Contents
The President's Corner
Native American Freemasons
THE SCHAW STATUTES
IN MEMORIAM
K.l.S.S.
Learning How To Learn
the philalethes The Journal of Masonic Research and Letters
Jerry Marsengill, FPS Editor
401 Masonic Temple, 1011 Locust St.
Des Moines, IA 50309 (515) 244-6011
FAX (515) 244-2540
OFFICERS
John Mauk Hilliard, FPS, President
Lehman College
Bronx, New York 10468 (212) 960-8713
Wallace E. McLeod, FPS, 1st Vice President
Victoria College University of Toronto
73 Queen's Park Crescent
Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 1K7
Forrest D. Haggard, FPS, 2nd Vice President
Overland Park Christian Church 7600 W75th St
Overland Park, KS 66204 (913) 677-4646
Allen E. Roberts, FPS, Executive Secretary
Drawer 70, 110 Quince Ave.
Highland Springs, VA 23075 (804) 737-4498
FAX 804/328-2386
Henry G. Law, FPS, Treasurer
2608 E. Riding Dr. Wilmington, DE 19808
(302) 737-9083
Harold L. Davidson, FPS, Librarian
The Philalethes Society 1903 10th St. W.
Billings, MT 59102 (406) 259-1552
LIVING PAST PRESIDENTS
Philalethes Society
William R. Denslow FPS
Robert V Osborne, FPS
Eugene S. Hopp, FPS
Dwight L. Smith, FPS
Robert L Dillard Jr., FPS
Bruce H. Hunt, FPS
Allen E. Roberts, FPS
John R. Nocas, FPS
Jerry Marsengill, FPS
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EMERITUS
Carl R. Griesen, FPS
S. Brent Morris, FPS
CONTENTS
The President’s Corner
Native American Freemasons
Nimrod of Babylon
Unity
Full Of Sound and Furry
Samuel Langhorne Clemens – The "Maverick Mason"
The Schaw Statutes of 1598
Assembly-Feast-Forum 1990
In Memoriam – Chas. A. McGaughey, FPS
The International Philalethes Society Presents the Fall, 1990 Semi-Annual Meetings
Through Masonic Windows
----o-----
by John Mauk Hilliard, FPS
I recently completed a year of service as president of my local Rotary Club. As a result of that experience, I have lately been examining and comparing Rotary, Freemasonry, and other institutions to which I belong, or with which I am otherwise acquainted. It seems to me that if one compares the essential core of leadership in various institutions for clues as to what motivates people to sacrifice their precious time, energy, and wealth in the role of institutional leadership, one sees patterns which reveal much about the essential nature of the organization. I thought first of the Rotary, Kiwanis, and Lions, service institutions once confined to men only (now most admit women), but unlike Freemasonry, loosely based on business, professional, and commercial networking. The leadership of such service clubs is often efficient and imaginative due to the high calibre of training and experience represented in their memberships.
My observation leads me to see, however, a profound difference between the leadership cadres of these service institutions and that of the Craft...and my conclusion is that Masonic leaders exhibit a far more profound personal absorption in, and compelling passion for, their institution than that which appears to be generated in the leaders of traditional service institutions.
It is not altogether clear to me why this is so. Yet I believe that it indubitably is true. This profound and passionate attachment of committed Masonic leaders to Freemasonry can be both edifying and appalling to behold! Edifying, because it inspires men to extraordinary heights of personal sacrifice and accomplishment. Appalling, because, if misdirected. as it all too frequently is, it can generate the most destructive and dangerous personal ambitions, petty feuding, and power games or struggles reminiscent of the worst kind of modern corporate warfare.
There are many Masonic leaders of my acquaintance whose passion for our institution represents the greatest adventure of their lives, far more compelling than their business or professional activities, perhaps almost as important to their sense of themselves and their personal identities as their marriages and family relationships. Now some might say, especially those outside Freemasonry, that such men have, in some way, trivialized their lives by this profound personal attachment to Freemasonry, that such men have left the larger, richer oceans of the world to splash about in an exceedingly small pond. I do not make that claim.
Freemasonry is not a game. It is not a place to have "fun" (although its funlike dimensions such as the Shrine, Grotto, and Jesters render it more universally human than it might otherwise be). Rather, it is an enterprise that touches profoundly upon the human condition. Observed in that light, Freemasonry is the most serious of institutions and demands the best possible skill, acumen, and commitment that it can inspire in its leaders. The power of Brotherhood, that quality of male bonding that the anthropologists have found in the "men's house" in many cultures older and less technological than ours, is the essential element in the great dynamic that propels the Ancient Craft. This characteristic bonding is found in military establishments the world over, in religious institutions of a single sex nature, in college fraternities, in private clubs, and other male-dominated institutions...it is a distinctly unfashionable thing to talk openly about in these days when much public discourse is filled with feminist rhetoric. Yet, much of feminist thought is now focused upon the attempt to recreate or imitate that special kind of bonding exclusively among women. But that is their problem, and not ours. At our best, we males know instinctively how to achieve that bonding already. The special relationship that can be developed among a group of men, particularly when they are freed, at least momentarily, from the temptations and distractions represented by the all-pervasive presence of women throughout the rest of society, can best be observed in the Masonic Lodge itself. Nowhere else, in my experience, does such an institution exist. The Masonic Lodge teaches no particular creed or religious doctrine, but draws on the great traditions of all the world's philosophies in order to give its initiates an intimation of the great cosmic unity that has produced human consciousness. Its ritual, laden with archetypal images and symbols, is the great engine that propels it not only into the stream of the future, but backward into the mighty waters of the human past.
The Lodge also throws a broad net with respect to social and economic condition. Professionals interact Masonically with workingmen, business people with technicians, private sector with public sector. It is m the Lodge, that the concept of universality truly finds a formidable proving ground. The Masonic Lodge cuts across the barriers of age more effectively than perhaps any institution now operative: where else does a man in his eighties find as comfortable and natural a relationship with a man in his twenties as that found on the level of the Lodge? At its best, the Masonic Lodge demands of each brother the most intimate and immediately personal involvements with his fellows: that modest charity and quiet relief born in the tender mercies only apparent when one brother calls upon another to discharge, in time of trouble or need, that mystic tie of comfort and support which we know as true friendship.
In the daily transactions of life, how many gentle favours can we count that take place within the Lodge? The brother who goes miles out of his way to drive another home; who takes time to write a note, make a call, present a small gift, share a special thought, who allows himself to be inconvenienced many a time because of the most direct and simplest of personal regard for another's comfort or support...he is the reason Freemasonry is known as "the Gentle Craft."
The leaders of Freemasonry will only be honestly effective insofar as they do not distance themselves from this great personal dynamic at work in the Lodge. The quality of their leadership will suffice to meet the necessities of the Ancient Craft only so long as they are directly and immediately immersed in the social and fraternal transactions of the Lodge. For in the Lodge, and only in the Lodge, does the Masonic covenant continually renew itself. The Grand Lodge and the great blither of concordant and appendant bodies in Masonry are a temptation for all of us who passionately love the Craft. We Lodge Fiends become addicted to honorifics and honours, to high ceremony and mighty fraternal circumstances.
We dare not forget the primary relationship of that covenanted community. If we do not immerse ourselves repeatedly in the well-spring of our Craft, if we do not give the "Lion's Share" of our energy, imagination, and commitment to the Lodge, then ultimately we will confound and impair our apprehension of the unique human transaction that Freemasonry so nobly celebrates...Man with Man, Brother to Brother, Man from, to, and with God.
----o----
by Dwight D. Seals, MPS
The term Native American is unuttered by the majority of human beings. The preferable term seems to be Indian or Redman in place of the respectable species title of Native American. Depending upon whom you may be talking to, rest the laurel wreaths of victory or the agony of defeat. They have been branded as savages for the most part throughout history. Our modern world has delineated them on stage and screen as ruthless and uncaring murderers. The Indian heritage has been spit upon, slandered, and considered in many circles as the lowest class of human form.
It is my own opinion, that they have been perceived in this manner because of misunderstanding. The Native Americans were, and still are, a very proud people. It is common knowledge that they ruled America long before Christopher Columbus and the Pilgrims. Their language was foreign to the "white man." Their religious beliefs uncommon. The Indians were thought of as nomads because of their living quarters and conditions. We thought of them as primitives because they didn't have up-to-date weapons, relying on the bow and arrow, homemade spears and clubs to put food on the table, as well as defense of life and property.
In today's world, a man is blameless in defending life or property. Many court cases are won and lost due to self defense actions. The Redman did not have the luxury of the present judicial system in times past. The present day Indians are still fighting battles, but doing so in the proper manner. Even in our modern world, such a fast-paced society, and supposed to be more knowledgeable than ever, look upon our Native Americans as less than a human being should be treated or admired.
Many Indians have names that will be remembered as long as we have history books to read and stories to tell. Sitting Bull, Geronimo, Red Cloud, and Tecumseh are names very familiar and names that will last eternally in the archives of our United States. Custer's last stand and the killing of the Moravian Indians will live in perpetual records. There were many more battles and massacres than these two, some the white man won, others the Indians won. Personally, I don't feel that either side won. Unfortunately, we can not turn back the hands of time. If we could retrace our steps, would anything be changed? I dare say not, at least not without more understanding than was relinquished from both the white man and the Indian.
The Indians were very simple and straight forward. When a child was born, the newborn was given a name from what was seen or what the "spirit" told the parents or the chief. If a father were to walk out of the teepee and see a beautiful eagle flying proudly amongst the clouds, he might name the baby Soaring Eagle. A bear running across the plains might give credit to a Running Bear. A white dove perched on a tree limb might very well be proof for a name of White Dove. Names that had credence and worth to their heritage, but quite uncommon and worthless to many of the white race.
The Indians did much dancing, with fervency and zeal, and costumes that had pride and sustenance. They danced to bring rain during drought, to bring a good harvest for an upcoming long winter, and a good fall hunt to tide them over during a hard winter. They danced to give them strength, wisdom, and wealth. Last but not least, they danced for their amusement and entertainment.
The Native American believed in the spirits, a very deep belief in a Supreme Being. Many tribes believed in many Gods. But they all had one thing in common, that being a firm belief in the hereafter.
The Indians were strictly hunters and farmers by trade. As time progressed so did their occupations and vocations. They became traders, scouts, and interpreters just to name a few. One thing was for sure, the Redman was happy to be alive and wanted to be left alone.
I am not professing that all Indians were saints, nor sinners, but merely a very misunderstood society or people. We, the white man, did not take the time to try to understand them. Nor did we give them the time to understand us. Greed overtook us for the most part, and history tells the rest.
Even with the perception we have of the Native Americans, we are able to call a number of them Brother, as a valued member of the Masonic Fraternity. Tracing the lives of some of these worthy Brethren can be a history lesson in itself.
One of the most notable Native American Freemasons undoubtably is Brother Ely S. Parker. He was born on the Tonawanda Indian Reservation in New York in the year 1828 . Brother Parker was the son of a Seneca Indian Chief by the name of William Parker, and the Grandson of the famous Red Jacket. Brother Parker's Indian name was "Hasanoanda," which was changed to "Donehogawa" when he became a sachem and the eighth Chief of the tribe. He was a Union Brigadier General during the Civil War. Brother Parker was a professional engineer. He was present at the surrender of General
Robert E. Lee, which ended the Civil War officially. It was Brother Ely S. Parker, an Indian, who wrote the official document of surrender. He was appointed as Commissioner of Indian Affairs by President U.S. Grant in 1869. He was also very active in the City of New York and the State of New York by holding several political positions over the years. Brother Parker was raised a Master Mason in Batavia Lodge No. 88, Batavia, New York in 1847 at the age of 19. He was very active in the Masonic Fraternity. His Masonic memberships and accomplishments are numerous and well-documented. Brother Parker passed away on August 31, 1895.
The Philalethes-August, 1990 Brother Os-Ke-Non-Ton was a Mohawk Indian. His Indian name translated to "Lewis Deer." He was a professional singer, bearing a baritone voice. Brother Lewis Deer was raised to a Master Mason in Putnam Lodge No. 338, New York City, New York on April 6, 1917. He was also a member of the Scottish Rite, Valley of Buffalo, New York where he received these degrees in 1923.
Brother Peter P. Pitchlyn was born January 30, 1806 in Hush-Ook-Wa, Noxubee County, Mississippi of a white father and Choctaw Indian mother. His Indian name was "Hatchootuekee," meaning "Snapping Turtle." He was reared as an educated Indian boy in Tennessee. He graduated from the University of Nashville. He later became a Choctaw Indian Chief. His father was an Indian interpreter for Brother George Washington. It has been recorded that his Christian faith caused him to be the first Choctaw Indian to depart from the practice of polygamy, or having more than one wife. Brother Pitchlyn signed the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit in 1830 and the Treaty of Washington in 1855, among others. His home Lodge is unknown, as are the dates of his initiation, passing, and raising. It is recorded that he was knighted in Washington Commandery No. 1, Knights Templar, Washington, D.C. on May 27, 1854. He was also a Scottish Rite Mason, having received his 32nd degree at the hands of well-known Brother Albert Pike. Brother Pike conducted his good friend and Brother's Masonic funeral service when he passed away on January 17, 1881. Brother Pitchlyn is buried in Congressional Cemetery in Washington, D.C.
Brother Joseph Parker was an Indian Chief and Grand Sachem of the Six Nations. On June 24, 1853 he was recorded as a visiting Brother of Friendship Lodge No. 153, Owego, New York. His home Lodge is yet unknown, but that is not terribly uncommon for that era.
Brother Maungwandaus was an Indian Chief from the state of Maine. He was raised a Master Mason in Jordon Lodge of Danvers, Massachusetts on March 27, 1850. He received all three degrees the same day.
Brother George Washington Finley was a Piankesha Indian Chief whose tribal name was Te-Wah-Guah-KeMon-Gab. He was born October 7, 1858 near Paola, Kansas. Brother Finley was raised in Miami Lodge No. 140, Miami, Oklahoma on September 24, 1913. He was also a Scottish Rite Mason and Shriner. Brother Finley died on November 16, 1932.
Brother John Konkipot was an Oneida Indian, the son of the Grand Sachem of the Oneida Tribe. It has been suspected that he was initiated into the mysteries of Freemasonry in a Lodge at Newburyport, Massachusetts. He was a member of the "Munsey" Division during the American Revolution. He impoverished himself to assist the American Revolutionary cause. He later received financial aid from his Masonic Brethren.
Brother Pleasant Porter was a Creek Indian Chief and General of that Nation. He was a member of Muskogee Lodge No. 1, Eufaula, Oklahoma. Brother Porter was born in 1840 and passed away in 1907. He received his Scottish Rite Degrees in 1886.
