As we have seen, Regular Masonic authorities refrain from taking any part or stance in conflicts, controversies and disputes of the outside world, whether political, religious or otherwise.

Entirely taken up as they are with their task of initiation, they refuse to issue declarations about causes, demands or protest actions, however respectable. The dangers of any intervention by Freemasonry in the confrontations of the outside world would be manifold. Freemasons may have very different opinions about the problems of the society they live in and would be unable to accept that their Grand Lodge might adopt a position on them in their name or on behalf of a majority of them. By abstaining from the conflicts of the day and thereby avoiding controversy within Lodges themselves, Regular Freemasonry is well aware that any departure from this line of conduct would be far-reaching. One single instance of doing so, even for the worthiest of causes, would create a precedent and eventually lead to the continual question as to whether and how it should again express its opinion and with what aims in mind.

By abstaining from matters outside its remit, traditional Freemasonry declines to associate with action groups, pressure groups or information units of any kind, political parties, or professional or religious associations in their initiatives in society.

Freemasonry expects nothing from the authorities apart from the protection given to all citizens in a free society: the right of assembly and freedom of conscience which are the foundations of any Masonic organization.

If Regular Freemasonry itself is non-political, however, it goes without saying that outside the Lodge it makes no demands on its members in this respect: each is free to take part in any public activity he wishes, providing firstly that it is a lawful one (terrorism, for example, is incompatible with the ethics of Freemasonry) and secondly that he never does so in his capacity as a Freemason. He is thus required at all times to make a clear distinction between his Masonic and public activities. In Lodge, he is a Freemason, no more, no less.  In his party, trade union and so on, he has not to refer to his membership in Freemasonry, still less to try to gain by it.

Besides, the ritual, spirit and climate in a traditional Lodge will leave him in no doubt that an unbridgeable gap has to separate the world of Masonry from that outside. This does not mean, of course, that his activities outside Freemasonry are not to some extent influenced by his Masonic background.