W W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc.  Home Page   Contents Page for Volume  What is New




It is always a challenging task to formulate a creed; but when that task is to formulate someone else's creed, the matter is not simple at all. However, when that party has disgorged, delineated or depicted its thought in some 343 pages of deposition, the labour is not at all outlandish in principle. Again, when we have so far considered its deposition somewhat extensively and minutely for something like 76,000 words, to this point, directed to investigation and remedy; and when, indeed, formulation or even proto-creedal consideration has been given, then the matter in hand seems perfectly appropriate (if one may borrow a much-used term in this context!).

First, we shall plan simply to itemise elements, giving a sort of corporate life to the Report Religion, personified in the parallel, as if an artificial person with a constructed religion. On pp. 23ff. and elsewhere in this work, we have discussed 'absolutisms'; and allied, we have seen the 'tribalisms'. Without excessive attempt to theologise at the outset (that is, express in terms that are theological, material which is exhibited to exist in this field of the Report Religion) - as our stated analogical purpose at length requires, we shall now proceed.

Obviously other parts of this work, sufficiently well-known to the attentive reader, are also involved in the above - thus, for example,  the correlation with the Report's treatment of the right of withdrawal is explicit.

Now we turn to an allied phenomenon of this phenomenological religious approach, in the Report. One  refers to that of myths and symbols.  It is so intimate as to demand immediate insertion at this point.  Intimacy indeed makes now more reasonable, a stronger analogical aspect, taken as moving  towards other religious forms or formulae, outside the Report Religion. The reader may notice this in what ensues.

THAT would violate the first and greatest commandment.

This is: Absolutisms are destructive.

The lord thy god ( if any ) is a relative god, and no absolute dicta may he (or it)  speak.  Conservative components may prefer the wording: The Lord thy God is a relative god... This sort of variety is not to be depreciated. It lends colour to the homogenisation, which is not to be neutral in tint, or expropriated from its outward forms and modes, unless the first and greatest commandment, requires it.

The discerning reader, again,  will perhaps notice the resemblance to obsolete archaic speech forms gnawingly perceptible in our proto-creedal formulation.  This aids the sense of parallel, and shows the extent of the intrusion, almost to comedy, but in apparent gravity, in this coup d'église, which has been necessary, lest education suffer, teachers are dissatisfied and the State does not continue to express itself as one mouth with one spirit, and one heart.

Our literature, is beginning to look more like some of the religious literatures; but this is intentional.
It helps the analogical process, and enables the imagination the more readily to savour the data in each case, by putting in parallel, the external forms.

In fact, one at all intensively versed, whether from his youth up (a youth perhaps not given the valuable 'secular' Religious  Instruction, which is to be so helpful) or otherwise, with Biblical language, say in the not uncommon Authorised Version, will be likely to observe dozens of sympathetic phraseologies relative to that document; but this is not at all outside our present project.  The Report is in view; and its views on symbolisms and particular propensities in religions, provided they be relative, is very sympathetic.

The Report? It positively likes and favours what it evidently regards as the quaint little particularities, and we have noted this (supra pp. 44-45). Since it ALSO stresses that our cultural background (pp.158, 270) makes some emphasis on the content of the "Judaeo-Christian" religion socially (one should think that would be the word) appropriate (it seems certain that would be the word), it would not seem unfitting to use this format in this preliminary stage at least.  It is conformable to some of the Report's own indications.

Further, it would seem necessary in one instance to consider a component specifically.  In the rest, the extensive preliminary work would render it merely verbose to recapitulate; but in this, there is a step which needs formulation.  One refers to point 15 - and the words - 'For then there should be war in earth amongst men, either physically or spiritually; and possibly in heaven also, if there is one'.  The word to notice is 'either...', - and has been shown to be - ', in the first instance.  The Report is - and has been shown to be - concerned at anything divisive, defiant of unity and so on. It is intriguing, that: DEFIANT is certainly a correct analysis of the tone of the Report to any such, and we have this rarefied thing, which any ant would understand, DEFIANT OF UNITY! Here is unity clamouring for succour, for support, for indulgence, nay, for sovereignty, with a mouth - not noticeably in its own possession.

At the very least, then, since the nature and quality of man's spirit is in part in view, spiritual battles are deprecated in the Report Religion (that is, present company always excepted, battles other than the ones necessary if the Report would ever get to be implemented : there might be battles indeed, but since this is 'appropriate', it is perhaps exempted from the commandment.)  As to physical war, the intense stress on indefeasible social rights, necessary social integration and sovereign powers make it clear that anything which could threaten this phenomenon (assuming it is one) or this possibility (assuming it is not yet a phenomenon) could effect a wrongful battle. That this MIGHT even be physical is not excluded: that society has - shall we say a physical aspect - is clear.