Brother Baptiste Powles was an Oneida Indian Chief. He received his three Masonic Degrees in one day, that being June 5, 1840 in Manhattan Lodge No. 62, in the state of New York.
Brother Alexander McGillivray was born in 1740 of a Scottish father and a Creek Indian mother. He became Chief of the Creek, Seminole, and Chickamauga Indians. He was at one time a British Colonel, a Spanish General, and later an American General. Brother McGillivray was educated by his father's brother who was a Presbyterian minister. He received a personal invitation from Brother George Washington to assist in the American Revolutionary cause. It is not known where he received his Masonic Degrees, but on his death on February 17, 1793 he was buried with Masonic honors in Panton's Garden, Pensacola, Florida.
Brother Carlos Montezuma was born in 1867 in Arizona of Apache Indian parents. His father was Co-Lu-Ye-Vah. Brother Montezuma was taken captive during his youth by the Pine Indians and sold for $30 to a Mr. C. Gentile, who gave him a most impressive education. He graduated from the University of Illinois in 1884 at the age of 17. In 1889 he received his M.D. degree from Chicago Medical School. Not only was he an excellent physician, but also a scholarly author and editor. He wrote several books on Indian welfare and folklore. He was the editor of the Indian magazine "Wassaja." Brother Montezuma received his Masonic degrees in Blaney Lodge No. 271, Chicago, Ill . in 1907. He passed away in January of 1923.
Brother Arthur C. Parker was born 430il 5, 1881 on the Cattaraugus Indian Reseniation, New York. His Indian name was Ga-Wa-So-Wa-Neh. He was the nephew of Brother Ely S. Parker, the Seneca Chief. Brother Arthur Varker was an archaeologist and museum curator by profession. He was also a consultant on Indian affairs under United States Presidents Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson, and Coolidge. He was also an accomplished author of books and magazine articles. Most of his writings dealt with museum and Indian subjects. He was an organizer of the Society of American Indians. In 1911, he founded "American Indian Day," the second Saturday in May. He also founded and edited the American Indian Magazine. After becoming a member of the Masonic Fraternity, he became a proficient Masonic author. Brother Parker was raised in Masters Lodge No. 5, Albany, New York. He was a member of both the York and Scottish Rites. He received the honorary 33rd degree on September 16, 1924. He also was a member of the Royal Order of Scotland and a life member of the Philalethes Society. Brother Parker passed away on January 1, 1955.
Brother Red Jacket was a Seneca Indian Chief and Chief of the Six Nations. He was born in 1751 and passed away in 1830 at Seneca Village, New York. He was famed as an orator and was most knowledgeable of Indian tribal customs, language, dress, and religion. During the American Revolution he sided with the British, which is where he picked up his name as "Red Jacket." He was formerly called "Otetiani" meaning "prepared." He then took the name of "Sagoyewatha," which translated to "he who keeps them awake," which referred to his being an eloquent speaker, when he was elevated to Chief of the Wolf Clan. In the War of 1812, he sided with the United States. Brother George Washington presented him with a medal. Although his Masonic membership has yet to be established, it is widely accepted by Masonic scholars that he was definitely a member of the Fraternity. It is suspected he received his degree work from a British military Lodge. Brother Red Jacket owned a silver Masonic medal which passed down through his family. Brother Red Jacket's family lineage includes Brother Arthur C. Parker and Brother Ely S. Parker.
Brother John Ross was a Cherokee Indian Chief. He was born October 3, 1790 in Rossville, Georgia of a Scottish father and Cherokee mother who was three quarters white. His Indian boyhood name was "Tsanusdi" which meant "Little John." This name was changed to "Guwisguwi" or "Coowcescoowee" when he reached manhood. He was the uncle of Brother William P. Ross, another Cherokee Chief and Freemason. Brother John Ross received his education at Kingston, Tennessee. He was once described as "civilized, highly educated, accomplished, devoted, urbane, and temperate" by the Indian artist, George Catlin. Although his Masonic degree dates are unknown, there is no doubt he was a member of the Fraternity. According to the Grand Lodge of Arkansas, he was a member of Cherokee Lodge No. 21, Tahlequah, Cherokee Nation, Indian Territory. There seems to be some thought that he was a frequent visitor of this Lodge and not a member of it. While Brother Ross was the Cherokee Chief, he approved the appropriating of ground to be donated to the board of trustees for the building of the first Masonic Temple at Tahlaquah. He was given a Masonic burial at his death on August 1, 1866 in Washington, D.C.
Brother William P. Ross was also a Cherokee Indian Chief. He was born August 28, 1820, the nephew of Brother Chief John Ross. He graduated from Princeton University in 1842. He taught school in the Cherokee country after obtaining his education, which was paid for by Brother John Ross. In 1871 he became Chief of the Cherokee Nation. He was editor of numerous Indian magazines during his lifetime. He received his Masonic degrees in Federal Lodge No . 1, Washington, D.C. in 1848. He was a charter member of Cherokee Lodge No. 21, Tahlequah, Cherokee Nation, Indian Territory. He was that Lodge's first secretary in 1849, and served as Worshipful Master of the same in 1851. He passed on to the Celestial Lodge above on July 28, 1891.
Brother White Seneca was a Seneca Indian Chief who was raised to the sublime degree of a Master Mason in Manhatten Lodge No. 62, New York City, New York on June 5, 1840 .
Chief Shabonee was a Potawatomi Indian Chief. He was born in 1775. His is said to have been a great friend of white settlers. In 1832 he saved the settlers of Chicago from massacre by Black Hawk, when he warned the settlers of the upcoming attack. At one time, he was one of Chief Tecumseh's lieutenants, and was with him when he was killed at the Battle of the Thames. He was a British sympathizer until incensed by the treatment given to Indians as a whole by the British. This caused him to transfer his allegiance to the American cause. He saved many white villages from Winnebago attacks. He was a grand nephew of Chief Pontiac. Although we have no proof, it is suspected that Shabonee received his Masonic degrees in a British military Lodge, thus making him a member of our great Fraternity. Brother Shabonee died July 17, 1859 in Dealb County, Illinois, where he had retired on land given him by the United States government as a reward for his services.
Brother N.T. Strong was a Seneca Indian Chief who was raised to a Master Mason on April 15, 1840 in Manhatten Lodge No. 62, New York City, New York.
Brother Tecumseh was a Chippewa Indian. He was initiated into the mysteries of Freemasonry on February 22, 1851 in Valley Lodge No. 109, Rochester, New York. He and his family were traveling and giving exhibitions on Indian customs. The night of his initiation into the Masonic Order, so was his blood brother, Peewauk, initiated as well. These were the sons of Maungdwais, who is said to have also been a Mason. This Brother Tecumseh is not to be mistaken for the infamous Tecumseh, who was a Shawnee Indian.
Brother William H. Rockwell was born May 10, 1870 in a log cabin in Oneida, New York. He was Chief of the Oneida Indians. He was a tool designer by trade, retiring at the age of 73. He was an extremely proficient orator on Indian customs and medicines, lecturing frequently on these subjects. He was a member of Oneida Lodge No. 270, Oneida, New York. He passed away on July 30, 1960.
Tecumseh was a Shawnee Indian Chief. His life is well documented and needs no representation in this paper, other than to say he led an infamous life. He joined with his blood brother, Tenskwatawa, in an effort to unite the Western Indians against the whites. On November 7, 1811 they were utterly defeated at Tippecanoe. He then sided with the British, and was killed at the Battle of the Thames on October 5, 1813. He was born in 1768. Many have claimed he was a member of the Masonic Fraternity. It has been reported that he was made a Mason while on a visit to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania disputes this claim saying, they have no record of the event. Others assume he was made a Mason in a British military Lodge, and very few records are available for military Lodges, either British or American. This information is included because it is properly recorded that Tecumseh Lodge of New York was named for him. Tippecanoe Lodge of Tipp City, Ohio is named in honor of the Battle of Tippecanoe, of which Tecumseh was highly involved.
Brother John Brant was a Mohawk Indian Chief, and the son of the famous Brother Joseph Brant, also a Mason. He was born in 1794 at Mohawk Village, Upper Canada. His Indian name was "Ahyouwaighs." He served the British in the War of 1812 with honor. He succeeded his father as the Principal Chief of the Six Nations in 1807. He died of Asiatic cholera in 1832, just after being elected to the parliament of Upper Canada. He was supposedly initiated into Freemasonry about 1815 in Union Lodge No. 24, which first met in Flamborough Village. This Lodge later moved to Dundas and then to Ancaster. He received the Fellowcraft and Master Mason degrees in 1818.
Brother Joseph Brant was a Mohawk Indian Chief and later Principal Chief of the Six Nations. He was the first Indian Freemason of record. He also is renowned for his actions during the American Revolution. He was born on the banks on the Ohio River in 1742. He was only 29 years of age when he became Chief of the Six Nations in 1771. During the war, Brother Brant saved the lives of several Freemasons who appealed to him Masonically. He received his Masonic degrees in Hiram's Cliftonian Lodge No. 417, London, England early in 1776, when he was sent to England by the government. In 1798 a charter was issued to Lodge No. 11, Brantford, Mohawk Village by the Grand Lodge of England. Brother Joseph Brant was the first Worshipful Master of this Lodge. He passed away in 1807 at Brant Mansion in Wellington Square, Ontario, Canada.
Brother Crazy Bull was a Sioux Indian Chief. He was the great grandson of the famous Chief Sitting Bull of the Dakota Plains. Brother Crazy Bull is said to have been a member of Suffolk Lodge No. 60, Port Jefferson, New York.
Brother Holmes Colebert, Sr. was a Chickasaw Indian Chief. His home Lodge is unknown, but it has been recorded that he was a member of the Scottish Rite, having received his 32nd degree AASR from Brother Albert Pike in the spring of 1860.
Brother S.H. Cone was a Seneca Indian Chief. He received his three Masonic degrees the same day, that being June 5, 1840. He received these degrees in Manhattan Lodge No. 370, New York City, New York.
Brother George Copway was a Chippewa Indian Chief. He was born near the mouth of the Trent River in Ontario, Canada in 1818. His Indian name was "Kah-Ge-Ga-Gah-Bowh." His father was the tribal medicine man. Brother Copway became a Methodist missionary among his people, and converted many of them, including his father, to the Christian religion. Brother Copway, although a full-blooded Chippewa Indian, married Elizabeth Howell, a white woman, who traveled with him on his many missionary trips. He also authored extensively on subjects he liked or disliked. He was a very opinionated man. He loved his family, his Indian culture and heritage, nature, his Christian religion, and the Masonic Fraternity. He disliked immensely whiskey, tobacco, the Sioux Indians, and cash given to the Indians by the government. He was made a Master Mason in Federal Lodge No. 1, Washington, D.C. He passed away in 1863.
Brother Philip Deloria was a Sioux Indian Chief who became an Episcopal priest . He was born in 1854 . He was known as "Tipi Sapa" to his people. There is a statue of him in the marble reredos of the Jerusalem High Altar of the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. He was converted to Christianity in the early 1870s. He was a teacher at St. Paul's School for Indian Boys. He spent 40 years at Standing Rock Reservation, laboring as the superintending priest. He became a Mason in Aberdeen Lodge No. 38, Aberdeen, South Dakota in 1911, having been raised on June 27. He was also a member of the Scottish Rite. He died on May 8, 1931.
Brother William Penn Adair Rogers, better known simply as Will Rogers, was born November 4, 1879 in Oologah, Indian Territory, Oklahoma. He was not full-blooded Indian, but very proud of his Indian heritage. His great grandmother on his father's side was a full-blooded Cherokee Indian. He is best known for his humor, both on stage and off stage. He was also an actor, author, entertainer, and circus performer among other things. His most quoteable saying was "I never met a man I did not like." He once commented about people bragging that their ancestors came to America on the Mayflower, but that he was very proud to say his ancestors met the Mayflower on American soil. Brother Will Rogers was a member of Claremore Lodge No. 53, Claremore, Oklahoma where he was raised a Master Mason on March 13, 1906. He died in a plane accident near Point Barrow, Alaska on August 15, 1935.
Brother Elias C. Boudinot was a Cherokee Indian Chief and one of the most noted characters of Indian lore. He was born August 1, 1835 in Cherokee Nation, Rome, Georgia. He was orphaned at a young age and reared by relatives. He was well educated, studying law. He was admitted to the bar in 1858. He then turned to journalism, becoming an accomplished author and editor. In 1863 he was elected as a delegate from the Indian Territory to the Confederate Congress. His Lodge membership is unknown, but it is of known record that when he died on September 27, 1890, Masonic honors were performed at his burial by Belle Point Lodge No. 20, Fort Smith, Arkansas.
Brother Louis Annance was Chief of the St. Francis Indians, a vigorous and powerful Indian tribe of the Canadian province of Quebec. He was born at St. Francis du Lac in the county of Yamaska, Quebec, Canada in 1794. He was educated by the Jesuits. In 1817 he renounced Catholicism and joined the Congregationalists, and shortly thereafter connected himself to the Methodist religion. He succeeded his father as Chief ruler, but was looked down upon by his people due to his protestant religious beliefs. This caused him to flee Quebec, finding refuge in Hanover, New Hampshire. He was made a Freemason in North Star Lodge, Lancaster, New Hampshire in 1834. He passed away in 1875 . The Grand Lodge of Maine issued a dispensation to Doric Lodge which erected a tombstone over his grave in Greenville, Maine near Moosehead Lake.
Brother Joseph J. Clark was born November 12, 1893 of Cherokee Indian blood. He was a 1917 graduate of the United States Naval Academy. He progressed through the military ranks to attain the rank of Vice Admiral of the U.S. Navy, and Commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet. He was raised a Master Mason on December 6, 1945 in Chelsea Lodge No. 84, Chelsea, Oklahoma. At the time of his receipt of the Master Mason Degree, there were many old-time Cherokee leaders present.
Brother George Jameson was a Seneca Indian Chief. He received his Masonic degrees in Manhattan Lodge No. 62, New York City, New York on June 5, 1840. He was also a Royal Arch Mason.
Brother William Augustus Bowles was a white man who became Chief of the Five Civilized Tribes. He joined the Creek Indians and married an Indian woman. He was born in 1763 and passed away in 1805. He was made Provincial Grand Master to the Creek, Cherokee, Chickasaw, and Choctaw Indians by the Grand Lodge of England. Although his home Lodge is unknown, he was "admitted an honorary member" of Prince of Wales Lodge No. 259, London, England on January 20, 1791. It is suspected that he received his degrees in a British military Lodge, as he was a British sympathizer and at one time a British officer.
