Description
As early as 1738, objection was taken to an oath of secrecy taken on the Holy Bible and a few years later in 1757, the Synod of Seceders of Scotland condemned the Masonic Order on five grounds, namely; that it is on oath of secrecy; secondly that such an oath is considered by Freemasons as paramount to the laws of the land; thirdly, that such oaths are administered before the secrets of Freemasonry are communicated; fourthly that they are accompanied by certain objectionable ceremonies, and lastly that to each is attached a penalty which is ridiculous and absurd. Is there anything in these criticisms?