The possible inclusion of any facet of that unified society in its admonitions is therefore not contrary to so inclusive a document, so sovereign in social power and propriety.  It could not be accused of ignoring the fact that people have more then merely ideational or ideological properties.  It is not keen on absolutising symbols.

As for the procedures in heaven: first it must be realised that the strong presence of symbols in the Report Religion must make the existence of heaven at all, in their religion, something objectively uncertain - the beliefs would be deemed supra-rational, it would seem, by the correct, orthodox (?) 'religious believer' (p.232) in the Report System. It might  transcending (possibly transcendent or even transcendental) in their symbolism.  On the other hand, the use of symbols, we learn,  is not at all per se to be discouraged; and as has been noted, we are specifically not to engage in mere religious decodification to the paint there is an undistinctive and weak residue.  It is all very precise, like the goose-stepping technique of that abstruse religionist who wrote Mein Kampf, this system.  Hence, considering both these already excavated and reviewed criteria,  we reach a suggested formulation hopefully with come delicacy.

By now, we are becoming familiar with the religious absolutism of this relativism; and whilst it may be a trifle embarrassing in prospect to seek to create in analogical style a religious literature for creedal purposes, subsequently the task is not without interest.  After all, the specialists are aware of the religious backgrounds one would hope, and possibly the significance has entered in some measure into their - what shall we say, libido? unconscious?; but rather, should we say in our own language, into their minds.
At all events, however that may be, it has entered into the Report, which objectively is our sole recourse in the matter.

It will be observed that we are proceeding to give to some of the concepts of the Report Religion, a yet more familiar religious terminology - the 'Judaeo-Christian' mode.

It is time to be more specific on the religious basis itself: for religion in still given a place of some kind.  The Report, page 96 in particular, is relevant particularly at this point, and could be consulted.

Here endeth the Broader Creed Approach.

Now it would seem a pity not to make it a round thirty; but then we are not persuaded that the Report Religion would necessarily hold it is a law of nature that such a Creed should have such uniformities.  There then might be the 'sacred' writings of the Report Religion.

These start in more modern style, establishing a linguistic rapport; and they continue in more archaic styles with strong Biblical stylistic overtones relative to the translation epoch of the Authorised Version of the Bible - for as Winston Churchill seemed to know so well,  certain obsolete and archaic things may stir the depths.  And in this field,  where so many actually possess, and perhaps sometimes even read the said Bible, the chances of discerning a sort of resonance with the underlying strains, these are greater

It is true that the Bible is explicit: it comes from God. There is that difference; and as to God and man, the difference, in the end, as at the beginning, is only infinite. It is thus, that if the substance been seen in substantial and indeed significant parallel, then the implications concerning the ripening of the State towards the posture taken up by the "man of sin" as detailed in II Thessalonians 2, when he shows himself that he is god, is a very rich one!

Now we must remove at once a possible misunderstanding.  We are not wishing (not at all) to act as an assistant to this Religion, that is, to do its job for it, creedally.  Obviously, its own god might want this; or it might want a new god of its own to somehow undergird all the 'religious words' and integrate, synthesise, syncretise or whatever other sort of erudite, abstruse or exotic activity should seem just.  But they did not do this; and it was mandatory for us therefore to endeavour - dare we say it - to interpret
the writings of the Report,  to give them some 'feed-back'  (this is the term of the Report, and presumably
they will not mind taking their own PRESCRIBED medicine p.133*48 ).

Again, a religion provided with 343 pages of premisses, presuppositions and other less than cogent considerations is susceptible to interpretation; and should we attribute to its attitude an unwillingness to codify?  Perhaps as a religion; but then, the Report seems unaware of this aspect of its protocol and attainment, of its work; so that we must make an analogous presentation to religion, since its apparent nescience on this point would preclude it seems, even the idea.

Indeed, the Idea seems contrary to the hopes and imaginings which it expresses; for it seems to be replete with religious controls without expressing knowledge that by its program, there is being or would be created,  in the appropriate controls and knowledge,  the right mode of approach to religion, and the correct approach to religious 'words'.  Religion is ever at this, and an approach to ultimate reality so profound that it can even interpret the nature of other approaches, classifying the acceptable and the inappropriate as a matter of fact; and this without denying there is a god, and while making an insistence that facts are not the real substance of any religion: this would logically have to imply access to this ultimate truth. It is so hard to do, since explicitly the Report distances this so far from its purvey, in requiring the same of others, that it is by definition unattainable, just as it is required of those to whom, in its ignorance, it renders absolute the knowledge of the unknowable. Such is man; it is so very much less self-contradictory to deal with God direct, and to avoid these nebulous meanderings, misaligned to logic, and taking their own, vitamin type, with them, not visible alas, to the secular kind.

