Contents
PRESIDENTS CORNER 1995 Annual Assembly, Feast and Forum
NORTH AMERICA'S 'MOST MASONIC' POSTAGE STAMPS From the Editor’s Desk
Laurels and Darts Letters to the Editor
An Owed to the Spelling Checker the philalethes lecture
Strange But True MEXICAN GRAND MASTERS
In Memoria James D. Carter, FPS 1907-1994 FEMININE FREEMASONRY AND CO-MASONRY
Masonic Writers' Creed The Executive Board of The Philalethes Society
EXPORT FREEMASONRY Rule of St. Benedict and the Philosophy of Masonry
THE TOMORROW OF FREEMASONRY The Philalethes Society Does It Again
the philalethes
The Journal of Masonic Research and Letters
WEBSITE URL http://www.gryffin.com/fiat_lux
Nelson King, FPS Editor
2 Knockbolt Crescent (416) 293-8071
Agincourt, Ontario FAX (416) 293-8634
Canada, M1S 2P6 E-mail: nking@shaw.wave.ca
or 71202.22@compuserve.com
OFFICERS
Forrest D. Haggard, FPS President
6815 W. 78th Terrace
Overland Park, KS 66204 (913) 642-5519
Royal C. Scofield, FPS 1st Vice President
655 W. Maryland Ave.
Sebring, OH 44672 216/938-6240
Robert G. Davis FPS 2nd Vice President
P.O. Box 70
Guthrie, OK 73044 (405)-282-2037
Allen E Roberts, FPS Executive Secretary
P.O. Box 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
Robert V. Osborne, FPS
Robert L Dillard Jr. FPS
Bruce H. Hunt, FPS
Allen E. Roberts, FPS
John Mauk Hilliard, FPS
Wallace MacLeod, FPS
CONTENTS
The President's Corner
by Forrest Haggard, FPS
Annual Assembly, Feast & Forum a Success
North America's "Most Masonic" Postage Stamps by Christopher L. Murphy
From the Editor's Desk
by Nelson King, FPS
Darts and Laurels
Letters to the Editor
Change - The Six Letter, "Four Letter" Word!
by Robert Q Davis, FPS, 2nd Vice President
Mexican Grand Masters and Presidents York, Scottish and Plain Vanilla
by Paul Rich MPS and Guillermo de los Reyes
In Memoriam - James D. Carter, FPS
The Rites and Lodges of Feminine Freemasonry and Co-masonry
by Michael L. Segall, MPS
Executive Board Report
by Alien E Roberts, FPS
Export Freemasonry
by John J. Olk, MPS
The Tomorrow of Freemasonry
by Edward Struble, MPS
The Philalethes Society Does It Again
Through Masonic Windows
by Allen E Roberts, FPS
ON THE COVER
The collage of colorful postage stamps on our cover is a sampling of the many United States and Canadian postage stamps which may be connected with the Masonic Order. Among those stamps illustrated are what many Masonic philatelists would consider the ``most Masonic" stamps issued by these countries. These particular stamps are discussed in an article by Christopher L. Murphy featured in this months issue. The hobby of collecting postage stamps which may be related to Freemasonry is called Masonic Philately
----o----
by Forrest D. Haggard FPS
It was through my presidency of the "World Convention of Churches of Christ, Disciple of Christ, Christian Church" that I become involved with the wonderful people of the Blue Mountains of Jamaica. In those Mountains the United Church has a private High School; Oberlin High where in 1992 they dedicated the 3.5 million [Jamaican dollars] Haggard Family Medical and Dental Clinic. Teams of volunteers, from many countries and areas, volunteer their services at that clinic. This last February Mrs. Haggard and I were in a group of 24 workers [medical, dental and construction] going to Jamaica to service the satellite clinics and open up a new wing of this expanding mission. In the group was Robert L. Tomlinson Jr. MPS and President of the Jerry Marsengill Chapter. He headed up the construction crew of people from Oklahoma, Nebraska, Missouri, and Kansas.
