finney's articles; we have read works on Masonry, including many of their own authorized publications; and we have read the Bible; comparing the three we know that many of the statements of Prof. Finney are true. Now if Masons are unwilling that the truth should be told about Masonry, is not that of itself a condemnation of the institution?

We love the gospel—its truths and its institutions. We love the Bible. It is all dear to our heart. What then? Shall we hide it from the public, talk of its truths and celebrate its institutions in secret darkness, and grow indignant when any shall inquire concerning its facts or call in question its claims? No. We will proclaim it to the world as a blessing to man; we invite investigation and court the most critical examination of both its truths and its claims. Why will not Masons do the same by Masonry? Can it not bear the light? See John iii, 19-21. Will some of our Masonic friends answer this question?

Prof. Finney writes in a fair style, and is by no means extreme in his statements. We trust he will not be condemned before he is heard. We publish without any intention or desire to injure anybody's feelings or to do anybody injustice. But we are obliged to look with suspicion upon any institution which works only in the dark and shrinks from an investigation of its principles—which grows intolerant and persecuting when its claims and professions are called in question. We hope “our friends” will carefully review the ground on which they stand, and see if the institution will stand the test of the day of investigation which is approaching, when “God shall bring every work into Judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil.”

J. H. W.