The difference between the call to humanity and the call of Freemasonry is very slight.
The real difference lies in expression. In the blunt and harsh language of Freemasonry, religion is placed beside one’s shoes. A person accepts Freemasonry only when, in practice, he has removed his religion like footwear, or is about to remove it. For this reason, such harsh wording does not disturb him; he may even welcome it.
These expressions are used for emphasis and sometimes as a warning—directed at anyone who still has even a small trace of religious commitment. Therefore, this condition is stated clearly from the beginning: before entering, religion must be set aside, just as shoes are removed.
In contrast, the language used in the call to humanity is gentle and appealing. It speaks of encouragement and affection, and for this reason it is subtle and attractive. People receive it gladly, and it easily draws in those who are already inclined toward it.
Despite their different styles, both ultimately lead to the same result. They invite a person to abandon religion and to face life without it. When this happens, destructive forces gain control over the individual and make him obedient to their influence.
Some people may be deceived by the attraction and outward beauty of the call to humanity. They may believe in it or promote it, while remaining unaware of its true nature. Others may not even realize that this idea encourages separation from religion and its removal—a message spread by certain forces for specific purposes.
For the sake of discussion, let us assume that humanity is a sincere call to free human beings from all forms of prejudice that influence their thoughts, behavior, and emotions, so that they may interact with all people with goodwill and sincerity.
Such an idea may seem convincing in theory or imagination, but how much value does it have in reality?
In a world filled with nationalism and racial, religious, political, and social biases, can such a claim truly be upheld?
Consider a contemporary example: the treatment of Muslims in regions controlled by non-Muslims or under their direct or indirect influence.
Let us examine the “humanity” shown toward Muslims, the tolerance claimed in their regard, and the kindness and open-mindedness that are said to surround them.
The truth is that the call to humanity is mainly directed against religious people.
Anyone who remains committed to religion is described as narrow-minded, extremist, or backward. Such a person is accused of dividing people on the basis of faith and of lacking true “humanity.” As a result, religious commitment itself becomes the target.
More precisely, those most affected by the call to humanity today are Muslims.
Muslims are targeted for two main reasons. First, to weaken the sense of dignity and moral elevation that a sincere Muslim gains from faith—a feeling that comes from recognizing the difference between belief and the widespread ignorance in the world. Second, to remove the spirit of struggle from the Muslim heart, so that opponents may feel secure and unthreatened.
The contemporary Austrian orientalist Von Grunebaum, in his book Modern Islam, refers to the first objective as follows: “In reality, the obstacle that prevents Muslims from adopting Westernization is their sense of dignity derived from faith. This obstacle must be broken in order for Westernization to take place.” [1]
By this statement, he suggests that Islam is not fixed and unchanging, but something that develops over time. According to this view, early Islam, medieval Islam, and modern Islam are all different. This idea has been used as an intellectual tool by orientalists in their critique of Islam.
Is this not their main objective? Does the Muslim not feel dignity and confidence through faith?
The goal is to weaken the Muslim identity so that it loses the special quality God intended for it, as stated in the Qur’an: “وَكَذَلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا” Translation “Thus We have made you a balanced community, so that you may be witnesses over mankind, and the Messenger may be a witness over you.” [2]
The opponents of Islam will not be satisfied until this sense of faith-based dignity is removed: “وَلَا يَزَالُونَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ حَتَّى يَرُدُّوكُمْ عَنْ دِينِكُمْ إِنِ اسْتَطَاعُوا Translation They will continue to fight you until they turn you away from your religion, if they are able.” [3]
This issue is not new. It has existed for more than fourteen centuries, since the formation of the Islamic community in Madinah. While the methods have changed, one modern method is cultural influence, and among its forms is this call to humanity or humanism.
