# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1904_S24
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

24 Proceedings of the twentieth convention

Among the things that must be sworn we find above all obedience to all ordinances of the lodge and secrecy about the work of the lodge toward those who do not belong to the lodge. Now one must bear in mind that the man taking the oath does not yet know the secrets of the lodge, nor does he know the work of the lodge, which he is not only to get to know but in which he is also to work. In complete ignorance, then, of what he swears, even if in some lodges under the assurance that there is nothing in it that could bring him into conflict with his duties toward family, state and church, he takes the oath. The judgment on this can only be that it is a frivolous swearing, quite incompatible with the sanctity and majesty of the oath. — Then, as a main point in what is to be sworn, it is to be named that the one swearing promises to do no harm to any lodge brother nor to look on while harm is done to such a one. Something of the kind, and much more, goes without saying for a Christian, to whom the commandment applies: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself!" It is something he would not first have to swear, either for God's honor or for the neighbor's good. The oath is therefore quite unnecessary.

For the sake of the oath, then, the lodge is objectionable. But there are a number of lodges that demand no oath. The Freemason says: "I promise and swear, so help me God!" In other lodges the one to be admitted says: "I promise in the presence of Almighty God!" The Odd Fellow even avoids in his ritual not only the word "swear" but also, in his promise, the invocation of the divine name. He says: "I promise solemnly here before the assembled brothers!" and closes with a pledge of his manly honor. Even if for us the substance of an oath is present and what Sirach says holds: "If he swear and understand not, he sinneth nevertheless," Sir. 23:13, yet one is at the end of one's operations when an Odd Fellow or such a lodge brother who really need not take any oath makes us such a declaration.

And further: Does the oath belong to the essence of the lodge? Does an oath change anything in the essence of a thing? The oath makes firm. "An oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife [*Hader*]," as long as it remains firm among them, it says in Heb. 6:16. Luther translates *Hader*. With this translation he generalizes — certainly not incorrectly — what is said in the Greek text. There stands ἀντιλογία, thus literally: contradiction, opposition. Through the oath as it is customary in the lodge, the one swearing therefore deprives himself of the right to contradict in any way what the lodge wants. He thereby gives it his assent to everything that it is. He binds himself with its interests, views, ideas, etc., and makes these his own. This lies in the oath. Though the personal views of the one swearing may contradict those of the lodge, he is bound by his oath; he stands at the πέρας πάσης ἀντιλογίας [end of all contradiction], at the end of every contradiction.