There is no doubt that this list of Native American Freemasons is but a small gathering of our worthy Brethren. If we could trace our heritage or genealogy back farther than most of us like to relate to, many would find their roots somehow have Native American blood flowing through them. This heritage should be proudly accepted, not despised, and definitely not forgotten.
In today's modern society, we are told that a good example is the best solicitation our Masonic Fraternity can have. The days of old were no different as they had worthy Brethren setting a steadfast example for others to follow. Missionaries who gave their time and effort to educate the Indians in both scholastics and religion such as Brothers Samuel Kirkland, Benjamin Kavanaugh, Joseph Murrow, George Hunter, and John Chivington just to name a few, were instrumental in the development of the Indians. They taught them about life in general and were highly respected among the tribes they dealt with daily. They were a living example of a just and upright Mason.
Indian Affairs officers such as Brothers William Craig and Harvey Peairs were just as important to the Indians as were the missionaries, but in a different way. Often times, more important were the Indian Affairs officers as the Indians were dependant on them for tangible goods such as food, clothing, and housing. It has been often said that to feed the soul spiritually, one must first feed the body physically. These Indian Affairs officers touched the lives of many, both physically and Masonically as they gained the respect of those they worked with and for.
How many British officers such as Brothers William Johnson and Guy Johnson among others attained a degree of respect and admiration that carried over into the Masonic Fraternity. How many Indians were made Masons in the British and American military Lodges during the war years? This paper has mentioned many Indians, the majority of whom were Chiefs, but as we well know, there is no rank or class divisions among the Fraternity. Officers as well as non-commissioned soldiers had the opportunity to set a worthy example and show the tenets of our institution to the Indians.
Last but not least, how many Indians had their lives touched in some way by the examples set by Brothers William (Buffalo Bill) Cody, Christopher (Kit) Carson, and Alfalfa Bill among others. These worthy Brethren met and dealt with the Indians frequently as explorers, frontiersmen, entertainers, and scouts.
We as members of the Masonic Fraternity are very proud of our Masonic heritage. I have no doubt that the Indians who came to know our glorious institution had just as much pride. We the "white men" of the Fraternity should accept our "Redman" Brothers, and be proud that all can join together in Brotherly Love and Friendship. In the process, I hope that we of modern times can touch the lives of others, as the Indians were touched by the Masons they came in contact with. May we now be the ones setting the example worthy of merit to others.
As we stand in the Northeast corner, hearing it said that we stand as a just and upright Mason, may that phrase mean as much to our Native American Brethren as it does to us "white men."
May we try to be more understanding, and not be afraid to shake their hand in token of Brotherly Love and Friendship. May we never forget our true heritage.
----o----
The Lost Legend of Our Original First Most Excellent Grand Master
by Mark L. Jarvie, MPS
In ancient times Lodges were dedicated to King Solomon, because it was said that he was our first Most Excellent Grand Master, or he was the founder of our present system...
Our beloved Masonic ritual upholds the time and place of the construction of King Solomon's Temple as the legendary beginning point of the organization of Freemasonry. It not only does this in the aforementioned passage from the Entered Apprentice lecture, but throughout almost all of the several degrees conferred in our Ancient Craft Blue Lodges, Royal Arch chapters, and councils of Royal and Select Masters. And although many of the numerous degrees conferred by the other appendant bodies of Masonry remove themselves in time and place from Solomon's Jerusalem, only a few of these degrees place their stories at a time prior to the building of his temple. Indeed, the building of Solomon's Temple is quite thoroughly cemented into our epic lore as the beginning point of our Brotherhood's organized existence.
Now it is safe to say that in this modern day and age, almost every intelligent and well-informed Mason knows this story, concerning the time and place of our society's foundation, to be our own peculiar mythical tale, rather than an actual historical fact. However, granting that the story is indeed an allegorical legend, few Masons would argue with a statement to the effect that this legend of our origins is the same legend which has been presented and taught to all Freemasons since the advent of purely speculative Freemasonry, about three hundred years ago. And since most Masons today know that our speculative fraternity is directly descended from the brotherhood of operative stonemasons of the middle ages, it is also likely that a great many brothers also assume that this mythic tale of our society's genesis is substantially the same as that which was presented to the newly made operative apprentices of the fourteenth century, or even earlier. But would this assumption be correct? Let us look at the evidence and find out.
As far as the operative Freemasons of the middle ages are concerned it is rather an easy task to prove that the story which they propagated about the beginnings of Freemasonry was very different than that contained in our ritual today. We can be quite certain of this by examining the body of medieval and renaissance documents which have come to be known as the 'Old Charges' or the Gothic Constitutions of Freemasonry. There are about one hundred of these old documents known to be in existence. And even though they do not tell us all that we would like to know, they do offer us meaningful glimpses into the nature and practices of Freemasonry during its operative period.
No two of these documents are identical, yet they all share certain common traits. For the most part they all begin with an invocation, then move on to a legend tracing the history of Masonry from the founding of geometry, at a time prior to Noah's flood, down to its propagation in tenth century England under good King Athelstan. They then present a list of the charges for a Mason and provide for taking an oath appertaining to these charges. It is the historical legend portion of these documents to which we now turn in our investigation.
The following is a portion of the historical lecture contained in the third oldest of the Gothic Constitutions, which is known as the 'Grand Lodge MS' and which is dated December 25, 1583. The English has been modernized, and the portions which are not directly pertinent to this paper have been copied from an abbreviated version found in Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia. Please keep in mind that the details concerning names and places in these lectures vary a little from one document to the next, but the basic story line is consistent.
"...The worthy Craft of Masonry was begun and kept by worthy kings and princes and other worshipful men, for it is a worthy Craft and curious science, being one of the Seven Liberal Sciences which are Grammar, Rhetoric, Dialectics, Arithmetic, Geometry, Music and Astronomy. These are all found by Geometry which is the most worthy. Before Noah's Flood, there was a man called Lamech, who had two wives, Adah and Sella. By the first, he had two sons, Jabell and Juball, and by the other wife, a son and daughter. These four founded all the crafts in the world. Jabell founded Geometry; Juball, music; Tubal Cain, the smith's craft; and the daughter, weaving. Knowing that God would take vengeance on the world, they wrote these sciences on two pillars of stone, one of marble that would not burn in fire and the other called Latemo that would not drown in water. Hermes, the father of wisdom, found one of these pillars after the Flood and taught the Sciences to others.
"And at the making of the tower of Babylon Masonry was made much of. And the King of Babylon at that time, Nimrod, was a Mason himself and loved the Craft well as it was said. And when the city of Neneveh and other cities of the East should be made, Nimrod King of Babylon sent forth forty Masons at the request of the King of Nineveh his cousin. And when he sent them forth he gave them charges in this manner. That they should be true to one another, and that they should live truely together, and that they should serve their Lord truely for their pay so that their Master may have worship and all that belong to him. And other charges he gave them, and this was the first time that any Mason ever had any charge of the craft.
"Abraham and Sarah went into Egypt and taught the Seven Sciences to the Egyptians, including Euclid, who became a master of all seven sciences. Egypt was suffering from overpopulation and unemployment. In answer to the King's entreaty made at a great council, Euclid undertook to teach the young men Geometry, whereby they could earn their living and live honestly by building churches, temples, castles, towers, and manors. Euclid gave them charges to be true to the king, to the Lords they served, and to each other, and to call one another fellow or brother, and many other charges.
"King David began the Temple at Jerusalem and paid the Masons well and gave them charges. His son, Solomon, finished the Temple and sent for Masons in devers countries so that he had 24,000 workmen in stone, 3000 of whom were Masters. King Hiram loved King Solomon and sent him timber. He had a son called Aynom who was master of Geometry and chief Master Mason and Master of all graving and carving as stated in the Bible. Solomon confirmed the charges of King David."
The legend continues, tracing the spread of Masonry into France and England. However, it is this portion, appertaining to the time before Solomon's Temple with which we are concerned.
So, now we have learned that the newly made apprentice of the middle ages was taught a legend of the Craft which goes back much farther in time than does ours. A legend which firmly credits the first organization of Masons to Nimrod the King of Babylon. A king whose reign predates that of Solomon's by almost one thousand five hundred years. Let us look at this Babylonian legend again as it is related in the two oldest versions of the Gothic Constitutions.
The 'Cooke MS' was drafted sometime in the early 15th century and contains a detailed account of Masonry's Babylonish beginnings. It relates the story as follows:
"Every chronicle and history and many other writers and the Bible especially relate the building of the tower of Babel; and it is written in the Bible, Genesis, chap. 10 how that Ham, Noah's son, begot Nimrod, who grew a mighty man upon the earth and waxed strong, like unto a giant. He was a great king and the beginning of his kingdom was the Kingdom of Babylon proper, and Arach and Archad and Calneh and the land of Shinar. And this same Ham began the tower of Babel and taught his workmen the Craft of Masonry, and he had with him many masons, more than 40,000 and he loved and cherished them well. And it is written in Polychronicon, and in the Master of History, and in other histories, and beyond this the Bible, witnesses in the same 10th chapter, as it is written, that Ashur who was of near kindred to Nimrod went forth from the land of Shinar and built the city of Nineveh and Plateas and many more. For it is written 'De terra illa.' It is but reasonable that we should plainly say how and in what manner the charges of the Mason's Craft were first founded, and who gave it the name of Masonry. And you must know that it is stated and written in the Polychronicon, and in Methodus Episcopus and Martiris that Ashur who was a worthy lord of Shinar sent to Nimrod the king to send him Masons and workmen of the Craft that they might help him make his city which he was minded to make. And Nimrod sent him 3000 masons. And as they were about to depart and go forth, he called them before him and said to them, 'Ye must go to my cousin Ashur to help him build a city, but see to it, that ye be well governed, and I will give you a Charge that shall be to your and my profit. When you come to that land, look that you be true to him, even as you would be true to me, labor at your Craft honestly, and take a reasonable payment for it, such as you may deserve. Love each other as though you were brothers and hold together staunchly. Let him that hath most skill teach his fellow, and be careful that your conduct among yourselves and towards your lord may be to my credit, that I may have thanks for sending you and teaching you the craft.' And they received the charge from him, being their lord and master, and went forth to Ashur and built the city of Nineveh in the country of Plateas and other cities also that are called Calah and Resen which is a great city between Calah and Nineveh. And in this manner the Craft of Masonry was first instituted and charged as a science. "
And now we turn to the 'Regius Poem,' circa 1390 AD, the most ancient of known Masonic documents. This document is unique among the Gothic constitutions in that it is the only version of the Old Charges known to have been written in verse. In contains only the seeds of a Babylonian legend, as compared to the fully flowered version found in the 'Cooke MS' penned only a few decades later. But it is worthy of inclusion, if only for the beauty of its verse. Once again, the English has been modernized .
Their feast will be without doubt,
After Hallow-e'en eighth day.
You may hear as I do read,
That many years after for great dread
That Noah's flood wasn't all run,
The tower of Babylon was begun,
As plain work of lime and stone,
As any man should look upon;
So long and broad it was begun,
Seven miles the height shadoweth the sun.
King Nebuchadnezzar let it make
To great strength for man's sake,
Though such a flood again should come,
Over the work it should not take;
For they had do high pride, with strong boast
All that work therefore was lost;
An angel smote them so with divers speech,
That never one knew what the other should reche.
It is interesting to note that in this version the author has inserted the name Nebuchadnezzar in place of Nimrod. Now every Royal Arch Mason knows that Nebuchadnezzar was the Babylonian king who destroyed Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple many years after the reign of Solomon. It's hardly likely that he was also around some fifteen hundred years prior to Solomon's age to supervise the building of the tower of Babel. But such is the nature of legends, historical facts are of strictly secondary importance.
Let us now turn away from the legendary for the time being and focus on the facts about ancient Babylon, its tower, and the historical King Nimrod upon whom this ancient Masonic legend was based. Genesis chap. 10 verses 8-12 relate the following about Nimrod: And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calah, in the land of Shinar. Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah, And Resen between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city.
And in truth, this is about all that we know about Nimrod. He was a Cushite who established a kingdom in Shinar, which flourished around 2450 BC and came to be known as Babylon. Also that he was directly or indirectly responsible for the building of eight cities in that region. Little enough, but still good credentials for a first Most Excellent Grand Master of Masons.
Now about his fabled tower, the first nine verses of the eleventh chapter of Genesis relate the Biblical account of its building. And although Nimrod is not mentioned by name in this account, he was named as the founder of this kingdom in the previous chapter, which would seem to imply that he was also responsible for the construction of its tower. The story is related as follows:
And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
Now this account is all very well and good. But it must be kept in mind that this story was set down long, long after the tower was actually constructed. It was also set down by a people who were mostly antagonistic towards any religious beliefs or practices which did not conform strictly with their own.
Modern scholars are now quite certain that the Biblical tower of Babylon was one of the Zikkurats, or stage towers, which were a common type of sacred architecture in ancient Babylonia and Assyria. The ruins of two such towers are still in existance near old Babylon. One at Birs Nimrod, and one at Akerkuf to the south. Originally these towers consisted of seven stages, stacked one upon the other, diminishing in circumference as one went from one stage to the next. They were constructed this way in order to symbolize their builder's notions of the universe. The tower near Babylon at Birs Nimrod was called E-ur-imim-an-ki, meaning 'House of the seven divisions of Heaven and Earth.' And since all seven levels are present, it would seem that this tower was completed to its final specifications, regardless of the account found in Genesis. Perhaps our ancient Jewish fathers never saw it until it had already begun to fall into disrepair. It is also of interest to note that the word 'Babel' is really an Assyrian word which means 'Gate of God.' This may have been connected by the writer of Genesis with the Hebrew root 'Balal,' which means 'to confuse' giving them the notions for their story concerning the diversity of human speech.
Now that we are familiar with Nimrod of Babylon, and his place in the lore of the Early operative Freemasons, we must ask this question. What happened to him7 He is certainly not a part of modern Masonic lore to any great degree. When did he disappear? And why? To answer these questions we must begin by examining the legends of the early speculative period, of which we are the direct ritualistic heirs. Since the advent of purely speculative Masonry in the early 18th century, a very great number of exposures and memory aids have been published which relate the form and substance of early Masonic ritual in great detail. When taken as a whole these documents show that our early speculative brothers, for the most part, shared the same legend of Masonry's inception as we do today. As an example, the very first exposure of Masonic ritual was published in 1723 under the title 'A Mason's Examination.' It contains the following question and answer in its catechism:
Q: Where was the first Lodge kept?
A: In Solomon's porch; the two pillars were called Jachin and Boaz.