For sometime I have wanted to visit one of the regular Lodges on the Island. [Irish Constitution, Scottish Constitution, or English Constitution]. Nelson King FPS [Editor] had acquainted me with William J. Lumsden, Past Depute Grand Master, Jamaica and the Bahamas [SC]. Through Bro. Lumsden I learned of a once ever event: the Constituting of a Provincial Grand Lodge [IC] in Jamaica, which coincided with our visit. I was invited and asked Bro. Tomlinson to accompany me. The five Jamaican Irish Craft Lodges were the founders. In attendance were some five hundred Masons including Grand Officers from the English and Scottish Constitutions as well as from Ireland. It was a GRAND EVENT, highlighting the reality of Masonic Unity.
I was surrounded by Masonic Leaders who said: "How do we deal with the religious right who have invaded our countries, via satellite TV, with their bigotry, prejudices and lies and now attack Freemasonry? Why do American Grand Lodges not allow other Grand Jurisdictions to have Lodges in their geographic territories? Glad you are finally seeing the Light about Prince Hall.We have, for years, worked together with them. How did the Shrine gain control of Freemasonry in the USA? We hear you have so many wanting to join the Craft that you have "classes" of several hundred men getting all their degrees in one day!" Membership in the Craft in Jamaica is a lengthy and involved process.
The Masons I met were all quality leaders either in a profession, education, commerce or government. I began to understand the carefulness they exhibit before allowing entrance for membership. Masonry in Jamaica is EXPENSIVE, LIMITED AND VALUED. Their concept of the totality of the group supporting and utilizing the limited facilities is important for their well being. While many of us are struggling to bring in numbers, they struggle with maintenance of quality. One last thought: It was the first time Bro. Tomlinson and I can remember being in a group of some five hundred Masons where we did not know a single man and where our race, skin color and Masonic understandings were in the minority. And yet we were IMMEDIATELY AT HOME AND AT EASE IN GREAT MASONIC FELLOWSHIP. We might want to do some research on "THAT without which Freemasonry cannot exist."
----o----
1995
Annual Assembly, Feast and Forum
a Success
Two hundred Freemasons and their ladies enjoyed a hearty dinner on Friday, February 24, 1995, at the Hotel Washington. It was a continuation of Masonic development that began 40 years earlier, and which has continued every year since 1955. At that time The Philalethes Society and the Allied Masonic Degrees met in the Statler Hotel. In 1959 they moved to the Hotel Washington where they have remained to the present. Not even blizzards have stopped the Society from transmitting Masonic information during these meetings.
Those in attendance represented England, France, Italy, and several jurisdictions in the United States. Several representatives of Prince Hall Masonry and The Phylaxis Society added to the festivities. Philalethes members from the Masonic Forum on CompuServe added their expertise.
The annual affair was opened with words of welcome by the President, Forrest D. Haggard. He presented the first toast, "To the United States of America." The invocation was presented by Pierre "Pete" Normand, Jr., MPS. Throughout the meal, which featured beef brochette, toasts were offered under the leadership of Royal C. Scofield, FPS, First Vice President. These toasts included: "To all free countries" by Robert L. Tomlinson, MPS; "To all Grand Lodges" by Duane L. Anderson, MPS; "To all appendant bodies" by Ralph Hulquist, MPS; "To our Philalethes Society" by Wallace McLeod, FPS-PPres.; "To all Freemason" by Royal C. Scofield, FPS.
The Executive Secretary reported on the actions of the Executive Board. Among other things, he urged the members to add at least one new member during the year. He asked them not to be "selfish," but to inform their Lodge Brethren of the many benefits to be found in the Philalethes. (Also see the report of the actions of the Executive Board.)
The President presented a certificate to Richard S. Sagar naming him a Fellow of the Society. He also presented the Awards of Merit approved by the Board. Nelson King, FPS, was awarded the Certificate of Literature for an article he wrote prior to his selection as Editor. The President then introduced Robert G. Davis, FPS, Second Vice President, as the Philalethes Lecturer for 1995. Brother Davis spoke on "Change: A Six Letter -Four Letter Word." (See a record of this lecture in this issue.) He received a deserved standing ovation at the conclusion.
