Masonic Authority

You can be sure something is wrong if anyone says a single person or organization speaks for or represents Masonry. Only a Grand Lodge has that power and then only within its jurisdiction. There is no national authority in the United States or international Masonic authority.

Anti-Masons Jim Shaw and Tom McKenney, "American Freemasonry (Blue Lodge and Scottish Rite) is divided into two jurisdictions." (The Deadly Deception, page 41)

Actually, it is the Scottish Rite that is divided into two jurisdictions not the Blue Lode. Freemasonry in North America is governed by independent legislative bodies known as Grand Lodges who exercise Masonic authority within a state or province. Within its boundaries or jurisdiction, each Grand Lodge reigns supreme over its lodges and all appendant Masonic organizations. The only control or influence a Grand Lodge comes from the influence by persuasion of its sister Grand Lodges which maintain a network of mutual recognition. Any other assertion displays a fatally flawed understanding of the organization of Freemasonry.


There Is No International Organization That Controls Freemasonry
Anti-Mason John Salza, "There is no authority that speaks for worldwide Freemasonry. There is no single governing body over American Grand Lodges. Each United States Grand Lodge is sovereign. Through its rituals, laws, and other practices, each Grand Lodge speaks authoritatively for Freemasonry in its particular state." (Masonry Unmasked, page 27)

Christopher Haffner, ". . . there is no international masonic organisation which can make a pronouncement for the whole masonic world." (Workman Unashamed, page 27)

Anti-Mason William Whalen, "The structure of Freemasonry has not changed over the years. Every Mason in good standing belongs to a Blue Lodge; maintenance of membership in this lodge is essential to keeping membership in any of the so-called higher rites or the Shrine. No one outranks the Master of his lodge or the Grand Master in his state. A 33rd-degree Mason would always rank below the Grand Master of his state even though the latter might be only a Master Mason." (Christianity and American Freemasonry, page 27)


Scottish Rite Freemasonry Does Not Control Freemasonry
Anti-Mason William Whalen, "Neither the Scottish rite nor the York rite constitutes an integral part of the Masonic order and neither is officially recognized by the Grand Lodges.
Claims of these two rites to form a part of Freemasonry rest only on the requirement that their initiates must be Master Masons. Expulsion from the so-called 'higher degrees' or appendant bodies does not affect Blue Lodge membership. On the other hand, a Mason expelled from the Craft degrees is automatically excluded from the dependent 'higher degrees.' Therefore, membership in these higher degrees demands maintenance of membership in a Blue Lodge. Relations between the Blue Lodges and these rites are friendly, but a high-ranking Scottish-rite Mason or a Knight Templar exercises no precedence in local Blue Lodges, nor may he wear his jewels of office or insignia of the rites in the lodge.
In theory and fact, the individual state Grand Lodges are far more powerful than the Scottish rite. A Grand Master 'outranks' any 33rd degree Mason." (Christianity and American Freemasonry, page 78)

Anti-Mason John Salza, "While no degree is considered higher than that of Master Mason, a Master Mason in good standing is eligible to receive additional Masonic degrees and orders from two appendant bodies: the Scottish Rite and the York Rite. Appendant bodies are supplemental, or auxiliary, organizations a man may join after becoming a Master Mason. Because Blue Lodge Freemasonry is considered the foundation of Masonic philosophy, every appendant Masonic body bases its teachings and rituals on the first three symbolic degrees." (Masonry Unmasked, page 25)

Anti-Mason John Salza, "The Scottish and York Rites, like all Masonic organizations, share the belief that there is no higher degree than that of a Master Mason." (Masonry Unmasked, page 26)

Ray Denslow, ". . . there are many uninformed individuals who have the mistaken notion that a Freemason is to be judged by the number of degrees which he has received. This is far from the truth, for there are literally hundreds of so-called Masonic degrees, and no living man has yet acquired them all.
Freemasonry is a course of instruction. One may go through college and acquire only the rudiments of education; likewise, one may acquire a hundred or more Masonic degrees, a dozen patents, and a score of titles, and yet be no more a Freemason than one who bears the simple, yet dignified, title of Master Mason.
Do not be misled by measuring Freemasonry according to the number of degrees." (A Handbook for Royal Arch Masons, page 67)