By the study of these exposures, which were published at intervals from 1723 to the early 1800's, we can trace the refinement and expansion of this modern Solomonic tradition about our beloved fraternity's foundation right down to the rituals which we use today. Therefore, it was certainly sometime prior to 1723 when Nimrod was dethroned as our founding father and Solomon installed in his stead.
This puts us into that gray period of Masonic history known as the Transition Period. That time during the 17th and very early 18th centuries when our organization transformed itself from an operative craft guild into a wholly speculative science and fraternal order. Ironically, of the roughly 100 known existing copies of the old Gothic Constitutions, containing the older legend, the vast majority were penned or printed during this transition period when the legend most certainly began its change into the modern version.
That this change did take place we have shown. How long it took, where it originated, and how it was effected we can not demonstrate. There are no known existing rituals from this period. And all those copies of the "Old Charges" are just that; copies of much older documents, made to be preserved in the Lodge archives, or perhaps to serve as a sort of charter for the Lodge. As this period progressed, they most certainly exercised less and less influence over the actual rituals performed and lessons taught.
It would seem safe to suggest however, that this change was a gradual one, and perhaps not universally accepted at first. For when we examine the time period just after the formation of the first Grand Lodge in London in 1717 we can find evidence of a proliferation of smaller rival Masonic groups. Some of which claimed to adhere to traditions much older than those used by the Grand Lodge group. These differences are not specified however, and probably involved a great deal more than the substitution of Solomon for Nimrod as our founder, if this was indeed even one of the points of contention.
Now for our final question. Why this change? It is a question which I can not answer for certain. No one left a record of the 'why' of it. I can however, offer this speculation.
The transition process of changing from an operative craft guild into a speculative order, presented opportunities for the Brothers of that time to greatly enlarge upon the traditional mythic lore which had been passed down by their medieval counterparts. Indeed, it was a necessity that they do so for the survival of the fraternity. The old operatives had obviously had to devote the great preponderance of their time and energy to the teaching, regulating, and execution of the actual sciences of architecture and construction. The functions of charity, fraternalism, and moralization were of secondary importance, and so took up less of their time. The establishment of Freemasonry by Nimrod, and the resulting construction of many cities, served well as a legend for our operative brothers. After all, they were concerned with producing real buildings. And according to history King Nimrod was indeed a great builder of buildings.
But during the transition period came the gradual loss of any need on the part of the membership to engage in the building arts. The formerly secondary functions of the order began to take on primary importance. The rituals and teachings of the order were being redesigned in order to help its members learn moral, social, and spiritual lessons, with which to build righteous, God-pleasing lives. And for this purpose the story of Nimrod just would not do! For it was inevitable that Nimrod, the great building King of Babylon, would be primarily remembered for his role with the infamous tower of Babel. A project which, at least according to the Jewish-Christian tradition, was anything but pleasing to God. How much easier and more fitting to their purposes, to move forward two chapters in the Old Gothic legends to the time of Solomon and his Temple. A building which, according to the seventh chapter of 2 Chronicles, pleased God to the extent that when it was finished 'the priests could not enter into the house of the LORD, because the glory of the LORD had filled the LORD'S house!'
And so the old legend was lost and Nimrod was replaced by Solomon, not so much by design as by default.
References
Brown, William Moseley, Ph.D.: From Operative to Speculative, The Masonic Service Association, Silver Springs, MD.
Coil, Henry Wilson: Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, Macoy Publishing & Masonic Supply Co., New York.
Horne, Alexander: King Solomon’s Temple in the Masonic Tradition, The Aquarian Press, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, U.K.
Encyclopedia Americana, 1966, Americana Corp., New York. Vol. 3, pg. 5 & Vol. 20, pg. 356.
The Regius Poem, Freemasonry's Oldest Document, The Masonic Service Association, Silver Springs, MD.
King James Version of the Holy Bible.
----o----
by Bob Ellenwood, MPS
The other day I was eating in a restaurant where the presiding officers of the town's four service clubs were meeting to discuss an important upcoming city project. Present were the presidents of the Kiwanis club, the Rotary club, and the Civitan club and the Worshipful Master of the local Masonic Lodge.
As they sat chatting over a cup of coffee, the president of the Rotary Club said to the President of the Kiwanis Club, "You know, I have always admired the work you fellows do in this town and if I were not a Rotarian I would most certainly be a Kiwanian."
"I feel the same way," said the Kiwanian. "If I were not a Kiwanian, I would most certainly be a Rotarian."
At that point, the Civitan Club President said to the Worshipful Master, "I know you're a Mason. But if you weren't a Mason what would you be?"
"Well," said the Worshipful Master,
'If I were not a Mason, I'd be ashamed of myself."
Hopefully, this is the way most Masons feel. We have and should have much pride in ourselves and our Lodges.
However, in recent times we have computerized things to such an extent that maybe we have become too dependent upon automation and thus have forgotten how important individuals are.
A man came home one day from work absolutely dragging. It was all he could do to get to the couch and stretch out.
"Did you have a hard day at the office?" his wife asked.
"Oh! It was terrible," he moaned. "The computer broke down in the middle of the morning and we had to do our own thinking all day long."
It is the Grand Master's earnest desire to see UNITY established here today.
As we shall see in a few minutes the definition of UNITY is: continuity without deviation or change--oneness--unification.
UNITY--togetherness--the whole-the sum of all parts. UNITY is the name of the committee that has worked on this meeting for over a year and UNITY is the name of this meeting for a very specific reason. Because UNITY is what we are striving for. UNITY of spirit, UNITY of effort, and UNITY of purpose.
Why UNITY7 Because UNITY, cooperation and an increase in membership during the next few years in Masonry are the Grand Master's heartfelt desire. Hopefully, that is what we will start here today and it will continue into the future so that we can see an increase in the membership of all phases of Masonry and its affiliated bodies.
In one of his most famous speeches President John F. Kennedy said: "And so my fellow Americans--ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country." I paraphrase that into the saying "Ask not what Masonry can do for me, rather ask what can I do for Masonry?"
Now Masonry has done a lot for me and I am sure each of you can make the same statement. We all can tell of many instances of what Masonry has done for us. But how many stories can we tell of what we have done for Masonry? What can we do for Masonry? Hopefully, we will answer that question here today.
But back to UNITY. It is defined in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language as:
1). The state of being one; singleness. 2). /The state, quality, or condition of accord or agreement; concord. 3). /The combination or arrangement of parts into a whole; unification. 4). /A combination or union thus formed. 5). /Singleness or constancy of purpose or action; continuity.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines UNITY as:
1). The quality or state of not being multiple: ONENESS. 2). /A condition of harmony; ACCORD. 3). /Continuity without deviation or change. 4). /The quality or state of being made one: UNIFICATION. 5). /The totality of related parts; an entity that is a complex or systematic whole.
Now contrast the first definitions given in these separate dictionaries:
The state of being one; SINGLENESS. The state of not being multiple: ONENESS .
The American Heritage takes a very positive approach whereas Websters' is totally negative; yet they both arrive at the same definition.
Normally I like a positive approach, however, in this particular instance it really makes no difference.
Some synonyms for UNITY are: Union, (then the term made famous by the Polish labor unions) Solidarity, and Homogeneity. These nouns refer to a condition of oneness in some sense; they are not always interchangeable, however. Unity is the fact of condition of being one; in most contexts it implies fundamental agreement of interdependent and usually varied components, which in turn produce harmony, as of thought, purpose, or artistic quality.
UNITY and cooperation--you can't have one without the other. In fact, I will go so far as to say that cooperation is the foundation upon which UNITY must be built. As Jesus said in Matthew 7 verses 24 through 27:
24 "Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:"
25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon the house; and it fell not; for it was founded upon a rock.
26. And everyone that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand.
27. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon the house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."
lt is very simple; a house built upon a foundation of sand can not and will not stand .
UNITY without cooperation is like a house with a foundation of sand.
Without cooperation you have no foundation upon which UNITY can be built.
The Most Worshipful Grand Master has expressed the desire to see all bodies of Masonry and all of its affiliates cooperate completely during the coming Grand Lodge years. Brother Ray has discussed this with the Unity committee on numerous occasions and we have discussed it amongst ourselves many times. What will cooperation bring us? First let us take a look at the word cooperation and ask what precisely does it mean? And how would it apply to us?
The American Heritage Dictionary defines cooperation as: An act of cooperating. Fine; now what is cooperating? It is defined as: To work together toward a common end or purpose.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines cooperation as:
The action of cooperating: common effort. I like that--Common Effort.-Common Effort. It further defines cooperation as:
1.) To act or work with another or others: act together. (very good.) 2.) To associate with another or others for mutual benefit.
Now let us look at the definition: "To associate (or work) with another or others for mutual benefit." (This is, I believe, what the Grand Master has in mind . )
Remember I said work with others.
Today; we have come together for the beginning. Now let us stay together, not physically but spiritually to work toward a common goal and pray that we can also work together until we have reached success. Because; coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; and working together is success.
Here again that word WORK . Re member you cannot climb the ladder of success with your hands in your pockets. We must all work.
Also, it is very important that we have enthusiasm for Masonry; and that we show others this enthusiasm, make sure it shows in all we do for Masonry.
Or as can be said to gain UNITY: AGAIN coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; and working together is success or UNITY.
Remember the banana; when it left the bunch it got skinned.
But back to cooperation: As an example; for instance how much has a lack of cooperation cost us as a nation? Let me cite a couple of examples:
Because of the way the Department of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff were set up at the end of World War II, there was created a weak and ineffectual organization that existed then as well as now. Inter-service and intra-service rivalry has caused the Armed Forces to fight over defense budgets, control of weapons systems, etc. For instance, during the late 1950s, rather than establishing a joint effort by the Armed services to develop missiles; the Army, Navy, and Air Force each set out, independently of one another, to develop their own missile system and this led, in 1957, to the USSR, not the USA, to be first to launch a satellite into outer space.
In early 1956 the Army began a concentrated effort to beat the Russians, by a year, and place a satellite in orbit around the earth. They could have accomplished this by the late summer of 1956. However, the Joint Chiefs of Staff voted, Air Force and Navy against Army, along with Defense Secretary Charles Wilson, to remove the Army's midrange missile program from the Army and give it to the Navy. At the same time General James M. Gavin, Army's Chief of Research and Development, was given a written order which read in part: Quote "The Redstone and Jupiter missiles will not be used to launch a satellite." In September of 1956 the Army successfully fired a Jupiter-C missile with-sufficient power to launch a satellite; but without a satellite on board. And again in August 1957; each time the Army dutifully reported to Secretary Wilson that there was not a satellite in the missiles' nose cone. Finally, on October 4, 1957 the Russians launched a missile. Thus Sputnik was born. Still the DOD would not let the Army launch a missile bearing a satellite. Then on November the 3rd the Russians launched an even larger satellite.
By this time great political pressure had been brought to bear on the Eisenhower administration and the Army was finally permitted to proceed. On January 31, 1958 the Redstone missile was finally used to launch America's first satellite into outer space, one that could have been in orbit two years earlier if only the Armed services had all been cooperating all along.
This demonstrates rather well the old adage which says: "Whenever you are too selfishly looking out for your own interests, you have only one person working for you--yourself. But when you help a dozen other people with their problems, you have a dozen people working for you." On the other side of the coin we must show both cooperation and enthusiasm; for example:
One night the phone rang and my daughter answered it and after a while, hung up and went back to her homework. "That was a quick call," I said. "You only talked for 15 minutes. What was the matter?" "Wrong number," she said. Now 15 minutes on a wrong number, that's enthusiasm.
However: the other example of cooperative effort within our Government:
On April 24 in 1980, a joint effort to rescue the Americans being held hostage in Iran was attempted. It involved: two CIA agents (before the main operation started, they planted landing lights in the desert), 93 commandos (to rescue the hostages from the former American Embassy), 13 Army rangers (to rescue the 4 hostages being held separately from the others), about 12 Army antiaircraft experts, 11 men fluent in Farsi (Far-see), the local language (they were part military, part secret agents, part civilian, and one Navy Captain [Their job was to drive the trucks into and out of Teheran (Ta-ron)], 8 Marine helicopter air crews (to fly the rescue force closer to Teheran), an Air Force Special Operations Control Team (to do the necessary refueling), 2 Iranian Generals (who were just along for the ride, friends of some big wheel in D.C.), the Air Force air crews for 3 C-130 aircraft and 3 tanker aircraft, and a third Army ranger force to capture an abandoned air field south of Teheran to be used as a staging area to load the freed hostages and rescuers aboard aircraft to fly them out of Iran. The reasons for this mix, from all the Armed Services involved, were varied. 1.) The US didn't have any military organization with a combination of planes, helicopters, and other equipment necessary to conduct long-range antiterrorist operations. 2.) The Navy would not allow anyone except Navy personnel to fly from aircraft carriers, therefore, only Marine Corps helicopters could be used, as others were not available with the necessary range to accomplish this task.
Also, because of the inter-service and intra-service rivalry and the committee system at the apex of the US defense structure the following things were not done. A written plan of full operations did not exist and a full rehearsal of the operation was not held. Therefore, when this rescue force arrived and was down on the desert floor there were four separate commanders, not wearing any type of identification marks, using radios that did not operate on the same frequencies, and although two of them could talk to either the White Howe or the Pentagon, they could not communicate with each other and had no agreed-upon plan of operation. The rangers could not communicate with the Air Force, the Marines, or the Navy and vice versa. There were a lot of other similar things that caused all of this but we simply do not have time to go into it all.
After all of the above, one of the Marine Corps pilots got so close to a C-130 that the helicopter rotor knocked a hole in its fuel tank starting a fire. Then things got worse. It cawed the rescue attempt to have to be aborted. The point being: had there been more cooperation and trust among the have been averted. (Would not have happened.) Cooperation--to associate with others for mutual benefit. Redoubling the effort.
Undoubtedly you have all seen the sign "No one plans to fail; they fail to plan." When someone fails, is it because they've lacked enough planning? Or was it because they didn't give it enough effort? Is the problem laziness or is it a lack of planning? Does effort inspire planning? Does planning inspire effort? Or do they stimulate and sustain each other?
Of course, the answer is: they do stimulate and sustain each other, especially when effort is defined as "giving it all you can." There is not a doubt that little effort is put forth without some planning. It is also certain that prior planning motivates maximum output of personal energy and investment.
That is why we are here today to try and get all the Masonic family together to cooperate fully with one another. Not that we are going into the desert to try and rescue hostages but that we need help; all the help we can get to save ourselves; to save our Fraternity. The projections about the future of Masonry are not good. I don't want to sound like a doomsayer but the future, currently, is not bright. However, this assembly can and must do something about that. Cooperation is forming a partnership. In John 15:4 we find "Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself...neither can you, unless you abide in Me . " . . . In other words together we must all work toward a common goal. To save Masonry as we know it.
