|
Evangelical Truth reply to Mr Dawson's letters(Issue 31)Having analysed the substance of Mr Dawson's two letters, in Ulster Christian 30 and Ulster Christian 28, objecting to the Ulster Christian review of, and the facts contained within, 'behind closed doors', we, like probably the majority of the Ulster Christian readers, are still confused as to what his arguments in favour of the Royal Arch Purple initiation are. He fails, once again, to advance any biblical argument for such heathenism or furnish the readers with any valid criticism of the book. It is also notable that he fails to answer any of the readers concerns in Ulster Christian 30 choosing rather to fudge the subject with evasive replies and inaccurate generalities. This is most marked in his refusal to condemn Freemasonry in a question from Ulster Christian reader A Evans. We are not surprised at his unwillingness to condemn Freemasonry, as to do so would force him to compromise his own position within the neo-Masonic Royal Arch Purple, which shares the same or similar mystical practices and absurd teaching. Whilst he is careful to conceal his pro-Masonic views in public, he privately attacks the strong biblical stance of the book's author Paul Malcomson against Freemasonry, in a secret internal Independent Orange memo to his members, by saying, "Mr Malcomson would have us reject William of Orange who was a member of the Masonic Order. He would also have us reject all the Hymns of Charles Wesley. Charles Wesley was after all a prominent Mason." His logic is contorted in the extreme in that his reasoning in no-way proves Masonry's virtue. Besides, the material he outlines is wildly inaccurate. Firstly, King William of Orange died on 8th March 1702 - fifteen years before speculative Masonry was formed in 1717. Secondly, there is absolutely no historic evidence that Charles Wesley the hymn writer was, before or after his conversion, a speculative Freemason. Such is a scurrilous attack upon the character and memory of both these men. Mr Dawson has clearly a vivid yet erroneous imagination. Mr Dawson understandably refuses to answer three pertinent questions by the Ulster Christian contributor Mr Paul Johnston. 1) "Is the RAP initiate assured he can make an obligation to theorganisation which will not hinder him in his duty to God, country or one's self? Is this not contradicted by him being sealing to keep the secrets of his fellow RAP men in everything except murder and treason?" 2) "Is it true the RAP initiate is told he has received the "light" which is later referred to as the "marvellous light" knowing that both terms refer to the Lord Jesus Christ, and rather than receiving it through the ministry of the Holy Ghost, one receives it through the ministry of the Worshipful Master?" 3) "Is the RAP initiate told he will get to the "Grand Lodge above" by careful regulation of his life, without any mention of the blood of Christ or His atoning work, repentance or forgiveness of sin?" Being uncomfortable with such direct questioning, he sheepishly sidesteps the queries by stating "Question one and three are as a result of a lack of understanding, or a lack of knowledge, of context." And deceptively says of 'Question 2' that it "is as inaccurate in content as it is nonsensical." Mr Dawson nonchalantly concludes that Rev. Hugh Hanna and Rev. T.C. Hammond where "recipients of the Royal Arch Purple Degree." Where does he get his evidence? Like most historic claims he makes, his statements are ill-researched and factually flawed. Interestingly, both these preachers lived in a day when Orangeism strongly opposed the iniquitous practices and the erroneous teaching of the Royal Arch Purple degree. Mr Dawson provides no evidence that either man was a member of this neo-Masonic Royal Arch Purple Order! Defending the justness of any belief or practice by listing the names of men who are, or where allegedly, part of the Order, whether famous or little known, reveals the impotent and redundant nature of his position. This reasoning is contrary to the consistent evangelical Protestant view which holds, in the words of Paul the Apostle, "what saith the scriptures" (Romans 4:3). On this overriding test alone, the RAP stands naked, exposed and condemned." Mr Dawson's first letter Mr Dawson's second letter |