Bernard Jones, "The additional degrees are often called the 'higher degrees,' but the term seems hardly fair to 'pure, ancient masonry.' The 'highest' degrees must always remain those which authentic masonic history proves to be the oldest. They are the three Craft degrees. Other degrees may be designated by higher numbers but in no sense other than, in some cases, that of a more highly developed symbolism, can they be said to be higher - a statement which does not in any way detract from their value or beauty. The Grand Lodges of England and all English - speaking countries acknowledge the Craft degrees and, to a varying extent, Royal Arch masonry and Mark masonry. All other degrees are 'aditional' or 'side' degrees . . ." (Freemason's Guide and Compendium, page 549)

Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry Southern Jurisdiction USA Orient of California, "The Scottish Rite shares the belief of all Masonic organizations that there is no higher degree than that of Master Mason. The degrees are in addition to, and in no way 'higher' than, those of Blue Lodge, or Craft Lodge, Masonry. Scottish Rite degrees simply amplify and elaborate on the lessons of the craft . . ."

The Supreme Council, 33°, for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction, United States, "Scottish Rite shares the same belief of all Masonic organizations that there is no higher degree than that of Master Mason. The Supreme Council and its subordinate bodies acknowledge the Masonic supremacy of the Symbolic Grand Lodges and Grand Masters within their jurisdictions. Scottish Rite degrees are in no way higher than the degrees of the Symbolic lodges."

The Grand Lodge F & A M of California, "Every Grand Lodge presides over one (and only one) Masonic jurisdiction. It is the supreme Masonic authority within that jurisdiction. Its authority extends not just to the Lodges under its control, but also to each of the Appendant and Concordant Bodies within its confines."

The most common mistake about the organization of Masonry comes from assuming that Supreme Councils of the Scottish Rite control Masonry. This is not true. The Supreme Council is the governing body of the Scottish Rite in a particular jurisdiction. It holds authority only over Scottish Rite organizations. Supreme Councils have no authority over Grand Lodges. The Grand Lodge is the central Masonic authority and its decisions become Masonic law. Supreme Councils of the 33 degree must obey Grand Lodge law, as do all other appendent Masonic orgainzations. A person may be a Scottish Rite or York Rite Mason, but if he is suspended or expelled from the local Lodge, he is no longer a Mason.

There is no Masonic degree "higher" than the Third Degree or Master Mason Degree in symbolic Masonry. While the number 33 may be greater than the number 3, a 33 degree Mason has no more authority or power in a lodge than a 3 degree Mason. Both are equally subordinate to the Master of their lodge, and all in turn are subordinate to the Grand Master of their Grand Lodge.

The Scottish Rite degrees are numerically greater than the first, second and third, but not "higher". To quote Albert Pike: "It may be too late to change a common terminology. But, however we may refer to these ancillary or appendant degrees, let us not make the mistake of pretending that a 33 degree Mason is 'Higher' than a Master Mason, much less the Master of a Lodge. Let us by our conduct and our speech always acknowledge the Grand Master of Masons in his own Jurisdiction to be the highest officer the world has ever known or ever can know."

The Grand Lodge of Virginia Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons, "There is no higher degree than the Master Mason's Degree or Third Degree in Freemasonry.  The Master Mason's Degree is the foundation of all appendant bodies associated with Freemasonry."


The Grand Lodges Are The Real Masonic Authorities
Anti-Masons John Ankerberg and John Weldon, ". . . . the Grand Lodge of each state has the power to regulate the ritual practiced in that Lodge. As Coil writes, it is 'well understood that Grand Lodges are the highest Masonic authorities in both law and doctrine'." (The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, page 15)

Anti-Masons John Ankerberg and John Weldon, "Remember, for each state, no higher jurisdictional authority than its Grand Lodge exists." (The Secret Teachings of the Masoni Lodge, page 16)

John J. Robinson wrote, "In the Masonic tradition, the Grand Lodge is supreme. There is no control above it, and no Grand Lodge can tell any other Grand Lodge what to do." (A Pilgrim's Path, page 15)

