Post by Tamrin on Sept 24, 2009 20:39:56 GMT 10
We are never going to satisfy our critics. Misguided attempts to accommodate their objections as to who we are and what we do will simply erode our identity. If we choose to change, fine; if we can identify changes needed to be consistent with our own rhetoric, good; but to change just to silence anti-masons is futile, they will simply find another stick with which to beat us. The removal of the Ancient Penalties from the Obligation saw no abatement among our detractors; nor did changes to our Mode of Preparation; or the addition of, "By the Grace of God" to the conclusion of the explanation of the Working Tools in the 2°.
This last example of accommodationism particularly peeves me, as it seeks to address the accusation of us teaching salvation by works. Apart from the obvious point that we don't teach salvation, as such, of any kind (although individual Masons may choose their own interpretation), so what if we did?! This fine theological objection overlooks James 2:24, which states: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." If we were seen to be teaching salvation by faith alone, the same critics would hold this verse up as proof of our error — By trying to please everyone we risk becoming vacuous.
This last example of accommodationism particularly peeves me, as it seeks to address the accusation of us teaching salvation by works. Apart from the obvious point that we don't teach salvation, as such, of any kind (although individual Masons may choose their own interpretation), so what if we did?! This fine theological objection overlooks James 2:24, which states: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." If we were seen to be teaching salvation by faith alone, the same critics would hold this verse up as proof of our error — By trying to please everyone we risk becoming vacuous.
