I was told many times that while it's mostly Christians in it, as long as you have a belief in a higher power it is fine.So by that definition anyone not atheist could be accepted.
The fact that you highlighted "God" rather than "a god" though makes me think that freemasonry accepts only monotheistic faiths as those can always "compare their one god to the Christian God".
I was led to believe that freemasonry's goal was the betterment of people, but here you claim it is all about "being a man".
Which is the truth?
Considering the mixed and women-only lodges in existence, I disagree with this.
Sure, if all masonry is about is about "being a man" then clearly there is nothing women could gain from it as there is difference between "being a human" and "being a male".
But as this oddly specific male association isn"t as seen around as the association of "being human", I have to question your words.
Already knew this part.
I know that there are demands required of candidates and if they can't even meet them then the person isn't "mason material".
I never said nor implied that freemasonry was to "fix bad people", but that it helped develop people into a better version of themselves.You can be a good person and still seek to be better, that doesn't imply you're bad.
Freemasonry emerged from a Christian culture and so if you arent comfortable with Biblical stories of morality, it isnt for you. That said you are correct in that you have to have a belief in a higher power; however and this is something that gets poorly explained these days, it must be a supreme being. Supreme means 'utmost', 'highest' etc. which is why I used a God with a capital G. Yes, according to our landmarks you must be either monotheistic, monistic, pan[en]theistic or deistic. You can believe in multiple gods but they must be under some transcendent divinity. Some jurisdictions have gotten lax on this, too lax, failing to distinguish between higher power and supreme being as we take it on the honor system and do not pry. All Supreme beings are higher powers but not all higher powers are supreme beings. The Indiana monitor's description of that landmark uses the term monotheism however Hinduism has been interpreted to meet the requirements as despite the plethora of deities they are all expressions, though individual in their own right, of the Trimurti. In the traditional religious and spiritual practices of my tribe we recognize one great spirit behind creation and every instance of life, hence I also qualify. My tribe's system is also heavily mixed with Christianity at this point. At the same time it has more to do with your personal theological beliefs about deity than how that deity is historically viewed. For example, in Norse lore Odin is not depicted as a supreme transcendent being as that concept was foreign but many many heathens today may see him as such, putting their faith in the context of modern philosophical and theological concepts. The more we learn about the world around us, the greater God has to become to still be God.
I will give you a few more examples.
I. Buddhism.
Buddha did not teach for or against an Atman, and therefore did not teach for or against the existence of a God. So in and of itself Buddhism would not provide the requirement of a God, even though we do not discriminate against any religion, and- as Buddhism does not exist in a vacuum in the East, many Buddhists there would qualify while in the West fewer Buddhists would.
II. Wicca
If you believe in a co-equal God and Goddess neither is greater than the other and so you do not have a supreme being and thus would not qualify. If however you recognize the Dryghten, you would qualify.
III. Pantheism
If you state nature is God, that is fine so long as you see that nature as self-aware enough to hold you to an obligation. This goes for such vague statements as "God is energy" as well.
We only care that:
I. you have a belief in a Supreme Being
II. You recognize some aspect of the spirit and/or soul that is eternal.
Both statements are truth. Freemasonry is for men and it is to help good men become better by giving them the lessons, working tools and opportunities to do so. We are a Fraternity, a group of men, who uphold ourselves to a certain level of excellence and personal growth. It is pretty straight forward. We are based out of the old stone guilds of Europe and centered around the work/labour a man did in said trade guilds and how those lessons can be applied to ones life. We give men a rite of passage whereby they may, as a brother, come under the tutelage of other men who take them under their wing, mentoring them and holding them to a higher standard.
There are no legitimate women Freemasons. It is against our landmarks and obligation to make a woman a mason. There will never be nor can there ever be a woman mason, and any lodge found doing so will, rightfully, lose their charter. Point blank, it is simply not possible nor does any man in Masonry have the authority to change this. Co-Masonry is illegitimate as HFAF and OWF. They do not have a proper lineage or charter and thus are considered Clandestine. All HFAF has from the UGLE is a letter that says if they could be recognized, they would be seen as doing good regular work. That is a compliment but they can never be recognized because the landmark does not allow them to be granted a charter.
Frankly, I depise these groups as they have stolen and appropriated ritual that is not theirs, making it out to be something that it is not. Blatvasky, and other movers and shakers of "Co-Masonry", a misnomer, were even involved in other clandestine organizations that have bastardized our degrees.
Question my words all you like, but understand that being on the outside looking in, you have not the ability to try one as a mason nor are you so acquainted with our conceptions of regularity, clandestine and amity. See, what people dont understand is that such lodges and groups that you refer to, are completely separate organizations, and not considered part of the masonic family. We dont allow them in our lodge nor can we communicate with them masonically. If this sounds like sectarian politics within an identity demographic, keep in mind that there was no schism. They started imitating us, having no right to do so nor any connection. Which is not to say that there havent been those who had lineage but had their charter revoked as did bid them able to work under the usual masonic restrictions of said landmarks which they ignored, thereby rendering their charter null and void. Aside from that, some charters are sovereign, but without the landmarks it isnt masonry. Granted, Grand jurisdictions do have the right to interpret the minutia of the landmarks.
From the Indiana Monitor:
"A Mason must be a freeborn male adult primarily because he must be a master of his time, his resources and himself. In operative masonry women and young men could not work at a mason's trade; so traditionally membership in the Craft has been confined to male adults, and from long usage this practice has become imbedded in the Fraternity as a Landmark" - Landmark 7
and
"Monotheism is the sole dogma of Freemasonry. Belief in one God is required of every initiate, but his conception of the Supreme Being is left to his own interpretation. Freemasonry is not concerned with theological distinctions. This is the basis of our universality" - Landmark 1.
Which is not to say that we teach universalism, in the sense that all religions are equally valid. We do not say that all religions are equally valid nor that any one religion is more valid than another. We simply do not take a position on this as we are not a religion and believe as such it is not our place to rule on such a thing, but the place of one's Church, Synagogue, Mosque, or whatever authority they go to in their religion for religious instruction.
Certainly, we do not teach that a man has to be a mason to be a good man. I meant, merely, that we are not obligated to put ourselves, family or community at risk by admitting a bad man for sake of his growth; we are not a reform.