Albert Mackey, "Grand Lodges, Jurisdiction of. A Grand Lodge is invested with power and authority over all the craft within its jurisdiction. It is the Supreme Court of Appeal in all masonic cases . . ." (Lexicon of Freemasonry, page 177)

Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. of North Carolina, "There is no central or supreme Masonic authority in the United States, each grand lodge exercises complete control of its own destiny and total Masonic authority within its jurisdiction, recognizing and respecting the right of each other grand lodge to do likewise. Top officers of the fifty-one grand lodges meet together periodically, nationally and regionally, to maintain fraternal harmony and to share information and ideas.
The grand lodges maintain ongoing fraternal relations and correspondence with each other and with most grand lodges in other countries. If a grand lodge should adopt policies or engage in activities contrary to those held to be properly Masonic by another grand lodge, it is probable the fraternal relations between the two will be severed. Several grand lodges in Europe, for example, have over a period of time dropped the requirement that each member believe in a Supreme Being, or the requirement that the Holy Bible be always present and open upon the altar while a lodge is meeting, and this has resulted in the grand lodges here and most of those abroad withdrawing fraternal recognition of the offenders. When fraternal recognition is withdrawn it means the withdrawing grand lodge no longer recognizes the other grand lodge or its members as being Masonic."

United Grand Lodge of England, Constitutions, Rule 4, "The Grand Lodge possesses the supreme superintending authority, and alone has the inherent power of enacting laws and regulations for the government of the Craft, and of altering, repealing, and abrogating them, provided always that the antient Landmarks of the Order be preserved."

United Grand Lodge of England, Basic Principles for Grand Lodge Recognition, "That the Grand Lodge shall have sovereign jurisdiction over all the Lodges under its control; i.e. that it shall be a responsible, independent, self governing organization, with sole and undisputed authority over the Craft or Symbolic Degrees . . . within its Jurisdiction; and that it shall not in any way be subject to, or divide such authority with a Supreme Council or other Power claiming and control or supervision over those degrees."


No One Author Speaks For Freemasonry
Anti-Mason Robert Morey wrote, "Another error typically made by anti-Masons is the assumption that Freemasonry is based on the writings of a single individual. They usually pick Albert Pike as the official 'spokesman' of Freemasonry." (The Truth About Masons, page 22)

Anti-Masons John Ankerberg and John Weldon surveyed the Grand Lodges about which Masonic writers were authoritative. They wrote, "What we present in this book, therefore, is an analysis of Masonry itself, as stated by Masonic authorities recommended by at least half of the Grand Lodges of the United States." (The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, page 14) The question that needs to be asked is: Which "Masonic authorities" were recommended by at least half of the Grand Lodges of the United States? The answer is none. Not one Masonic author was recommended by at least half of the Grand Lodges of the United States as being authoritative. (The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, page 16)

Anti-Masons John Ankerberg and John Weldon, "Which authors and books do Masons themselves recommend to outsiders as authoritative? In order to answer this question, a letter was sent to each of the fifty Grand Lodges in America. We addressed this letter to the Grand Master of each Lodge and asked him to respond to the following question: 'As an official Masonic leader, which books and authors do you recommend as being authoritative on the subject of Freemasonry?'
Twenty-five of the Grand Lodges in the United States responded. A response of fifty percent is sufficiently high to suggest that the response of other states would not have varied significantly. In other words, we may assume that these responses are normative for U. S. Masonry as a whole. Remember, for each state, no higher jurisdictional authority than its Grand Lodge exists.
44 percent recommended Henry Wilson Coil
36 percent Joseph Fort Newton
32 percent Albert G. Mackey
24 percent Carl H. Claudy
24 percent H. L. Haywood
20 percent Alphonse Cerza
20 percent Robert F. Gould
20 percent Allen E. Roberts
16 percent Albert Pike
Other authors recommended included W. R. Denslow, R. V. Denslow, Charles C. Hunt, Bernard Jones, Roscoe Pound, James Anderson, Henry C. Clausen, D. Darrah, Manly Hall, W. Hutchinson, M. M. Johnson, Karl C. F. Krause, W. Preston, G. Steinmetz, J. H. Van Gorden, T. S. Webb, and Louis Williams.
What individual books were recommended by the Grand Lodges as being authoritative interpreters of Freemasonry?
44 percent Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, by Henry Wilson Coil
36 percent The Builders, by Joseph Fort Newton
32 percent Mackey's Revised Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, by Albert G. Mackey
24 percent Introduction to Freemasonry, by Carl H. Claudy
24 percent The Newly-Made Mason, by H. L. Haywood
20 percent A Masonic Reader's Guide, by Alphonse Cerza
20 percent History of Freemasonry, by Robert F. Gould
20 percent The Craft and Its Symbols, by Allen E. Roberts
16 percent Morals and Dogma, by Albert Pike
(The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, pages 16-17)