We have already seen steps being taken in the right direction:
For instance the terms: Shrine Masons, Scottish Rite Masons, York Rite Masons, etc., showing the interrelationships, is a step in the right direction. But it is not enough. What happened when you became a member of a Masonic organization? You formed a partnership. Now who will have more success-the person who is confident that he can make it all by himself or the person who shares the power, the credit, the risks, and the rewards with a partner or partners. It will be through the leadership represented here today that Masonry will either survive or die within the next few years. Think about that. You all, us all, are the only hope that our Brothers and Sisters out there in Oklahoma Masonry have to save our glorious fraternity. Either we do it or it will not be done.
Remember: If you want to avoid criticism, say nothing, do nothing, be nothing.
Also, think about Christopher Columbus. If Columbus had turned back, no one would have blamed him. But no one would have remembered him, either.
Shall we succeed or shall we fail? The answer lies within this group gathered here today.
The man who gets the most satisfactory results is not always the man with the most brilliant single mind, but rather the man who can best coordinate the brains and talents of his associates. Failure can be divided into those who thought and never did and those who did and never thought.
In closing let me elaborate and not only repeat some of what has been said about UNITY and cooperation but remember up front I mentioned automation and individuals. Individuals are where its at. individuals are at least in part, the answer to our problem.
We as individuals must live our Masonry in such a manner that other individuals, male or female, young or old, will want to be like us. Or will want their husbands, fathers, sons, brothers, boy friends, etc., to be like us. We must live Masonry with enthusiasm. Just remember this quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson: "Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm." Enthusiasm--you must show such enthusiasm for Masonry that even if people throw cold water on you, you are willing to go right on living as an enthusiastic Mason.
This enthusiasm must be so contagious that others will go to any length to learn about Masonry, will want Masonry at whatever cost. You must show so much enthusiasm that they feel compelled to ask you about Masonry; so compelled they will literally tear your clothes off to learn about Masonry.
Remember, Brethren, we are the only Masonry the non-masons of our society see and they must learn about Masonry from us. Let us live up to our Masonic teachings and beliefs.
----o----
Full Of Sound and Furry
A column wherein our gentil readeres shake a lance at ignorance, at one another, at ye olde editor and on rare occasions even succeed in hittinge ye naile on ye heade.
Dear Brother Marsengill:
I was by turns both overjoyed and amazed at the response which my letter in the August issue provoked from Brother Allen E. Roberts. It certainly did get his attention, even if it failed in making clear my points of argument. I was especially delighted when I read his initial exclamations of "Touche!" and "Wow!" However, after reading the rest of the letter I got the definite impression that the "Touche!" was reserved for Brother Papas, while the "Wow!" was meant for me.
Some of Brother Robert's rebuttals were very much to the point, and afforded me a better understanding of his position, as opposed to mine. This is very good, and as it should be. Others, however, seemed to 'beat around the bush' and centered more on my choice of words than on the point I was trying to make.
First, his refusal to apologize for what he wrote was unnecessary. I never asked him to make one, and to do so would have been unthinkable! I am opinionated, but I would hope that I am not that self-important.
Second, I am in total agreement with Brother Allen's view that we should never, ever buckle to our critics from outside of the Craft. I merely tried to advance my point that a much larger body of strong opinion exists within the Craft than what he would be able to uncover by asking for a show of hands at seminars and conferences.
I would further state that as more and more of our 'neutral' Brothers become acquainted with the arguments in this case, both pro and con, many of them will leave that deceptively calm sea of neutrality and take a stand on the subject. So, whereas Brother Roberts seems to view these large numbers of neutral Brothers as an indicator of no problem, I see them as a group prudently waiting for more light on the subject before committing themselves to one side or the other, or even to a position someplace in-between.
Third, and in a somewhat lighter vein, I will not retreat from my description of Brother Roberts as "a very eloquent, very important, very influential spokesman for the Craft." His assertion that he ain't no such thing reminds me a little bit of one of our nations most eloquent speakers, Abe Lincoln, claiming to be little more than an Illinois rail splitter. He should also not interpret the word influential as meaning able to get one's own way, right away. If he wanted to make things happen right now he should not have chosen that noblest, yet least rewarded field of endeavor known as Education. Educators rarely make things happen fast, yet they are consistently remembered as being among the most influential people of all ages.
In token of my sincerity on this point I am willing to wager Brother Allen that every one of the excellent causes which he has championed over the years will eventually be adopted as policy by the vast majority of Masonic jurisdictions in this country. This includes the elimination of the ballot box and the recognition of the regularity of Prince Hall Masonry, both of which are long overdue. If we hadn't had the ballot box in the first place we might not have been stuck with this silly system of segregated Freemasonry which we have in the United States. (Bigots as well as cowards have hidden behind that box.) Unfortunately, this is a wager we may have to settle from a vantage point in that celestial Lodge above. As I said, education works very slowly at times. But it does work!
Finally, as a step forward in this cause of Masonic education I am enclosing a copy of an excellent paper in support of my views on the controversy of the Masonic penalties. This work did not originate from outside the Craft. It was written by W. Bro. G.G.F. Halliwell, and appeared in the 1987 Masonic Yearbook of the Provincial Grand Lodge of Yorkshire, North and East Ridings. It presents the United Grand Lodge of England's reasoning behind their ritual changes concerning the penalties. I would love to see it reprinted in The Philalethes, but I do not know much about copyright laws and such. If it is not appropriate to print it, I will gladly send a copy of it to any Brother who sends a stamped. self-addressed envelope to me at: 5986 N. Ionia Rd., Vermontville, MI 49096. Fraternally yours, Mark L. Jarvie
Dear Bro. Roberts:
Enclosed is my report for our Chapter for our last year. We have had a fair year, but like almost everyone else, membership continues to be a problem. We actually feel the need for new members in order to get some new ideas into our Chapter.
A few months ago you asked if you should be allowed to express your personal opinion based on your experience and work with so many of the bodies. I am afraid my answer is that as long as you are an officer, you should not. I feel (and I am sure you feel) that this is unfair, but my experience is that no matter how much you tell people that you are speaking as Alan Roberts the Mason, they will hear you as the Executive Secretary of the Philalethes Society or as one of the other offices which you hold. When the chairman of the Elders at our church tried to express his personal feelings concerning our Senior Minister and his health, he was interpreted as speaking for the Elders, he was subject to rather insulting phone calls, and he seriously considered leaving the church. Two other families who expressed similar opinions did leave the church, he resigned as chairman, as did the vice chairman. That was almost three years ago, our Senior Minister did resign for health reasons almost a year later, we had an interim minister for one year and we now have a new Senior Minister. Our Associate Minister, who was perceived as being in on the "plot" to oust the Senior Minister, as well as our Minister of Education are also now at other churches. I was lucky enough to be the only one foolhardy enough to replace the resigned chairman of the Elders, and I still feel a little burned over the experience. I think the church is beginning to recover, but it has been a long road. I have dwelt perhaps too long on this, but the "bottom line," if you will, is that although the chairman tried to express a personal opinion (which was after all a correct assessment of the situation), he was heard as speaking for the Elders, he was personally insulted and the authority of the Elders, limited as it was, was seriously eroded. From that experience, I suggest that you should not, unfair as it seems, express your opinion over important issues. However, one alternative might be to create a "Poor Richard" to speak for you, under another name. Since most of your opinions have appeared to correspond to mine, I would hate for you to lose your forum; however, for harmony's sake, I do not believe you can express yourself as long as you hold an office.
I am down to about half a dozen Society applications; would you please send about fifty or seventy-five? Thank you.
Fraternally, Thomas Craig
Secretary/Treasurer
Tennessee Valley Chapter
Philalethes Society
Guatemala, June 3, 1990
Re: The Philalethes, February 1990: "You be the Judge and the Jury."
Dear Brother Marsengill:
Well, as a good European lawyer, I do not believe in Juries, and thus I will be the Judge--three bangs of the gavel.
Having read your articles carefully in the course of time; Having admired your courage to advertise and advocate new ideas, not touching the basic principles of Masonry, and not trying to bring forth "innovations," but simply adjustments to modern times--after all, how many of us go on horseback to the Lodges today?
Having admired your logical approach to administrative changes and the simplicity of the solutions planted in your writings and addresses; WE, This Court, presided by me, Dr. Johannes Marinus van Beusekom LL.M. (Harvard Law School), having heard all comments and arguments from all parties, CONDEMN you, Allen Roberts, FPS, to continue with your writings, calling for changes and adjustments to modern times, by whatever means or function you have available, and to shake up sleepy and stuffy Brethren to better thinking and activities, and by no means to be silenced by anyone.
Non-compliance with this order will invoke the serious punishment that I will strip you from all Masonic honours and functions.
So be it. J.M. van Beusekom
----o----
Samuel Langhorne Clemens
(1835-1910) THE "Maverick Mason "
by Thomas Rigas, MPS
The man who became Mark Twain was born Samuel Langhorne Clemens. "I was born the 30th of November, 1835, in the almost invisible village of Florida, Monroe County, Missouri," Mark Twain noted in his autobiography.
He died at Redding, Connecticut, in 1910. During his brilliant, and unusual career, he became one of America's most important literary characters, writing under the pen name of Mark Twain.
In his person, and in his pursuits, he was a man of extraordinary contrasts. He left school at age twelve when his father died, yet he was eventually awarded honorary degrees from Oxford University, Yale University, and the University of Missouri.
His career encompassed such varied occupations as printer, Mississippi riverboat pilot, journalist, travel writer, and publisher. He made fortunes from his writing, but near the end of his life he had to resort to lecture tours to pay his debts.
He was hot-tempered, profane, and sentimental. He was also pessimistic, cynical, and tortured by self-doubt. These characteristics and attitudes, no doubt, were formed in his early childhood. Although his parents were well matched in background, his father and mother were, at best, not wholly compatible throughout their twenty-four years together. In character and personality, they were antithetic.
Play, humor, laughter, tenderness-was how Mark Twain saw his mother. His father, however, he saw as "stern, unsmiling, never demonstrating affection for wife or child...Silent, austere, of perfect probity and high principle; ungentle of manner toward his children, but always a gentleman in his phrasing...It was remembered that he went to church--once; never again."
Like his father, the son was to become an agnostic and an anticleric. It was his "sunshiny" mother, at the same time an enthusiastic and "abandoned" Presbyterian, who subjected young Sam Clemens to a religion of chronic anxiety and certain damnation which, although he later rejected it, reinforced his lifelong sense of wrongdoing, his obsession with conscience, and his inability to disabuse himself altogether of a belief in the reality of hell and Satan. Sam Clemens was to look back with "shuddering horror upon the days when I believed I believed. "
From Mississippi riverboat pilot to famous writer and humorist, Mark Twain captured the heart of America. His nostalgia for the past helped produce some of his best books, and a reputation that continues on to this very day in American letters as a great artist.
Samuel Langhorne Clemens was a "Maverick Mason." He was a member of the Craft for only a short period of his young adult life. On the 100th anniversary of his birth, in 1935, the Grand Lodge of AF&AM of Missouri dedicated a plaque to honor Sam Clemens, which today graces the front elevation of the old Masonic Temple at Hannibal, Missouri. The plaque relates that "Samuel Langhorne Clemens was a member of Polar Star Lodge No. 79 AF&AM at St. Louis, Missouri. Initiated May 22, 1861. Passed June 12, 1861. Raised July 10, 1861." What the plaque does not say, however, is the unfortunate fact that Sam Clemens demitted on October 8, 1868, and presumably never again affiliated with any other Masonic Lodge.
In April 1859, after two years of apprenticeship, Sam Clemens received his federal license as Pilot of Steam Boats. He was a riverboat pilot on his beloved Mississippi River until 1861, when the outbreak of the Civil War closed down the river to commerce. In April 1861, he became a Southern loyalist, and gave up his princely occupation on the river, in part because he was afraid that he might be forced at pistol point to serve as pilot on a Union gunboat.
The following month, Sam Clemens was initiated into the Masonic fraternity.
His brother, Orion, had been an abolitionist for years, and remained a loyal Union man. A few days after President Abraham Lincoln declared the existence of a state of insurrection, Orion Clemens reached the pinnacle of his career. On the recommendation of Lincoln's Attorney General, Edward Bates, a past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Freemasons of Missouri, Orion was appointed Secretary of the Nevada Territory. This was a position of considerable grandeur, even though Orion found himself hard-put to raise the money to get to Carson City.
At this point, Sam Clemens seemed to be floundering in direction, although in June he was passed to the Second Degree of Freemasonry. That same month, he saw volunteer military service near Florida, Missouri, as second lieutenant in the Marion Rangers, a band of inept Confederate militia. "I was a soldier two weeks once in the beginning of the war," he recalled years later, "and was hunted like a rat the whole time." His stint as a Confederate volunteer was brief. After a fortnight of rain, discomfort, boredom, and, above all, growing apprehensions about Union Forces led by an unknown commander named Ulysses Grant, Sam Clemens and other Marion Rangers said goodbye for the duration of the Civil War. In two weeks in the field, Sam Clemens had learned more about retreating, he was to say "than the man that invented retreating." He decided it was time for him to "light out for the Territory ahead of the rest."
Sam Clemens, however, did not retreat from being raised a Master Mason in July. No longer in the service of the Confederacy, he now became, nominally at least, a recipient of federal patronage, and an instrument of federal power, for in that same month in 1861, he started out for Nevada as his brother Orion's private secretary. In that capacity, he really had nothing to do, and received no salary. With money saved from his river pilot's earnings, he was able to pay for Orion's stage fare west, as well as his own.
The brothers were excited about going out West--America's last frontier--and expected to find wealth. The Nevada silver rush brought to the Territory a backwash of the 1849 gold wave into California. Millions of dollars in silver were being mined by 1862, and feverish schemes of wealth--silver, gold, lead, mercury, timber--were in every man's head, and speculation was epidemic.
Sam Clemens put aside his river clothes in favor of "a damaged slouch hat, blue woolen shirt, and pants crammed into boot-tops," and was on his way toward becoming something other than what he had been. His change of occupation from riverboat pilot to Nevada speculator and miner, mirrored a shift in the economic climate from the earning of a livelihood, to the quest for enormous wealth--the prospect of boom or bust.
Soon after he arrived in the Nevada Territory, Sam Clemens went to Lake Tahoe to stake out timber claims. In February and March of 1862, he found time for the Craft, and was recorded as having visited Carson City Lodge, U.D., at Carson City, Nevada.