A panel from the Executive Board answered many questions, some of them heated, from the attendees. Interestingly, no one, including the ladies, left until the President had to call a halt.
The next general meeting will be held on September 16, 1995 in Kansas City for a Semi-Annual meeting under the sponsorship of the Jerry Marsengill Chapter of The Philalethes Society.
----o----
NORTH AMERICA'S 'MOST MASONIC' POSTAGE STAMPS
The Blue Friar Lecture of 1995
by Christopher L. Murphy
Masonic Philately, or the collecting of postage stamps that may be associated with the Masonic Order, goes back to the early 1930's. Since that time, hundreds of United States and Canadian stamps have been identified as having Masonic connections.
For convenience, these Masonic stamps, as it were, are classified as follows:
CLASS 1. Stamps issued for a Masonic purpose
CLASS 2. Stamps showing a person who was (or is) a Freemason
CLASS 3. Stamps showing objects directly connected with a Freemason
CLASS 4. Stamps commemorating events in which a Freemason played a major role
CLASS 5. Stamps designed by a Freemason
CLASS 6. Stamps inadvertently showing Masonic symbols
Unfortunately, neither the United States nor Canada has issued a Class 1 Masonic stamp. Many other countries, however, have issued them, as shown by the adjacent Philippine example. And these stamps are highly prized by Masonic collectors.
Masonic collectors in North America, therefore, who wish to specialize on their own countries' stamps, must be content with stamps that fall into Classes 2 to 6. Nevertheless, this condition makes one look harder for applicable stamps and some highly unusual Masonic connections have surfaced. From my studies, there are nine stamps that top the list.
1. A Newfoundland stamp issued in 1857 is designed after a Royal Arch Masonic apron. The apron belonged to Brother Thomas Dundas, the second Earl of Zetland, who was Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England from 1844 to 1870.
2. A Newfoundland stamp issued in 1910 shows King James I who arranged for the English translation of the bible, which we all know as the King James Version. There is evidence James I was a member of the "Lodge of Scoon and Perth" in Scotland. Our Masonic Bibles are the King James version so every North American lodge has this brother's name within its walls.
3. A United States stamp issued in 1939 shows the inauguration of Brother George Washington as first president of the United States. Brother Washington is taking his oath on a Masonic Bible which belongs to St. John's Lodge No. 1, New York City. How this Bible found its way to the inauguration has become a matter for romantic speculation. There is no question, however, that it was the Bible used. The stamp itself, was petitioned by the Masonic Stamp Club of New York in 1938. At that time Brother Franklin D. Roosevelt was president of the United States and also a Masonic Stamp Club member.
4. A United States stamp issued in 1928 shows Brother George Washington kneeling in prayer at Valley Forge. The Masonic association with this act is very strong as all Freemasons realize. The stamp design was selected by Brother Roger S. Regar who was with the post office at that time and who later served as the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia.
5. Canada's first postage stamp issued in 1851 was designed by Brother Sandford Fleming. The stamp shows a rising sun in the background which has a sun face, a well known Masonic symbol.
6. A United States stamp issued in 1932 showing Brother George Washington was designed from a pastel portrait of Washington wearing Masonic Royal Arch regalia. The portrait, which belongs to Alexandria Lodge in Virginia, was created from life by W. Williams. The stamp designers omitted the regalia in the stamp design. Nevertheless, the United States Post Office acknowledges the source of the design.
7. A United States stamp issued in 1985 shows Brother Frederick Auguste Bartholdi with his creation, the Statue of Liberty, in the background. This stamp is unusual because it cuts across two Masonic stamp classifications.
8. A United States stamp issued in 1974 shows Brother Harry S. Truman, 33rd president of the United States. Brother Truman is the only Mason shown on a North American stamp who was a Knight Templar, 33rd Degree A.A.S.R. Mason and a past grand master.