Christopher Haffner, ". . . almost all the tens of thousands of books published about masonry in this country and overseas merely represent the personal views of individual Freemasons" (Workman Unashamed, page 27)

Roscoe Pound makes the following observation, "The philosophy of no one time, of no one people, and much more, of no one man, can be admitted as its final authority." (Masonic Adresses and Writings, page 84)

H. L. Haywood wrote, "Of Masonic teachers and scholars there have been many -- Oliver, Preston, Pike, Mackey, and others equally as honourable to our history -- and these have given us noble interpretations of Masonry, but no Mason is ever compelled to accept them unless he chooses to." (The Great Teachings of Masonry, page 26)

Henry Coil, "Much so-called Masonic writing has been worthless or misleading. No work published prior to 1860 upon the historical phase is of any value whatever, and many of earlier or later dates upon symbolism and philosophy are quite undependable." (A Comprehensive View of Freemasonry, page 8)

Writers my express their opinions about Masonry, but their statements are not authoritative. Unless formally endorsed by action of a Grand Lodge, no writer can speak for Masonry, only for himself. The only written authorities are monitors and other books approved and published by the various Grand Lodges or other official bodies. Other books may be accepted by some or many Masons, but they are the opinions of the authors, not authoitative works that all Masons must accept.

When anti-Masons make reference to their so-called Masonic authorities, three questions need to be asked. They are:
1. What do anti-Masons do when their so-called Masonic authorities disagree with each other?
2. What do anti-Masons do when their so-called Masonic authorities disagree with the beliefs of the anti-Masons about Freemasonry?
3. What do anti-Masons do when their so-called Masonic authorities disagree with the real Masonic authorities, the Grand Lodges?


Albert Pike
Albert Pike is claimed by anti-Masons as being a Masonic authority, but they do not use the hundreds of quotes that contradict with their opinions about Freemasonry.

Anti-Masons John Ankerberg and John Weldon called Albert Pike the "leading Masonic scholar." (The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, page 43) Yet, according to their book, only 4 Grand Lodges recommended Pike as an authority. (page 16) There are eight other Masonic authors who are ahead of him on their list of Masonic authorities. (page 16) This is hardly the "leading Masonic scholar."

Anti-Masons Jim Shaw and Tom McKenney, "Albert Pike (1809-1891) is easily the preeminent figure in American Freemasonry. His many titles include Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council of the Thirty-Third Degree (Mother Council of the World) and Supreme Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry. . . . His position in Masonry was, and is today, unparalleled, not only in the United States, but throughout the world." (The Deadly Deception, page 63)

1. Albert Pike was the leader of only one branch of Freemasonry, the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction.
2. No one in regular Freemasonry ever held the title of "Supreme Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry." There is no such position in regular Freemasonry.
3. There is no such organization as "Universal Freemasonry."


Anti-Masons Jim Shaw and Tom McKenney, ". . . Albert Pike the highest Masonic authority . . ." (The Deadly Deception, page 76)

1. Albert Pike was not and is not recognized by regular Freemasonry as the highest Masonic authority.
2. The highest Masonic authority are the Grand Lodges.