From the Report principles, again,  to be absolutely right in this infinite setting, it would have to have access to revelation. It would seem as if the relativised, symbol-seeking psyches could not hope to know the character of the infinite; their heredity-environment personalities could not know beyond their own limitations what is the actual case.  Are they not bound to their codes and symbols, and to their environmental impacts and conditionings, or libido quotients (libido as impacted on by events, with resultant modification); or whatever might seem appropriate, desirable or suitably modern to hypothesise?

How could the Report determine these matters so absolutely without an actual revelation! With or without one, it is on collision course with truth, on its own account, and in terms of its specifications for religion, in view of the  actualities of religions, as shown above from the first, in this review. Only revelation could give them what is needed to cover their own case; but, on the other hand, this as a fact conveyor, they dismiss with their knowledgeable nescience, in which symbols are elevated and factuality recedes into that convenient oblivion which allows anything to come from the mud of the imagination, and being bound, to be ... convenient. The Report sits squarely on the horns of a dilemma of its own making.

But apart from that misfortune which it bears, what of some species of revelation for the needs of the Report ?

Since the Report is acting in its program and suitable scenario,  with such limitations, yet with such profound and unbending assurance, the registration of some such implicit background (quasi-apotheosis or theophany*49 ) seems more than right; it seems but a completion, just as also it is a necessity for competence! The result, either simply by the powers assumed, or the truth supposedly uttered, with whatever self-contradiction; or the necessity which this requires, is a religion. Hence it needs a code.
It does not provide one. Since it is approaching rather like a roaring bull, with the State fence behind  us, it seems best to develop such a creed. How do these things act when the time comes? it would seem we certainly need to know.

Now there remains a short code.  We shall give this no great space to it, as it is meant to avoid this, since we have already been in the ampler confines of what precedes.


Interestingly, relative to point 23, the second Dragon in Revelation 13, the religious one:

At this point, it is both apt and relevant to make a short digression, for the enormities of the Report Religion should be compared even if briefly, with the marvels of what it would seek to replace.

As religious wines go, this one has a nose to it which is so close to that of Biblical prophecy,  as to be almost certainly assured of having both a market, a following and a profit. Already, though there is a little time left, it is beginning to have such a flavour that it represents an almost perfect fulfilment of the ultimate Biblical prediction. Therefore, this of  Report Religion, one must say it in all fairness, it is an approach to the predicted state in nature and word, so close as to constitute something like verification of Biblical prophecy, already. Like certain syndromes in disease, such as pneumonia, it is not death quite yet, but the complex of developments is so close, that the disease is quite readily susceptible to Biblical prophetic analysis.

This is therefore a development of great importance to Christian Apologetics; for it shows the immense contemporaneity of this feature, which Biblically HAS to COME during the multi-phase parallel of many other developments, which in fact, are NOW happening. This is simply a prophetic fact, a matter of data, and those other features may be seen conveniently in SMR Ch.8, and also Ch.9. It is always fascinating where men look, even in the pits of irrationality itself, instead of scientifically noting that the Bible is the only religious OR OTHER text which requires no change in predictions covering thousands of years, which it makes and which are fulfilled; and that science, merely human knowledge systematised in a parallel ACTION model, cannot begin to compete with it (on this, see also That Magnificent Rock Ch.1).

Now we may revert to a review of the creed's indications.


First, it will  be noted there is expressly seen, some almost incredible self-contradiction. No apology is made for this, as our task is not window-dressing but manifestation.

Second, it will be discerned that there is a considerable amount of material on children and education.  The Bible. however,  is also not devoid of this.

Of course,  this Report Religion in bizarre in that it in arising in its formulations and conceptualisations (both explicit and implied), whilst a secular State body (which even wants to use the term 'secular' of this Report Religion as it is exposed to be) is concerned about a phase of its own educational program.
Hence the child emphasis, as to type, in understandable.  Nevertheless, the sweep of doctrine in the resulting document is far beyond education (except to the extent education is given privileged access to all ... If so this is merely another way of establishing our point regarding the scope of the Report Religion).

As a matter of fact, there are some striking resemblances to Freemasonry, as well as to the more radical forms of current ecumenism,  in the approach to ALL religions.  Thus the account in the preface of one specific Holman Bible,  designated for freemasonry, similarly  makes references to the sacred writings of certain religions without ... discrimination *50. Thus the concept of the 'religious word' did not commence with the Report Religion...