9. The United States first postage stamp, issued in 1847 shows Brother Benjamin Franklin who did more for Freemasonry in America than any other individual. It is unlikely the brethren who started Masonic philately realized just how many famous Freemasons there were in North America, let alone how deeply Masonic tradition and ideals are etched into our history. Masonic philatelist in both the United States and Canada continue to uncover little "stamp secrets," which I am certain will soon swell the list of the "Most Masonic" and provide us with yet further insights into our past.
----o----
We note with sadness the demise of yet another Masonic Publication. The American Masonic Review, has ceased publication due to a lack of subscribers. Masonic Publications cannot survive without you, the subscribers. The Philalethes accepts no advertising and has no source of income other than your membership. At $25.00 per year [plus $5.00 for a new membership] this has to be one of the best bargains in the world. Yet how many of us are the only member of the Society in their Lodge? How many of us have expanded the knowledge of a new Mason by giving him either a membership or encouraging him to join. Membership is the life line of any organization, and we need new members. Will you help?
----o----
Periodically your Editor will be awarding DARTS or LAURELS, with respect to items that come across his desk. Please note that choice of either a DART or a LAUREL expresses only the opinion of the Editor, and does not reflect the official position of The Philalethes Society.
oOo
Laurels to The Freemasons of British Columbia. Since April of 1989 the Freemasons of British Columbia have provided free computer dispatched transportation for cancer patients to and from the province's cancer clinics. As of March of this year they have 11 vehicles on the road and more than 250 Masonic volunteers. All of the vehicles, their maintenance up-keep, the computers, dispatching and drivers are provided by the B.C. Masons. In the city of Vancouver 45 to 75 patients are picked up each and every day.
oOo
Laurels to BC PICTURES for producing a multimedia, interactive CD-Rom titled "The Search for Ancient Wisdom " which includes many references to Freemasonry. Click a button and you are inside the Lodge room at Black Creek Pioneer Village, The George Washington Memorial, or the Library of a Knight Templar. All references to Freemasonry are shown in a most positive manner. The CD-Rom disk includes a full color 100 page book, over an hour of Quicktime video, 3D Graphics/Animation, Audio Music and Text. For more information on this CD-Rom contact Robert Connolly, BC Pictures, 245 Britannia Road East, Mississauga Ontario Canada, L4Z 2Y7.
----o----
Dear Brother King,
I enjoyed very much the last issue of The Philaletes (Vol. XLVII No. 6). The articles about the Templars and Freemasonry and "Brotherhood in Action" both deserve high praise. I would like to comment about two articles that appeared in that issue.
First about R. W. Bro. Leon Zeldis' article "The Symbolism of Stone". I know Bro. Zeldis personally and greatly admire his abilities and his good natured friendliness. His learnedness and breadth of vision are apparent from every sentence in the article, and make it a masterpiece to be enjoyed by all. However, the article does contain one fallacy of logic: The case presented for the-importance of stone in western civilisation is very strong indeed, almost to the point of compelling one to agree with Bro. Zeldis' statement that "... the stonemason's trade, and his material - stone -have such profound, far-reaching and universal significance that the choice (to base Freemasonry on the builder's trade, his tools and legends) was not only justified but inevitable". "Justified" it certainly was, but "inevitable"? I believe that as strong a case - if not a stronger one -can be presented for a choice of metal working (goldsmithing being the obvious choice here), wood working (carpentry and housing), bread baking and seafaring. I would've expected to see a comparative study of these cases alongside that of stone and stonemasonry before such a far reaching conclusion is being offered for consideration.
An article that deserves a more comprehensive commentary is "Men, Women and Freemasonry" by MPS John H. Yingling. The article's ultra conservative point of view is almost enraging. I had to read it three times before I realized how utterly unfair and unacceptable it is. But first let me concede three points to the writer:
First, It is true that our modern society is very sick. The symptoms are many: illiteracy among college graduates, mental, verbal and physical violence, the disappearance of innocence, rampant crime and lenient justice systems, sexual promiscuity, disrespect to one's seniors and fellows, abuses of freedom and law - the list is practically infinite. Most of these symptoms can be attributed to the break-down of traditional social structures during the last fifty years. But let us remember that the breakdown is at fault - not the members of either gender that had to survive in a changing environment. Their unhappiness and disturbed world view are results, not causes.