C. Fred Kleinknecht, "Pike never meant his words to be accepted as indisputable canon. His purpose was to stir thought so each reader, individually and according to his own insight, would be motivated to achieve a personal understanding." (Forward, Pillars of Wisdom: The Writings of Albert Pike, by Rex Hutchens, page XV)

Albert Pike, "The teachings of these Readings are not sacramental, so far as they go beyond the realm of Morality into those of other domains of Thought and Truth. Every one is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound. Of course the ancient theosophic and philosophic speculations are not embodied as part of the doctrines of the Rite." (Morals and Dogma, page iv)

H. L. Haywood, ". . . contrary to the impression Masons have had, Pike's time, thought, and writing were not absorbed by the Fraternity." (Supplement to Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, page 1334)

Warren Licty, "What Pike did or said does not define the Masonic Fraternity. Pike is Pike, only. While it is true he shaped and directed the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction, USA, for 32 years (1859-1891) as its head, he did not then nor does he now define the Scottish Rite, especially outside the Southern Jurisdiction, USA." (Foreward, Albert Pike, The Man Beyond The Monument, by Jim Tresner)

Gary Leazer writes, "There are approximately 4,700,000 Masons worldwide with approximately 2,371,000 in the United States. Of these nearly five million Masons, only 495,000 Scottish Rite Masons in the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States recognize Albert Pike as a former Sovereign Grand Commander. Over four million Masons worldwide and nearly two million Masons in the United States do not recognize Pike as an authority, except as a former Sovereign Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdicition of the Scottish Rite, of which they are not members. To imply that most or all Masons aggressively embrace Albert Pike is an exaggeration and reflect poor research." (Fundamentalism & Freemasonry, pages 119-120)

John J. Robinson made the following observation, "He was a towering figure in the history of American Masonry. What he was not was a Grand Master of any Grand Lodge, who alone is the final authority in basic Masonic practices and jurisprudence. He was never a spokesman for all of Freemasonry and never tried to assert himself as such. He was a strong man who never shrank from expressing his personal opinions, and it is important to remember that his pronouncements as they relate to Masonry are just that: his own opinions." (A Pilgrim's Path, page 45)

Roscoe Pound wrote, "In the first place Pike was the apostle of liberty of interpretation. He insisted in season and out of season that no infallible authority speaking ex cathedra could bind the individual Mason to this or that interpretation of the traditional symbols of the Craft. He taught that the individual Mason instead of receiving a predigested Masonry ladled out to him by another should make his own Masonry for himself by study and reflection upon the work and the symbols." (Masonic Addresses and Writings, pages 76-77)

A. E. Waite, "Pike was like Ragon unfortunately, a man of uncritical mind, and I summarize his findings under all needful reserve." ("Emblematic Freemasonry, Building Guilds and Hermetic Schools", The Builder, vol. VII, no. 6, June 1921)

Albert Pike wrote, "What is truth to me is not truth to another . . . No man is entitled positively to assert that he is right, where other men, equally intelligent and equally well-informed, hold directly the opposite opinion." (Morals and Dogma, page 165)


"Morals and Dogma"
Anti-Mason Charles Madden, "In one of their official fundamental source book, Morals and Dogma . . ." (Freemasonry: Mankind's Hidden Enemy, page 6)

"Morals and Dogma" is not an "official fundamental source book" for Freemasons.

Gary Leazer writes, "'Morals and Dogma' is not a 'doctrinal book.' If it were, why would the Preface state, 'Every one is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound'? That does not sound like a statement which would be found in a doctrinal book." (Fundamentalism & Freemasonry, page 120)

"Morals and Dogma" has no role in the Blue Lodge.

"Morals and Dogma" was rejected by the Northern Jurisdiction.

"Morals and Dogma" is not a manifesto, a declaration of principles, policies or intentions for Masonry or the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction. Freemasons have never been taught that Pike or his work, Morals and Dogma, must be accepted by any Mason.

"Morals and Dogma's" preface makes it clear that no one is required to believe or accept any of its content as truth. In the preface to "Morals and Dogma", Pike wrote, "Every one is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound."

"Morals and Dogma" is a philosophical work, discussing world religions.

"Morals and Dogma" was Albert Pike's attempts to provide a framework for understanding religions and philosophies of the past.