His timber fever masked the silver fever that really gripped him. While his brother, Orion, tended to his official duties at Carson City, Sam, acting for both of them, prospected various alluring ventures in the silver mining district. In May 1862, he had acquired a one-eighth interest in a "silver-mining" operation, but by mid-summer they realized that instead of a bonanza, their investment was "barren rock and hard luck."
Orion at least had a salary to fall back on, but Sam was broke and in debt. He was reduced to shoveling sand in a quartz mine, and wondering how he was going to survive the next few months. By the end of July 1862, however, he received a job offer as local reporter for the Virginia City Territorial Enterprise.
It was neither the first, nor the last time, in his life that he had experienced the bitter cycle of boom and bust--prospective wealth, and present desperation. Nor was it the last time that, casually, passively, even reluctantly, he allowed himself to be turned toward authorship.
He became Mark Twain in 1862, while working as a reporter at the Virginia City Territorial Enterprise, the leading newspaper in the Nevada Territory at that time. The pen name came from his steamboating days--it is a river term meaning safe water ahead.
It was here, at the age of twenty-seven, that the now writer, and former printer, river pilot, speculator, and prospector made a great personal discovery--the end of a moratorium. "I feel very much as if I had just awakened from a long sleep," he said of his newly discovered self.
With increasing freedom and confidence, Mark Twain now wrote local news, personal satire, journalistic horseplay, comic libels, occasional editorials, travel correspondence from Steamboat Springs and from his frequent stagecoach trips to San Francisco, and from Carson City, legislative reports and reports of the Constitutional Convention of 1863. After less than a year on the Enterprise, he wrote to his mother saying, "I am prone to boast of having the widest reputation, as a local editor, of any man on the Pacific Coast." By now he already felt a national ambition, and the pulse and stirrings of a national consciousness.
Emotionally, he was to some extent still accountable to his mother and sister back home in Hannibal, Missouri, where admonitions of gentility and piety were reaching him frequently. He did his best to convince them that he moved only in "the best Society" of Virginia City and San Francisco, and that he actually had "a reputation to preserve."
In actual truth, however, he had become somewhat of a celebrity of Bohemianism, and a prominent part of San Francisco's gaudy subculture of writers, reporters, entertainers, traveling actors, and short-term promoters of the day. As he later confessed to his prospective mother-in-law, he had been "a man of convivial ways and not adverse to social drinking." Christmas Eve, of 1863, he spent in a marathon drinking celebration at Barnum's Restaurant in Virginia City, together with many of his writer friends, including the premier humorist of the day, Artemus Ward (a pseudonym used by Bro. Charles F. Browne [1834-1867], who was a member of Manhattan Lodge No. 62 F&AM at New York City).
In May 1864, his career at the Enterprise came to an abrupt end, when he perpetrated a hoax in the form of an editorial, which was described as a "blunder in taste and tact." It so infuriated everyone, especially the ladies of Carson City, that Sam Clemens decided that he had worn out his welcome as a humorist in that community. In the vein of his other hoaxes, and in the freewheeling character of Nevada journalism of the day, Sam Clemens claimed that he had written the editorial as a private joke, when he was not quite sober, laid it before an editor, neither of them intending it for print, and left the manuscript on the table. "I suppose the foreman, prospecting for copy, found it, and seeing that it was in my handwriting, thought it was to be published, and carried it off," is the way he explained this editorial fiasco.
Unable to exonerate himself "by saying the affair was a silly joke, and that I and all concerned were drunk," Sam Clemens left Nevada, because it was suicide for a humorist to make a public fool of himself.
From Virginia City, Sam Clemens went by stagecoach to San Francisco in May 1864, where he alternated between newspaper work, and gold mining, until he eventually gained some fame as a humorist, and began lecturing and writing books. Arriving at San Francisco, he worked, unhappily, as a reporter on the Morning Call. Then, in December, he went to the Mother Lode hills of California in Tuolumme and Calavera Counties. For a while, he tried to scratch out a living as a pocket miner, but it turned out to be a dismal and defeated winter of mud, rain, and meals of dishwater and beans.
There was one bright side, however, to this otherwise dismal experience, that eventually launched him to fame and secured for him the recognition he needed to, eventually, become a noted humorist and literary figure.
While sitting around a potbelly heating stove in an Angel's Camp saloon, he heard, for the first time, a Western analogue of an incident tale about a frog, which he summarized in his notebook thusly:
Coleman with his jumping frog-bet a stranger $50.--Stranger had no frog and C. got him one:--In the meanwhile stranger filled C's frog full of shot and he couldn't jump. The stranger's frog won.
From this simple, villainous backwoods tale, Sam Clemens was able to ride the jumping frog to fame. As he, himself, said, it was "the germ of my coming fortune," for it was the germ of the story he wrote and sent East, on the advice of his Freemason friend, Bro. Artemus Ward, as "Jim Smiley and His Jumping Frog." It was published in the New York Saturday Press, in November 1865, and soon after, through the then established newspaper exchanges. The frog, if not yet its author, became nationally celebrated.
The age of thirty, I am told, seems to be a familiar watershed time for self-redefinition. In their early thirties, Jesus set out on his ministry, and Luther nailed his thesis to the church door. Likewise, nearing the age of thirty, Samuel Clemens made his own significant departures. He began to explore the literary and psychological options of Mark Twain, the identity he created as a means of liberating and extending himself. Already savoring the praise of "editors of standard literary papers in the distant east," but nonetheless harried, in debt, and working desperately hard to get out of debt, he sent his brother, Orion, in October 1865 from San Francisco, a remarkable letter of purpose, summing-up, and apology.
In this unusual letter, which was published in The Berkeley Albion in 1961, Sam Clemens relates that he had but two powerful ambitions in his life. One was to be a river pilot, and the other a preacher of the gospel. He was to say:
"I accomplished one and failed in the other, because I could not supply myself with the necessary stock in trade--i.e., religion. I have given it up forever...But I have had a 'call' to literature, of a low order - i.e., humorous. It is nothing to be proud of, but it is my strongest suit, & if I were to listen to that maxim of stern duty which says that to do right you must multiply the one or two or three talents which the Almighty trusts to your keeping, I would long ago have ceased to meddle with the things for which I was by nature unfitted & turned my attention to seriously scribbling to excite the laughter of God's creatures. Poor, pitiful business!. . ."
At some time during this period, this person of great contrasts, for some unrecorded reason was suspended from his Masonic affiliation with the Craft. Speculation no doubt could conjure up any one of a number of "valid" reasons for his suspension from the Masonic fraternity during this period, considering his unusual lifestyle since becoming a member of the Craft. Masonic scholars and researchers, however, have been unable to document the reason, as of this writing.
Oh, well! Life does go on, and it certainly did for Sam Clemens.
"I am generally placed at the head of my breed of scribbers in this part of the country," Sam wrote his mother in January 1866. The "Jumping Frog," reprinted in The Californian, a literary journal, had consolidated his reputation on the Coast. Nonetheless, Samuel Clemens found that life in San Francisco and along the coast was full of queer vicissitudes. One day might find him in good financial fortune, with no debts, and living high at the Occidental Hotel. The next day might see him down and out, by necessity an expert at skulking and dodging, unpopular with the police because he said they were brutal and corrupt. At one point, he even found himself in jail charged with drunkenness, and this was probably a warning from the police of worse things to come.
Sam's answer was to depart in silence, as correspondent for the Sacramento Union, the most powerful newspaper in the West. In March 1866, he sailed on the steamer Ajax for "paradise," the kingdom of Hawaii, for a trip that would last five months away from San Francisco. His dispatch to the Union, from Honolulu, of the burning at sea of the chipper ship Hornet, was a dramatic scoop which was widely reprinted and talked about. It brought him a new kind of fame, as a straight news reporter, and in the hope of parlaying this fame into something more literary, he reworked the Hornet story for the December issue of Harper's New Monthly Magazine. He liked to think of this first appearance in a genteel Eastern journal as "my literary debut," even though the debut was marred by his mortifying discovery that the magazine listed him as "Mark Swain."
By this time, the Civil War was over, and Sam Clemens, a reconstructed Southerner who had gone out West only to find that his ambitions were really national, now began a new venture, and his first success, as a popular lecturer shortly after his return to San Francisco. He had learned a lot from his Freemason friend, Bro. Artemus Ward, the prince of platform entertainers, and within a short time, he found himself the master of his audience, and at his own will he could make it laugh or applaud or grasp in wonderment. His style and presence delighted audiences at San Francisco, Sacramento, and other California towns.
Even with these victories, he had begun to feel confined by the Coast. After the freedom of Hawaii and the expanses of the Pacific Ocean, San Francisco no longer seemed home to him, but a "prison." Armed with a new commission as traveling correspondent, this time from the Alta California of San Francisco, he planned to go to the Paris (France) Exposition. But first, it was time to see the States again, to go to New York, see his mother at St. Louis, and then go abroad. In December 1866, he sailed from San Francisco on the side-wheeler America, and arrived at New York in January 1867, at age thirty-one.
A trip to his home state of Missouri in March 1867, after an absence of six years, only reinforced his belief that the East was where he now belonged. At St. Louis, where his mother and sister now lived, he felt reproach in the air, his own and theirs. But at St. Louis, nonetheless, he tasted victory again on stage, giving a performance quite different from anyone else's on the lecture circuit, and completely delighted his audience. A week later, in early April, he repeated his lecture success at Hannibal, Missouri, then on north to Keokuk, Iowa, then another lecture at Quincy, Illinois, before starting on his return trip to New York.
While at St. Louis, he apparently satisfied the requirements for reinstatement of his Masonic affiliations, as he was reinstated as a member of the Craft in good standing again on April 24, 1867.
In New York again, he saw the body of his good friend Artemus Ward (Bro. Charles F. Browne) returned to New York from Southhampton, England, where he died in March of tuberculosis while on tour there. Dead at the age of thirty-three, Artemus Ward left a vacant place in popular stage entertainment that Mark Twain, his friend and protege, would soon claim.
In June 1867, Sam Clemens boarded the sidewheel steamer Quaker City and sailed from New York on a five-month tour of Europe and the Middle East. He returned in November, a national celebrity as a result of his travel correspondence, and which in 1869 led to the publishing of his successful book, The Innocents Abroad. Predictably, he had described the Holy Land in derisive terms, taking unholy verbal shots at the Holy Land. He also ribbed his fellow passengers for being brash, naive, and too quick to believe themselves cultured. He wrote, "The gentle reader will never, never know what a consummate ass he can become until he goes abroad. "
One passenger who escaped his barbs, was a handsome and wealthy shipboard acquaintance, Charles Langdon, from Elmira, New York. After seeing a photograph of his sister, Olivia, Sam Clemens became smitten over her, and remained in the East after the voyage to woo the young, twenty-two year old "Livy," his future wife, who he saw for the first time at Christmas 1867.
In April 1868, Sam Clemens reportedly sent his Masonic Lodge a gavel, for which he had claimed to have cut the handle himself from a cedar branch he had obtained just outside the walls of Jerusalem. Tradition holds that he had the gavel made in Alexandria, Egypt. In his attached letter to his Lodge, he reportedly wrote: "This mallet is a cedar, cut in the forest of Lebanon, whence Solomon obtained the timbers for the temple."
By the beginning of July 1868, he had completed writing The Innocents A broad at San Francisco, and after delivering a farewell lecture there, sailed for New York, never again expecting to return out West.
In August 1868, he presented himself at the gate of wealthy Jarvis Langdon's baronial estate at Elmira, New York. He was in love, and wanted to marry his young daughter. Livy, however, disapproved of drinking, smoking, Western manners, and even humorists, so Sam Clemens courted her by offering, in all sincerity, to make over his character and his habits to meet her desires. For a while, he even came close to religious orthodoxy, prayed, went to church, wrote a purple meditation on the Nativity, and even showed signs of intending to write a life of Christ.
This was quite a contrast from his previous views, when he openly criticized conventional religion, writing in Mark Twain's Notebook: "If Christ were here now, there is one thing he would not be--a Christian." Sam Clemens felt that the church of his time had lost touch with everyday life, insisting that man drop his religious illusions and depend upon himself, not Providence, to make a better world.
It seems that in choosing Livy as his idol to worship, Samuel Clemens chose his own willed transformations.
On October 8, 1868, Samuel Langhorne Clemens, for reasons probably best known only to himself, demitted from his Masonic Lodge, and presumably never again affiliated with our beloved Masonic fraternity. To this very day, Masonic scholars and researchers can only speculate as to why he chose to become a "Maverick Mason."
Sam Clemens and Livy were formally engaged in February 1869, and married a year later at Elmira, New York. Livy became his companion and first-draft editor for the next 35 years. Cast in the Victorian mold, she honed the rough edges of his prose. No doubt, Sam chafed at times under her prudent deletions but he cheerfully submitted his manuscripts to her. Livy seemed to have reigned, rather than ruled, their married life, and less as Sam's censor than his muse.
Samuel Clemens did not become a Christian, as he had promised to do when he was courting Livy, but instead became a foe of institutional and doctrinal Christianity, while Livy's Congregational faith, secure and unquestioned until her marriage, was eroded to a point where, at the end of her life, it no longer offered her spiritual shelter and refuge.
In his later life, Samuel Clemens was haunted by personal tragedy, in the deaths of loved ones, and bitterness fed on the man who had, at one time, made the world laugh. He grew cynical, bitter, saddened, and obsessed with the frailties of the human race.
Nonetheless, as Mark Twain, novelist and lecturer, he became one of the bestliked literary figures of the 19th Century.
Halley's Comet blazed into view in the year of Samuel Clemens birth, 1835, at a time when our nation still groped for identity. Samuel Clemens died when the comet reappeared 75 years later, tracing a fiery tail across the night sky as clearly as he had illuminated the character of his countrymen. Mixing cynism with humor, Samuel Clemens, as Mark Twain, worked his countrymen into literary portraits that remain as vivid and meaningful today as they were nearly a century ago.
----o----
(With Orthographic of 1598 Revision & Commentary)
by Thomas E. Weir, FPS
King James the Sixth of Scotland ("Jamie Saxt") became King James the First of England upon the death of Queen Elizabeth I in 1603. In 1601, he was made a Mason in Lodge Scoon and Perth in central Scotland. (1) The same year, William Sinclair of Roslyn was named Grand Master, and the office was made hereditary. (2)
In this time of political and Masonic mileposts, William Schaw (or Shaw) was "Master of the Work" for the kingdom of Scotland. His task was to supervise the work of operative Masons on behalf of the King. Attention must be called to the fact that the offices of Master of Work and Grand Master were quite distinct. The Master of Work was responsible to see that the Mason's Craft was soundly practiced and that the rewards therefore were not unfairly distributed. The Grand Master's role was to serve as advocate for the Craft at court. English sovereigns similarly appointed "Masters' of the King's work." A large body of their records is still available in the Public Record Office in London.
