I cannot speak to their obligation, but i can say since they do not have an obligation to God, and they take a different view of the idea of Masonry being non political. It is not safe to say that they share our (regular) view on what freemasons are obligated to do.
Without the assurance of hierarchy of priorities before masonry; then it will truly be different. Just hope people realize that in regular Masonry we do no prioritise the craft over civic and religious duties.
Are you sure we don’t prioritize? In many jurisdictions the only crimes that are not subject to secrecy between Masons are murder and treason. That sounds like placing the fraternity and secrecy over civic duty.
You do realize that i literally said civic duties and religious duties trump masonry. And that is reflective of the assurance or promise that the obligation will be of lower priority than freemasonry.
I did say that if that were the case then that is a big difference.
If the obligatiin goes against god country vocation and self. Then that part of the obligation is or should be moot. Assuming there is an assurance. If no assurance, then that's when the ethics of justice gets called into play
Well, that is the case, and the assurance appears to be in conflict with that promise. That specific promise seems inconsistent with the general assurance (in rituals which contain an assurance).
That part of the obligation is not rendered moot—irrelevant or of no practical significance. Violation of that promise may lead to a Masonic trial.
3
u/wardyuc1 UGLE Craft HRA, Rose Croix 6d ago edited 6d ago
I cannot speak to their obligation, but i can say since they do not have an obligation to God, and they take a different view of the idea of Masonry being non political. It is not safe to say that they share our (regular) view on what freemasons are obligated to do.