Jim Tresner, "But it's very important to understand what Pike was trying to do with Morals and Dogma. It is not some kind of 'Bible' of Masonry. That thought would have horrified Pike. It was, instead, virtually the first attempt ever made to write a survey text on philosophy and religion. . . . His purpose was simple, and it was the natural impulse of a good teacher -- to expose his 'students' to as wide a range of thought and information as possible." (Albert Pike, The Man Beyond The Monument)

Pike's influence on contemporary Freemasonry is the topic of some debate both within and outside of Masonry. "Morals and Dogma" has often been quoted, misquoted and taken out of context by anti-Masons and misled non-Masons. In Morals and Dogma, Pike was attempting the impossible task of surveying and condensing the whole history of human thought in philosophy into one volume. Pike made extensive references to the symbolism, practices and beliefs of religious schools through history and around the world. He writes about things which were believed in ancient Egypt, China, Persia, etc. It is easy for a careless reader to take a paragraph out of context and then insist that Masons teach and believe that all good comes from some ancient deity or come up with a mistaken idea of what constitutes Freemasonry. In addition, Pike was not always consistent in his use of some terms and he was a product of his time and place in history. A history lesson is not a statement of theology.

Art deHoyos wrote, "Morals and Dogma was simply Pike's commentary on his revised Scottish Rite degrees." (A Cloud of Prejudice, page 10)

Gary Leazer wrote, "Pike did not see himself as the final answer on the subjects he discusses in Morals and Dogma. Rex R. Hutchens writes that Morals and Dogma is 'a rather diverse collection of other people's writings and its compiler's (Pike's) thoughts about the great questions of life. The text is not well organized and was never carefully edited'. (Pillars of Wisdom, page 3)" (The Plumbline, Scottish Rite Research Society, Summer 2001)

Anti-Mason Charles Madden, "Copies usually are given only to those who have been accepted into the thirty-second Degree. . . . Copies of this secret work do occasionally fall into the hands of Church authorities and other non-Masons due to defections from the Masons and to inevitable human lapses." (Freemasonry: Mankind's Hidden Enemy, 2005, page 70)

Is "Morals and Dogma" a "secret work" as Mr. Madden claims? A copy of "Morals and Dogma" can be obtained from Amazon.com or Barnes & Noble by anyone who wants a copy. So much for being a secret work.

Art deHoyos and S. Brent Morris wrote the following about "Morals and Dogma", "Morals and Dogma has no role in Grand Lodges, it is not used in the N.M.J. (Northern Masonic Jurisdiction), it has not been distributed in the S. J. since ca. 1971, and it has never been held 'sacred' by any Masonic group." (Is It True What They Say About Freemasonry?)

Gary Leazer writes, "It is odd that 'Morals and Dogma' would be taken out of print if it is the 'Bible' of Freemasonry, as Larry Kunk claims it is often called. It is odd that 'Morals and Dogma' would be taken out of print if it is 'the handbook for Masons, as Cathy Burns claims." (Fundamentalism & Freemasonry, page 121)

Roscoe Pound observed, "He read and digested everything. He assimilated it. He made it part of himself and worked it into his system. But for this very reason texts from Pike and excerpts from 'Morals and Dogma' are more than usually deceptive. We may fasten almost any philosophical idea upon him if we proceed in this way. We may refute almost any page by any other page if we look simply at the surface and do not distinguish matter which he is adapting or is making use of to illustrate the development of thought upon the subject fom dogmatic statements of his philosophy. 'Morals and Dogma' must be read and interpreted as a unity. As Immanuel Kant said of his writings, it is a book to think through, not merely read throuth." (Masonic Addresses and Writings, page 76)

Gary Leazer wrote, "Certainly, Pike does not speak of the uniqueness of Christ or the Christian faith, but 'Morals and Dogma' is not a Christian theology book. 'Morals and Dogma' gives philosophical, moral, and religious ideas that different individuals and faiths have struggled with for the past 2,500 years. . . . One must understand that Pike does not intend to give a recitation on Christian doctrine, but an exposition on religious ideas held by a diverse group of thinkers over a period of 2,500 years." (Fundamentalism & Freemasonry, pages 179-180)

Anti-Masons find it hard to understand that "Morals and Dogma" is not a book of "teachings" nor a statement of what a Mason should believe about religion. "Morals and Dogma" is, essentially a textbook for a course in philosophy and comparative religion. The key is "comparative." Anti-Masons are astonished and horrified to find pre-Christian religions included. They think "Morals and Dogma" should be limited to Christianity. But that, by definition is impossible. Pike believed that you cannot understand an idea unless you understand the history of the idea. In "Morals and Dogma", when he introduces a concept, he also tells you what other philosophies and religious leaders who belonged to the great cultures and religions of the past taught on the same concept. But never does he say that Scottish Rite Masons have to believe what they taught.