Why were both a "Master of Work" and a "Grand Master" needed at that time? In contrast with the square, level, and plumb which the Master of Work applied to the stones and practice of the operative Masons within the King's dominions, the Grand Master of 1601 was charged with the task of taking the interests of the Craft to court.
The advisability of having both a qualified supervisor of Masonry and a laird with access to court to serve as Grand Master can be better understood when it is remembered that in 1424, Henry Vl (admittedly, in England) assented to a law that forbade Masons to "confederate themselves in Chapters and Assemblies." Masons, alone of all the guilds, who met in such convocations were to be "judged for Felons," should they so meet. (3) About the time the Regius Poem was written, the religious reformer Wyclif argued that Masons gathered to increase their wages. (4) Admittedly, the law cited was for a different country and an earlier age, but the consideration remained the same. Absolute monarchs did not promote the welfare of independent bodies, such as a Grand Lodge of operative Masons. They might be tempted to set prices and determine practices without prior reference to the royal will. Therefore Scottish Masons at the dawn of the seventeenth century sought to balance the direction they received from the Crown through the Master of Work with a Grand Master to represent their cause at court. A vestige of this practice may be seen in the Scottish universities today, where rectors are elected by the students to represent them at the highest levels of university administration.
In contrast with the city guilds, whose influence was local, such a body of Masons, whose itinerancy distinguished them from city guilds, could control the building trade of the nation. Although these Statutes indicate that by 1598 in Scotland there was a general Assembly of Masons, (5) that body was convened by the royal representative, William Schaw. It would appear from the lines of this document that the function of the Masonic "assembly or meeting" was to bring bad workmanship or administration to light for correction and to receive and approve the statutues handed down by the Master of Work in the King's name. However, attendance at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, Annual General Meetings of Scottish Boy Scouts or Boys' Brigade, the deliberations of my Mother Lodge, St. Andrew Lochlee No. 282, or any other forum in Scotland where issues are taken seriously suggests that the willingness of Scots to argue their points of view is not just a recently acquired trait or a passing fashion. There is a long and profound heritage of individual worth and expression in Scotland. How richly we would be rewarded if only we could read between the lines of this document and be privileged to share the discussion and debate of Schaw's Masonic assembly of 1598.
In 1598, William Shaw promulgated, as Master of Work, a list of statutes and ordinances to be observed by the Craft in Scotland. This document was published by the Grand Lodge of Scotland with the original spelling in 1953. (6) The 1598 version will present substantial difficulty in comprehension to the American reader. Spelling, therefore, has been modernized here. In addition, Shaw began the first article, "Item First," and each successive article, "Item," without a number. I have taken the liberty to substitute numbers for the "items," supposing that Shaw would do the same thing, could he offer this document today.
The advantage of current spelling to the modern reader is suggested by the first sentence. The original reads, "At Edinburgh the xxviij day of December the zeir of God ImVc four scoir awchtene zeirie."
William Schaw's Statutes
And Ordinances of 1598At Edinburgh the 28th day of December the year of God 1598. The Statutes and Ordinances to be observed by all the Master Masons within the realm set down by William Schaw, Master of Work to His Majesty, and general wardens of the said Craft with the consent of the Masters after specified.
1. That they observe and keep all the good Ordinances set down of before concerning the privileges of their Craft by their predecessors of good memory, and especially that they be true to one another and live charitably together as becomes sworn brethren and companions of Craft.
2. That they be obedient to their Wardens, Deacons, and Masters in all things concerning their craft.
3. That they be honest, faithful, and diligent in their calling and deal uprightly with the masters or owners of the works that they shall take in hand, be it undertaken as a duty, for meat and other consideration, or for weekly wages.
4. That none take upon hand any work great or small which he is not able to perform qualifiedly under the pain of forty pounds money or else the fourth part of the worth and value of the said work and that by and after as appropriate amends and satisfaction to be made to the owners of the work at the sight and discretion of the general Warden, or in his absence, at the sight of the Wardens, Deacons, and Masters of the Sheriffdom where the said work is enterprised and wrought.
5. That no Masters shall take another Master's work over his head after that the first Master has agreed with the owner of the work, either by contract, articles, or verbal conditions, under the pain of forty pounds.
6. That no Master shall take the working of any work that other Masters have worked at, before the time that the first workers be satisfied for the work which they have done, under the pain aforesaid.
7. That there be one Warden chosen and elected each year to have the charge over every Lodge as they are divided particularly and that by the votes of the Masters of the said Lodges and consent of the warden general, if he happens to be present, and otherwise that he be advised that such a Warden is chosen for such a year to the effect that the Warden-general may send such directions to that Warden elected as ordinary business.
8. That no Master shall take any more apprentices than three during his lifetime without a special consent of the whole Wardens, Deacons, and Masters of the Sheriffdom where the aforesaid apprentice that is to be received dwells and remains.
9. That no Master receive any apprentice bound for fewer years than seven at the least and similarly it shall not be lawful to make the said apprentice Brother and Fellow-in-Craft until the time that he has served the space of other seven years after the conclusion of his said apprenticeship without a special licence granted by the Wardens, Deacons, and Masters assembled for that cause and that sufficient trial be taken of the Worthiness, qualifications, and skill of the person that desires to be made Fellow-in-Craft and that under the pain of forty pounds to be uplifted as a pecuniary penalty from the person that is made Fellow-in-Craft against this order, beside the penalties to be set down against his person according to the order of the Lodge where he remains.
10. It shall not be lawful for any Master to sell his apprentice to any other Master nor yet to dispense with the years of his apprenticeship by selling thereof to the apprentice himself under the pain of forty pounds.
11. That no Master receive any apprentice without he signify the same to the Warden of the Lodge where he dwells, to the effect that the said apprentice and the day of his reception may be orderly booked.
12. That no apprentice be entered except by the same order, that the day of their entries may be booked.
13. That no Master or Fellow-in-Craft be received or admitted without the number of six Masters and two entered apprentices, the Warden of that Lodge being one of the said six, and that the day of the receiving of the said Fellow-of-Craft or Master be orderly booked and his name and mark inserted in the said book with the names of his six admittors and entered Apprentices and names of the instructors, that shall be chosen for every person, to be also inserted in their book. Pro viding always that no man be admitted without an assay and sufficient trial of his skill and worthiness in his vocation and craft.
14. That no Master work any Masonic work under charge or command of any other craftsman that takes upon hand or upon himself the working of any Masonic work.
15. That no Master or Fellow-of-Craft receive any cowans to work in his society or company nor send any of his servants to work with cowans under pain of twenty pounds so often as any person offends thereunto.
16. It shall not be lawful for any entered Apprentice to take any other greater task or work upon hand from an owner than will extend to the sum of ten pounds under the pain aforesaid, to wit twenty pounds, and that task being done they shall enterprise no more without license of the Masters or Wardens where they dwell.
17. If any question, strife, or variance shall fall out among any of the Masters, Servants, or entered Apprentices that the parties that fall in question or debate shall signify the cause of their quarrel to the particular Wardens or Deacons of their Lodge within the space of twenty-four hours under the pain often pounds to the effect that they may be reconciled and agreed and that their variance removed by the said Wardens, Deacons, and Masters and if any of the said parties shall happen to remain willful or obstinate, that they shall be deprived of the priviledge of the Lodge and not permitted to work thereat until the time that they shall submit themselves to reason at the sight of their Wardens, Deacons, and Masters as said is.
18. That all Masters enterprizers of works be very careful to see their scaffolds and footgangs surely set and placed to the effect that through their negligence and sloth no hurt or scathe come unto any person that works at the said work under the pain of discharging of them thereafter to work as Masters having charge of any work but shall ever be subject all the rest of their days to work under or with another principal Master having charge of the work.
19. That no Master receive or harbor another Master's Apprentice or Servant that shall happen to run away from his Master's service nor entertain him in his company after that he has gotten knowledge thereof under the pain of forty pounds.
20. That all persons of the Mason's Craft convene in time and place being lawfully warned under the pain of ten pounds.
21. That all the Masters that shall happen to be sent for to any assembly or meeting shall be sworn by their great oath that they shall hide nor conceal no faults or wrongs done by one to another nor yet the faults of wrongs that any man has done to the owners of the works that they have taken in hand so far as they know and that under the pain of ten pounds to be taken up from concealors of the said faults.
22. It is ordained that all these aforesaid penalties shall be lifted and taken up from the offenders and breakers of these ordinances by the Wardens, Deacons, and Masters of the Lodges where the offenders dwell and to be distributed "ad pios usus" according to good conscience by the advice of the aforesaid. And for fulfilling and observing of these ordinances set down, as is said, the whole Masters convened the aforesaid day bind and obligate themselves hereto faithfully and therefore have requested their said Warden general to subscribe their presents with his own hand to the effect that one authentic copy hereof may be sent to every particular Lodge within this realm.
(s) William Schaw Master of Work Comparison of the Regius Poem with this document reveals a remarkable affinity of spirit and intent of fifteen articles and fifteen points of the former with the latter. Both were designed to codify regulation of the stone builders trade. Schaw specified penalties, gave clues as to its provenance, and made no appeal to antiquity, in contrast with the Regius manuscript.
The term, "general Wardens" appears several times. A modern equivalent term would be District (or Provincial) Grand Master, i.e., the supervisor for a particular area. A Warden, assisted by Deacons, was in charge of a Lodge in 1598. There were only two degrees or grades, Entered Apprentice and Fellow-of-Craft or Master. A Master carried out a specific project, assisted by and training apprentices, under the supervision of the Warden of his Lodge.
In item 15, "cowans" are mentioned. Chamers Twentieth Century Dictionary, p. 244, defines cowans as "a drystone-diker (one who builds stone walls without mortar); a mason who never served an apprenticeship; and one who tries to enter a Freemason's Lodge, or the like, surrepticiously."
The Schaw Statues, then, offer a canon of ethics for the Masons in Scotland who raised the magnificent structures of 139 years before the founding of Grand Lodge. Essentially, this is a proclamation of morality. Please note that there are no regulations as to the richness of mortar or the squareness of stones. Instead, human relationships, fairness, equity, and the essential moral qualities of operative Masons are set forth.
William Schaw is principally remembered for these great and important moral lessons. Let us hope that his Masons were respected for practicing his precepts and that we may be remembered for exemplifying in public the moral duties we have been taught in the Lodge.
Footnotes
1. Year Book of the Grand Lodge of Antient Free and Accepted Masons of Scotland, Edinburgh: 1987, p. 50
2. Ibid.
3. Cited, G.G. Coulton, Medieval Faith and Symbolism, p. 125.
4. Ibid.
5. Articles 20 ff.
6. Year Book, p. 91.
7. W. & R. Chambers, Edinburgh: 1952, p. 244.
----o----
Assembly - Feast - Forum 1990
The Annual Assembly - Feast - Forum of The Philalethes Society will feature several firsts. You won't want to miss it.
The date: Friday, February 22, 1991
The time: 6:00 p.m., sharp.
The 1991 Philalethes Society Lecturer: Howard L. Woods
The investment: $24 for prior
registration; $29 thereafter.
Registrations will be accepted at $24 each until February 14, 1991. Checks should be made payable to The Philalethes Society and mailed to: Executive Secretary, PO Box 70, Highland Springs, VA 23075. Tickets will be mailed to the investor.
About the Lecturer:
Howard L. Woods has been the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Arkansas, Prince Hall Affiliation, since 1982. By profession he is a purchasing agent for a real estate company and associate pastor of St. Paul United Methodist Church in Little Rock. He is married to Tollye Gyne, has six daughters, two sons and thirteen grandchildren.
He has served as the presiding officer of all the Masonic bodies of which he is a member. He is an honorary member of several Grand Lodges and bodies, and an honorary citizen of several states. He is a member of many of the organizations affiliated with the black community. He has constantly used as his theme: "Growth Through Education."
A continuing search for truth:
The Philalethes Society has been dedicated to the inexhaustible search for truth since its inception. The pages of The Philalethes are committed to this quest. The Editor and the Executive Board do not agree with everything contained in the articles printed. There are as many points of view as there are writers and readers. Truth, however, cannot be determined unless there is an open forum for the thinking of all segments of our society. About the only Masonic publication in the world where opinions pro and con can be found is The Philalethes.
So it should be with the Annual Assembly of The Philalethes Society. Each Lecturer has brought the truths as he has seen them to the Society's forum. The open discussions that have followed have added to these truths. Because this Assembly is an open function the give and take has been invaluable.
Black Freemasonry in the form exemplified by Prince Hall Freemasonry is older than our country. The history of this organization has been fraught with myths, distortions, lies and half - truths by all sides. Truth has been buried. And there are no guilty or innocent participants. Prejudices and biases, which Freemasons of all colors should abhor, continue to be found on all sides. The Executive Board is aware of this. In an attempt to counteract this, and to continue the search for truth, a top - notch speaker from Prince Hall Freemasonry was invited to be the Lecturer for 1991. Fortunately Howard L. Woods agreed to be that Lecturer. Don't miss him.
----o----
Chas. King Alexander McGaughey, FPS
May 22, 1904 - January 22, 1990
by Allen E. Roberts, FPS
There is no indispensable man, so it is said. This may be partially true. But there is no man who will ever replace Charles K.A. McGaughey. No man will ever match his managerial ability in the thankless job of General Grand Secretary of the General Grand Chapter, Royal Arch Masons, International.
Few, even among the hierarchy, ever fully realized the work behind the scenes performed by McGaughey. He had to keep a multimillion dollar organization alive and well. And he had to do it with pennies. That he did a magnificent job is due to his leadership abilities. His love for his fellow man, despite their frailties, was the secret of his success.
Charlie and I became close friends in the 60's because of our interest in Masonic leadership. It was only because of him that I became a film producer. Only because of him I agreed to produce The Holy Royal Arch of Freemasonry. This led to another career for me. It also continued one of the closest friendships I'll ever have.
Dottie and I were honored to know Charlie's beloved wife, Betty. It was a joy to listen to them discuss the building of their home, almost every brick having been laid by Betty. Although she was crippled by arthritis, no two people were ever more in love. She stood beside him in all of his endeavors.
McGaughey was the spark that kept many of the little bodies attached to Freemasonry alive. He was a member or past officer of all of them. But it was the charitable aspects of Freemasonry to which he devoted his life. The Royal Arch Research program will sorely miss his guiding hand. So will many other similar foundations as well as Masonic bodies.