In resumé, we may notice, then, an important fact regarding our findings. It is this. Amongst the paraphernalia of this religion, we have:

Report Religion seeks accreditation, dispensation of  its codes with no mean authority,  dispersal of its concepts,  prefers compulsion for its auditing (Primary age), pursuit of its practicalities, State Staff for its expression on State premises and suitably modified clerics for accommodation to its dictates, desiderata and doctrines.  It wishes exclusion of what it deems unacceptable competition in these premises, and is assured of what is best, though having difficulties with what is true.

Whether or not those who might one day sanction the Report Religion, or some cousin of this theme,  are not aware of what they are about, the  results, in any case,  are largely the same for the children .. and the parents.


*47 Allow
A Chaplain's Handbook could perhaps elaborate by adding the item on p. 88 in Section IV (supra) (or other deemed appropriate).


Medicine p.133

This of course includes the submission of religious beliefs to what is called 'rational investigation'. We have also noted, as prescribed, the need to be alert to any mythological elements in religion and the need to interpret these; though for our part, we have assiduously sought to be just to the context even when interpreting. To do otherwise is mere piracy; it is then better honestly to found one's own religion, an occupation of great weight in the contemporary setting. Best ? Only in the sense of honest in the precise point here at issue.



The "theo"  in this theophany would of course need to relate to the Report's philosophical postulates; and correspondingly for the "apotheosis". However, as noted, this could not provide what is necessary. It produces merely a dilemma: no truth without revelation, and no revelation without truth. Truth having been evacuated by a presupposition, the system fails. It is also so when truth is discarded, discounted or dismissed. When there is no path, all you face are dilemmas concerning the absence of what is needed.


Under the heading, 'The Words of a Great Masonic Divine', and with the names R.W. and Rev. Joseph Fort Newton thereunder, and with the sub-title 'The Bible in Masonry',  we find elements of great affinity to the Report Religion. The quoted segment will illustrate the point.

Then as he moves forward from one degree to another, the imagery of the Bible becomes familiar and eloquent, and its mellow, haunting music sings its way into his heart.

And yet, like everything else in Masonry, the Bible, so rich in symbolism, is itself a symbol  - that is,  a part taken for the whole. It is a sovereign symbol of the Book of Faith,  the Will of God as
man learned it in the midst of the years - that perpetual revelation of himself which God in making mankind in every land and every age.  Thus, by the very honor which Masonry pays to the Bible,  it teaches us to revere every book of faith in which men find help for today and hope for the morrow, joining hands with the man of Islam no he takes oath an the Koran, and with the Hindu as he makes covenant with God upon the book that he loves best.

For Masonry knows, what so many forget, that religions are many, but Religion in one - perhaps we may say one thing, but that one thing includes everything - the life of God in the soul of men, and the duty and hope of man which proceed from His essential character.  Therefore, it invites to its altar men of all faiths, knowing that if they use different names for "the Nameless One of a hundred names," they are yet praying to the one God and Father of all; knowing,  also,  that while they read different volumes, they are in fact reading the some vast Book of the Faith of Man as revealed in the struggle and sorrow of the race in its quest of God.

The parallel with this and Report Religion is most substantial.

Report Religion, as irrational and illogical  in some ways as is Freemasonry seen to be, would similarly have the starkest of contradictions, which have been documented above regarding religions, to be ignored in the interests of words which, if they have meaning at all, seem to have taken a run on poetry while dealing ostensibly with reality.

Imagination, to be sure,  is fine in its place; but when one imagines that God has/does not a Son; that Christ died/did not die for the ransom price of the sins of those who would come to Him; that He IS/is not deity; that Muhammad, as one following Him in a prophetic role is/is not a false prophet; that evil is/is not real; that man is/is not developing on the long road to becoming every bit as much God as God is; that we should forgive and love enemies/should continue in war till Allah has no dissenters in various engagements; that afterward is the knowledge of God/is nirvana without knowledge; that the body of Christ did/did not rise, and that man is/is not significant in the world of events before the face of a God who has/has not loved him ... we merely begin to see the hideous sonority of protestations which contradict the facts so largely, that their hypothetical character is lost in words, and their contra-factual nature is not realised in the blur.

The soporific misuse of mind is no way to distinguish who should be worshipped; and if this sort of attitude of mind is to be followed, the true God may very justly ask: WHY did you not worship Me with ALL YOUR MIND! Is mind taboo because desire wants a unity which proceeds from man, and which  does not proceed from God, who gives without competition,  reason before and validation and verification behind; and is it not the more ludicrous when man's very ignorance is to be the source of his authority! And how well is that ignorance attested when it is founded on logical contradiction, and proceeds to praise what it rejects absolutely.