C. Fred Kleinknect, the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdiction of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, states the official position of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry concerning Morals and Dogma, "Morals and Dogma represents the opinions of Albert Pike. It does not represent dogmatic teachings for Freemasonry or for the Scottish Rite, Southern Jurisdiction, USA, of Freemasonry. Every interested person is encoraged to even study Pike's work, but should do so only after reading the book's preface which was authorized by The Supreme Council, 33d, and printed in the very first, 1871, edition of the work. This preface has been reprinted in every edition of Morals and Dogma and still applies today." (Rex Hutchens and Donald Monson, The Bible in Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma, 1992, p. iv"

The Preface states, "Everyone is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound." (Morals and Dogma, p. iv) There is o requirement that Masons must read or accept any philosophical speculations contained in Morals and Dogma.


Albert Mackey
John J. Robinson wrote, ". . . Fred L. Pick and G. Norman Knight. In writing about Albert G. Mackey in their reference book for Freemasons, they write, '. . . his writings, taken as 'gospel' in his lifetime, have come to be recognized as unreliable in very many respects'." (A Pilgrim's Path, page 97)

H. L. Haywood wrote, "Dr. Albert C. Mackey . . . The substance of what he had to say about the Ritual and the Symbols was embodied in his book on Symbolism. It is no longer to be taken, as for many years it was taken, as an authoritative work in the sense of being almost officially endorsed by Grand Lodges; nor is it to be taken as the sum of Masonic teachings, as once it was; but it is the best representative of the school of thought about symbols which interprets them in light of the Ancient Mysteries." (The Great Teachings of Masonry, page 164)

H. L. Haywood wrote, ". . . Mackey's Encyclopedia. This work is not official or final and there is some need of caution in using it, seeing that many new facts have been discovered since it was last revised, but it continues to be one of the handiest of our reference works." (The Great Teachings of Masonry, page 173)


A. E. Waite
Bernard Jones wrote, ". . . A. E. Waite, the learned author of 'The Secret Traditions in Freemasonry' and of other well-known masonic works, all written from a highly individualistic point of view." (A Freemasons' Guide and Compendium, page 121)


Manly Hall
Manly Hall did not become a Mason until 1954, so his 1923 book, "Lost Keys of Freemasonry", represents the personal theories of a non-Mason. Further, Mr. Hall was a self-avowed mystic and not a "leading authority" of Freemasonry. He was a promulgator of mystic and theosophical philosophies; his writings have not received official sanction by any Masonic body. The fact that he held the thirty-third degree and was respected by many thirty-third degree Masons and even by the Supreme Councils is no more significant than the fact that various Baptist, Anglican, or Methodist authors also hold or held that honor.


Carl Claudy
Carl Claudy admits that his writings were personal opinions. He wrote, ". . . the reader's interpretations are as good in theory, and may be far better in practice, than those given here, which are the writer's." (Foreign Countries, page 77)


J. D. Buck
Anti-Mason Charles Madden, "J. D. Buck (32nd Degree Mason), a still well-respected Masonic author of the 1920's . . ." (Freemasonry: Mankind's Hidden Enemy, page 25)

J. D. Buck - In 1896, Jirah D. Buck wrote a book titled "Symbolism of Mystic Masonry". You'll sometimes see it quoted by anti-Masons. Here's what the review in "A Masonic Readers Guide" (1956) had to say about it: "An illustration of the use of a vivid imagination and making the Craft an occult organization. To be read with caution."  Over 50 years ago - and long before the current crop of those who spread their claims that Masons were devil-worshipping pagans of some sort, Masons were being advised that Buck's writings were far from reality. Using quotes from his works may prove a point for the religious intolerant; the legitimacy of their arguments, however, is seriously undermined when it is noted that others disagree with his claims totally. I have failed to find any other review of the works by Masonic authors (and there are dozens) which make even the slightest note of Buck's work.


November 30, 2007