Secondly, Freemasonry does teach us the lessons of morality that belong to the world of "Gentlemanly Virtues" -the virtues one expected from an English gentleman at the height of the Victorian era and that Bro. Rudyard Kipling so wonderfully laid out in his poem "If-". But are these virtues purely male ones? I think not. Every person - male or female - can be brought up into a wholesome person that is discrete, courageous, obedient and respectful. Gender plays a very small part - if any - in this. Stoutness of mind and soul, stability of education and conduct are the deciding factors.
The third and last point I must concede to Bro. Yingling is that in my obligation as a Worshipful Master of my lodge I accepted the postulate that no man or body of men may make any changes in the ancient landmarks of our order, nor change anything which is essential in its character. I agreed to that then and I accept it today. But what about new interpretations of these landmarks? Are they as restricted as one may be inclined to assume? I doubt that - but more about this final point later.
Freemasonry is a system of ritualistic experiences that are meant to strengthen the members in their moral struggle with the daily temptations that beseech us. Through the sharing of these experiences with our fellow masons we strengthen one another in our constant search for the moral Holy Grail. Are we to deny the ability to acquire such moral instruction from our loved ones?
The economic reality of modern life is such that in most homes the second income provided by the work of the woman of the household is essential for day to day survival. The woman of today is as much a provider of daily bread as is the man. She has an equal share in producing the income, and rightfully she demands an equal share in the work put into the maintainance of the home, an equal share in the ability to enjoy the camaraderie of one's peres, the moral benefits of belonging to an order like ours. It is not a feminist statement - it is a realistic view of our world. With all due honesty - can we deny our partners of the female gender their chance of moral self-improvement? By what right can we do that?
One of our ancient landmarks describes the qualifications for candidacy: "a man - unmutilated, free-born, and of mature age". Does each and everyone of us fulfill all these demands? Do we all possess our full natural teeth - no caps, no dental cavities filled? Do we all enjoy perfect sight - no contact lenses nor glasses? Are all of us so lucky that none of us had to go through surgery? Or do we see today an occasional brother in a wheelchair (including one past Grand Master of New Jersey), another a victim of a car accident shy a limb or a part thereof? In aide tymes a candidate had to be whole in body to assure that he'll be able to perform the tasks of an operative mason. Nowadays his mental health and capacities are the important factors - so that he'll be able to benefit from our moral teachings. Therefore modern Freemasonry re-interpreted this demand of the ancient landmark in a new manner.
I believe that it won't be long before we re-interpret the "man" qualification as a "person" one. And with the advent of legally imposed equality of the sexes we may have our hands bent for us to do so before the year 2015. So we would better prepare: let us rework our ritual so that good and decent women will find it acceptable and not indecent or degrading to join our ranks - and please note: by " good and decent women" I refer to our mothers, wives and daughters. Let us rework our world picture into one that beholds favourably good and decent women entering into our lodges being accepted in them with all the love and affection that are their just dues. Let us prepare with joy in our hearts - for they are our loved ones.
Sincerely and fraternally,
Ron Berger, MPS
Dear Bro. King
I was shocked to read Bro. Yingling's misogynistic article "Men, Women and Freemasonry" in this magazine. I had always thought that The Philalethes Magazine being the official journal of the Society would impose strict levels of research integrity upon articles that it published. Although you did publish a disclaimer that this scurrilous article does not "necessarily" reflect the views of the Society my problem with it is that if it reflects the editorial standards of the magazine as to what should be published that those editorial standards are themselves questionable.
The piece is rife with unsupported claims as well as claims presented as factual which are clearly open to argument. To totally refute the article on a point-by-point basis would require of me to write almost a counter-article and I do not wish to waste too much of my time on this. The fact of the matter is that the article is just as wrong-headed as if you had published one titled "Those Black Brethren - They Sure Can Dance!" and had prefaced it with the same silly disclaimer.
