Andrew Murray and the Freemason Question
A needed rebuttal against the scurrilous claim that
Andrew Murray (1828-1917) of South Africa was a Freemason
When I first came across the unfounded accusation that Andrew Murray was a Freemason, I considered the thought so ridiculous that I didn’t give it any credence. But of late, this scurrilous allegation, which is obviously meant to debase his life and work, has reached new heights, and therefore needs to be debunked with irrefutable facts.
I have attempted to do this in a short book of around fourteen pages. It is titled: Andrew Murray and the Freemason Question: A Rebuttal. It was published in May 2022 and is be available for US$0.99 as an e-book on Amazon Kindle and other online stores.
In the meantime I have added a pertinent section from this book concerning Andrew Murray's obelisk gravestone which his accusers are using to condemn him, despite the fact that he probably had no say over its design.
Andrew Murray’s obelisk-type gravestone
Not having any facts to back up their Freemasonry assertion which they have simply plucked from fresh air, Andrew Murray’s present-day accusers have now tried to prove that he was a Freemason by pointing to his obelisk-type gravestone. (See photographs below.) According to this conspiracy theory, it is a symbol of Freemasonry and therefore proves that he was a Freemason.
This, however, begs the following questions: If this obelisk-type gravestone is supposed to prove that Andrew Murray was a Freemason, what about the Anglo-Boer-War Women’s Monument in Bloemfontein where the obelisk towers 120 feet into the sky? (See photograph below.) Does that mean that those starving women and children in the British Concentration Camps, where over 26,370 women and children died, were also Freemasons? The mind boggles!
And what about the obelisk on Execution Hill near uMgungundlovu that commemorates the slaughter of the Voortrekker leader Piet Retief and his entourage by the Zulus in 1838? By the same absurd argument, these men must also, then, be Freemasons.
And what about the Afrikaans Language monument in Paarl which sports several obelisks of various sizes? Are they too connected with Freemasonry?
(Photographs of the obelisks spoken of above can be viewed in my book: Andrew Murray and the Freemason Question)
So let’s look more closely at why an obelisk-type memorial was chosen in the cases above. One reason is that obelisks were very much in fashion during the nineteenth century. In fact, a number are dotted around South Africa from that era, including one in Port Elizabeth, Mafeking, Paarl, as well as in the Church grounds of the DRC in Robertson.
But the obvious reason is that the Dutch Reformed Church, as a denomination, is against displaying the cross—be it inside the church or to adorn its wonderful church steeples. Instead, the steeple is always capped by a weather vane. With this being the case, there are few options for the church to show its regard for a special personage or event with a sophisticated yet plain structure that could be seen from afar. So an obelisk became the obvious choice. Its pointed top also ensured that no bird would alight on it.
For more information, please refer to my book: Andrew Murray and the Freemason Question.
