Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of FreemasonryPike, Albert
Religion
Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry
Pike, Albert
Freemasons
Exalt and magnify Faith as we will, and say that it begins where Reason
ends, it must, after all, have a foundation, either in Reason, Analogy,
the Consciousness, or human testimony. The worshipper of Brahma also has
implicit Faith in what seems to us palpably false and absurd. His faith
rests neither in Reason, Analogy, or the Consciousness, but on the
testimony of his Spiritual teachers, and of the Holy Books. The Moslem
also believes, on the positive testimony of the Prophet; and the Mormon
also can say, _"I believe this, because it is impossible."_ No faith,
however absurd or degrading, has ever wanted these foundations,
testimony, and the books. Miracles, proven by unimpeachable testimony
have been used as a foundation for Faith, in every age; and the modern
miracles are better authenticated, a hundred times, than the ancient
ones.
So that, after all, Faith must flow out from some source within us, when
the evidence of that which we are to believe is not presented to our
senses, or it will in no case be the assurance of the truth of what is
believed.
The Consciousness, or inhering and innate conviction, or the instinct
divinely implanted, of the verity of things, is the highest Possible
evidence, if not the _only real_ proof, of the verity of certain things,
but only of truths of a limited class.
What we call the Reason, that is, our imperfect human reason, not only
may, but assuredly will, lead us away from the Truth in regard to things
invisible and especially those of the Infinite, if we determine to
believe nothing but that which _it_ can demonstrate, or _not_ to
believe that which it can by its processes of logic prove to be
contradictory, unreasonable, or absurd. Its tape-line cannot measure the
arcs of Infinity. For example, to the Human reason, an Infinite Justice
and an Infinite Mercy or Love, in the same Being, are inconsistent and
impossible. One, it can demonstrate necessarily excludes the other. So
it can _demonstrate_ that as the Creation had a beginning, it
necessarily follows that an Eternity had elapsed before the Deity began
to create, during which He was inactive.
When we gaze, of a moonless clear night, on the Heavens glittering with
stars, and know that each fixed star of all the myriads is a Sun, and
each probably possessing its retinue of worlds, all peopled with living
beings, we sensibly feel our own unimportance in the scale of Creation,
and at once reflect that much of what has in different ages been
religious faith, could never have been believed, if the nature, size,
and distance of those Suns, and of our own Sun, Moon, and Planets, had
been known to the Ancients as they are to us.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account