His Masonic career began on September 14, 1926 when he was Raised in Shelby Lodge No. 20, Indiana. It continued in Kentucky and that jurisdiction enjoyed the benefit of his expertise until his death. He served his Grand Chapter and Grand Commandery for 59 years as Secretary and Recorder. From 1961 until his death he was the General Grand Secretary of the General Grand Chapter.
Because of his work and love for Masonic education he was made a Fellow of The Philalethes Society in 1968. He was one of the original members of the Masonic Brotherhood of the Blue Forget-Me-Not, Masonic educators and writers.
McGaughey was buried in Shelbyville, Indiana; a Masonic memorial service was conducted in Richmond, Kentucky.
----o----
I was disappointed today when I received a great manuscript of 30 single spaced pages. The author was rightfully proud of his efforts and informed me that he wanted it published within the next two issues. I was sorry to do so but I had no choice but to send it back. A manuscript of six double spaced pages will probably get published in two or three issues. A short item of one double spaced page will undoubtedly be used as a filler in the very next issue. The longer the manuscript, the longer the period of time it will take to get it printed. We have only so much space and these long manuscripts in which an author tries to tell us everything he knows, use all of the Masonic cliches he has ever heard of, and fill the balance with literary jargon are usually the last thing to be published. Even when they are good, and many of them are, we can't devote the entire magazine to the work of one author. If you want to see your work in print (and all of us do, or we wouldn't take the time to write it) remember the four words which I put at the head of this column... "Keep It Short, S - - - -."
----o----
by Davy Crockett, MPS
Five years ago, after working as a Marine Engineer for sixteen years, I decided to complete a Masters degree in Education. I quickly became fascinated with the work of Doctor David Ausubel, professor Emeritus, Graduate School and University Center, City University of New York. Ausubel had developed a theory of no-nonsense learning, which he called meaningful learning. Ausubel's work has been studied by Joe Novak, Professor and Chairman of the Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education Department at Cornell University, for the past 25 years. This remarkable system of learning is seriously studied in practically no other part of the United States, but is utilized all over Europe.
When I finished my Graduate work in a small College in Keene, New Hampshire, one of the Professors of my Graduate Committee remarked, "Learning how to learn is an unusual specialty, why don't you write up a paper explaining what it consists of, so that administrative educators will understand your objective?"
I politely acknowledged the remark, thinking to myself, "what the hell is going on here? Educators are teaching yet they do not understand what learning how to learn means?"
The purpose of this paper is to briefly outline Ausubel's theory for the reference of members of our Fraternity.
Meaningful learning simply means this: new information is carefully related to what the learner already knows. It is not random memorization, it is constructing concepts. For example: In Masonry we might begin with the topic Masonic authors, next we divide that subject into major parts. For example, English authors, American authors, and other authors. Then we precisely define each major part. (For example, an English Author may be defined as one who was born, initiated as a Mason and wrote about Masonry from England). Next we divide our definitions into subparticles, such as eighteenth century, nineteenth century, and twentieth century Masons. Eventually we list classifications of philosophers, ritualists, administrators, authors, and form relationships between the various concepts.
Then we organize, and clarify in a chart format the various concepts that we have identified and listed. (Much like a business chart showing the relationships between the President and the various employees.)
So much for a brief look at the process. Now let us analyze what we are doing. We are beginning with an inclusive, or general idea...Masonic authors...then we enter a whole new world. Regardless of whether we discover the concepts on our own or we receive them from other sources, we are given the responsibility to identify how that subject is constructed. I found in my experience with graduate students going through the above exercise using one single page of integrated ideas that these same students would disagree with respect to how the concepts on the printed page in front of them should be arranged in an accurate hierarchy of relationships!
Ausubel explains this phenomena. He devotes powerful emphasis to the word perception. In brief, perception is our awareness (based on our five senses) of seeing, hearing, etc. some stimulus. Ausubel believes that our perception is a theoretical time of extremely short duration (i.e. Iess than micro seconds), and after this awareness occurs it is related to our existing knowledge and the perception is thereby interpreted, based on what we already know!
This may all seem "academic" or stupid to you...but let us look, for example, at the Masonic word truth. I submit that truth and all encompassing knowledge about anything is impossible. We as Masons seek the truth, we approach the truth through effort, but it is apparent to me that only one who is naive believes he has a monopoly on truth about anything. For example, the word light may be perceived differently by a photographer than by a Mason, but does that mean that the Photographer has a monopoly of truth about the word light?
Now comes the problem. If our perception is based on what we know, and what we know is imperfect...it follows rather thematically that our thinking process is flawed from the start.
Of course, in practice we learn from our mistakes by trial and error and as our existing knowledge of what we work at improves...our perception improves... and the infinite process of learning continues.
What does all of this mean? To me it means that meaningful learning is a strategy of approaching truth. It is a road of common sense. A Mason who uses meaningful learning will do a better job of approaching the truth because he recognizes that his thinking is never perfect, he refines his knowledge by clearly understanding similarities and differences between the parts that build knowledge.
In a figurative sense learning is climbing a mountain of infinite height.
In a literal sense learning is study. It requires us to organize and clarify our existing structure of knowledge.
Without a clear and stable structure of knowledge it is not possible to comprehend what we perceive. Without a clear and stable structure of knowledge we look, but we do not understand.
My first paper will be criticized by members of the fraternity. It will be accurately criticized, because experienced students of the Craft have a clearer knowledge of Masonry than a new member, such as me. My question is this: Does that mean I should not attempt to organize what little that I know?...and further, does that mean I should not try to learn from other members of the Craft?
----o----
Available From The Society
The following Masonic periodicals are available on microfiche:
The Philalethes magazine through 1989 at $76.00; all issues of The Master Mason, edited by Joseph Fort Newton for The Masonic Service Association, at $46.00; all issues of The Builder, edited by Harry Leroy Haywood (among others) for the National Masonic Research Society, at $119.00.
Make checks payable to: The Philalethes Society, P.O. Box 70, Highland Springs, VA 23075.
An index for The Philalethes is available at $24.00. Back issues of The Philalethes may be obtained at $4.00 each. Photocopies of articles may be obtained at 25 cents per page.
For the above contact: Harold L. Davidson, FPS, Librarian, 1903 10th St. W. Billings, MT 59102.
To join The Philalethes Society, or subscribe to The Philalethes magazine, send a check for $25 payable to the Society, along with your printed name, address (including zip code), and Lodge, to the Executive Secretary. Life Membership may still be obtained for $250, a real bargain in today's world.
----o----
The International Philalethes Society Presents
The Fall, 1990 Semi-Annual Meetings
"Brethren, Let's do something...for a change!" That's right! And that's the theme for this Fall's Semi-Annual Meetings of the International Philalethes Society. Hosted by the Oklahoma Chapter (only two years old, but full of movers and shakers), the meetings will offer excellent papers and some lively discussion on today's most important issues in the Masonic Fraternity. You won't want to miss it!
Rooms have been set aside at the Oklahoma City Airport Hilton Inn West for Friday and Saturday, September 28 and 29, 1990. The rates are $44 per night. The number is 1-405-947-7681. Just tell them you're with the Philalethes.
The festivities will start Friday evening at 7:00 p.m. with early registration. A Hospitality Room will be open all evening for getting acquainted, meeting old friends, and fraternizing with fellow Masons and their ladies.
The formal meetings begin on Saturday morning at 9:00 a.m. in the Quarter Horse Room. Those coming on Saturday may register any time after 8:00 a.m.
There are some great topics to be cussed and discussed around this year's theme. For those who want the fraternity to do something, for those who want the fraternity to make some changes - or for those who simply want the fraternity to do something...for a change, the meeting is for all of the above!
Here are some samples:
Joe Manning, Jr. MPS, Junior Past Grand Master of the International Supreme Council of the Order of DeMolay and PGM of Oklahoma, will tell us he thinks Freemasonry needs a National cause. He'll tell us why, and what he thinks it should be.
Pete Normand, MPS, Junior Past Master of the Texas Lodge of Research, will present a paper on how Freemasonry can grow by marketing the upper middle class. Marketing? Masonry? What a concept!
Our own Editor, Jerry Marsengill, FPS, will dare to suggest in his paper there is sometimes a difference between qualifications for leadership and the qualifications for a Grand Mastership in many Grand Jurisdictions. Whew. Sidearms will be checked at the door!
These are just a few of the subjects. There are plenty of others. National President John Hilliard, FPS, will give a talk,. So will National 1st Vice President, Wallace McLeod, FPS. We may even debate their points of view. When you're out west, anything is possible.
There's a paper on Freemasonry and Religion - suggesting we ought to respond to our most vocal critics. Another contemporary issue will be discussed in a paper concerning how today's Lodge can prepare for tomorrow's Mason.
And for those who think they are Masonic Scholars, here's the fun part...each paper will be rebutted by an alternative point of view, followed by a general discussion. Everyone can participate! And most probably will!
The Oklahoma Chapter promises an enjoyable day for the ladies, too. The activities are being planned by the wives of the Oklahoma Philalethes members. Ladies activities actually being planned by ladies? This will work!
And, then, Saturday evening, a special treat for everyone. Following a hospitality hour after the day's session, we will all load up in a charter bus and journey to Guthrie, the Territorial Capital of Oklahoma. We will tour the beautiful Scottish Rite Temple at Guthrie, one of the magnificent Masonic edifices in the world. We will then be treated to a Banquet in the Grand Ballroom of the Temple - the hall that housed the Oklahoma Legislature prior to 1911.
Finally, we will reload the buses for the 40 minute trip back to the hotel - full and fulfilled.
Again, you won't want to miss this one. Start making your reservations now by calling the Oklahoma City Airport Hilton. The registration fee for the conference is $40. You may pre-register by making your check payable to the Oklahoma Philalethes and mailing it to James Onkst, Secretary, 5009 Judy Drive, Del City, Oklahoma 73115. As they say in Oklahoma, "Ya All Come and See Us, Ya Hear!"
----o----
by Allen R. Roberts, FPS
Terming the restriction of alcoholic beverages "a relic of an unsuccessful social experiment during the years of the 'prohibition era,"' the Grand Lodge of Washington, on June 20, 1990, rescinded its ban against such legal beverages. Junior Wardens are reminded of their duty "to see that none convert the means of refreshment into intemperance and excess." They are to see that Masonic conduct maintains a high standard. Of even more importance, this Grand Lodge accorded "members of the M.W. Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Washington F. & A. M . and its Constituent Lodges the mutual right to visit our Grand Lodge and Constituent Lodges." This is subject to the same rights being accorded by the latter. Brotherhood in action!
***
Another Editor/Writer is leaving the educational scene. Charles R. Glassmire, FPS, for health reasons will no longer edit The Maine Mason. He founded it in 1972 while he was Grand Master and nurtured it through the years. His editorial work earned him the title of Fellow of The Philalethes Society. His work as Editor, more than any other of his Masonic activities, earned him the respect of Freemasons throughout the world. His editorial pen will be missed. The past five years have been disastrous for the Masonic literary scene. Over a dozen writers/authors/editors have been lost. Sadly they aren't being replaced. Could one of the stumbling blocks be what I said it was in 1962--the tight purse strings embraced by the Masonic leadership? Thanks for the past, Charlie. Let's look forward to the future.
* * *
John J. Robinson, the non-Mason (at the moment) author of Born in Blood, highly praised Freemasonry. More important he told the truth about its principles and teachings. One fellow, a non-Mason, who has read extensively about the Craft, and whose opinion of it hadn't been too high, wrote Robinson: "The last chapter of your book completely changed my mind on how I viewed the organization. It should be read to every member, and for that matter, in every church in the world." This gentleman is now a subscriber to The Philalethes. Incidentally, Born in Blood is available from Anchor Communications, PO Box 70, Highland Springs, VA 23075, for $16.75 postpaid.
* * *
David O. Johnson, MPS, writing in The Oregon Scottish Rite Freemason as SGIG, is concerned. He says organizations such as Rotary train their officers before they assume their duties. But in Freemasonry, he notes, "few, if any, of us who have ever held a position of Masonic leadership have been required to receive training or instruction as a prerequisite to holding office! We are appointed, or elected, for some perceived sense of leadership quality, and then left to our own deserts to succeed or fail. How can we expect to be successful without proper instruction in the elements of administration and supervision?" A good question that deserves an answer.
* * *
The Indiana Freemason reports Bartimaeus Lodge, U.D. is the only such Lodge in the world. It was founded in 1962 only to confer degrees on men with physical handicaps. On April 14, 1990 it raised its one hundredth candidate.
* * *
Francis G. Paul, SGC of the SR, NMJ, wrote in The Northern Light: "...we must never lose sight of the fact that the primary goal of Freemasonry in raising Master Masons is to challenge men to achieve moral and ethical excellence in life. This is why the three degrees of Symbolic Masonry are the bedrock of Freemasonry." And: "...It is what's inside a man that determines how he thinks and acts every day of his life. And that's what our fraternity is all about. We must never allow ourselves to forget that it is the Masonic message, planted deep within a man, that makes him a Mason. Not attending meetings. Not holding an office. Not having accolades piled upon him. We are concerned about how he lives out on Main Street. . . "
* * *
Interesting. News reports from all over tell us the hierarchy of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, commonly known as Mormonism, has made many changes in the ritual. Most reports try to compare much of the church ritual with Masonic ritual. And they could be partially correct! In 1827, when Joseph Smith found golden tablets (which no one else has ever seen), Freemasonry was under attack by religious, political and radical weirdos. Its purported degrees were being mimicked in public squares, and probably barrooms in the east. In spite of distortions, even the most fanatic opponents could find gems amidst the trash portrayed by the fakers. These gems could easily find their way into the making of an excellent religion. And insofar as I know, Mormonism is a good religion.
* * *
Carl L. Sitter, MPS, a past president of Virginia Chapter of The Philalethes Society, is a recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor. He's a retired Marine colonel who earned the award for action in Korea. On the congressional Memorial Day of 1990 The Richmond News Leader carried on its editorial page a portion of a speech he made concerning this medal during a meeting of Vietnam veterans. He covered its history from 1861, actually going back to George Washington and the War for American Independence. He said 3,417 Medals of Honor have been awarded.
The Pennsylvania Freemason informs us that the Grand Lodge awarded PGM William A. Carpenter, MPS, its Franklin Medal shortly before his death. He had been a tower of strength in his Grand Lodge since 1953 when he served as Master of Chester Lodge No. 236. For 25 years he served the Educational Committee (misnamed "Masonic Culture"). He founded the Freemason while serving as Librarian. For five years he was the Grand Secretary and then elected to the line, becoming Grand Master in 1984 . He won renown as a speaker and writer. He is survived by his wife of more than 50 years, Dorothy Roberts "Wally" Carpenter.