Let's just hit a few of Bro. Yingling's lowest high points:
"Children deprived of maternal love are damaged and become misfits in Society. "
This would be news to the many men who were raised by their fathers and who hold places of high esteem in the world. I point out to our esteemed Editor that this does not say that "Some children..." It makes a bold statement of editorially-injected fact which almost every reader can instantly come up with three or four or many cases in which the fact is demonstrability untrue. If I wrote an article which said that "Masons are Shiners" would you correct that to "Some Masons are Shiners" or would you let the statement stand?
The fact of the matter is that some children deprived of a mother's love, and some children deprived of a father's love, and some children deprived of both can become misfits. It is also true that many men and women deprived of any subset or all of the above have become excellent members of Society. Indeed, most respected sociologists today blame many of the ills of the Ghettoized socioeconomic classes on the absence of the father in the home.
Bro. Yingling spends a good part of his article detailing how the lunatic fringe of the Women's Movement considers all forms of vaginal penetration to be rape. Certainly one could take any aspect of human life and politics and find a lunatic fringe within it espousing equally stupid viewpoints. First he says that this is what it is, a "lunatic fringe" and then in the same two paragraphs the "them" suddenly metamorphoses from being a "lunatic fringe" to being a "juggernaut. " The logic is internally inconsistent. Again, the point is not to try to dispute these things which are impossible to defend in an article but to ask why in the world the Editor would allow such flawed logic to appear in the official publication of an historical and Masonic research association?
Bro Yingling maintains that "being strong, brave, just, honest, generous, prudent, temperate and loving" is "not a template for femininity. " One wonders if Bro. Yingling only knows women who are weak, cowardly, despotic, greedy, foolish, extravagant and filled with hate? I do know many men like that, and some are even Masons, and I do know many women like that – but, again, where is the editorial integrity in offering such an opinion to the readership? I wonder how that would be footnoted?
The point here is that many of our Brethren probably enjoyed reading Bro. Yingling's misogynistic, unsupportable, uncharitable, untrue and I believe unMasonic article. I suppose publishing such tripe is the equivalent of any medium pandering to the lowest common denominator of the Society they serve - but I expected more from The Philalethes Magazine. I expected scholarship and leadership.
This article was as scholarly as any graffiti you could find in a bus station restroom. As far as leadership - lead, move or get out of the way and if Masons today think of this as being leadership then our days in front of Society may well be numbered.
Sincerely and fraternally,
Neil Shapiro, MPS
----o----
An Owed to the Spelling Checker
I have a spelling checker It came with my PC
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot sea.
Eye ran this poem threw it,
Your sure reel glad two no.
Its vary polished in it's weigh
My checker tolled me sew.
A checker is a bless sing
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.
Each frays come posed up on my screen
Eye trussed too bee a joule
The checker pour o'er every word
To cheque sum spelling rule
Be fore a veiling checkers
Hour spelling mite decline,
And if were lacks or have a laps,
We wood be maid to wine.
Butt now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
Their are know faults with in my cite,
Of non eye am a wear.
Now spelling does knot phase me
It does knot bring a tier.
My pay purrs awl due glad den
With wrapped words fare as hear.
To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should be proud.
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaws are knot aloud.
Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays
Such soft ware four pea seas.
And why I brake in two averse
By righting want too pleas.
- Jerry Zar, Dean of the Graduate School Northwestern Illinois University
Downloaded by Richard W. Lodge, MPS from the Foreign Language Forum to the Masonic Forum on CompuServe.
----o----
Given at the 1995 Annual Assembly, Feast & Forum
CHANGE THE SIX LETTER, "FOUR LETTER" WORD! The 1995 Annual Assembly, Feast and Forum Lecture by Robert G. Davis, FPS, 2nd Vice President
"Tellson's . . . by Temple Bar was an old-fashioned place, even in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty. It was very dark, very ugly, very incommodious. It was an old-fashioned place, moreover, in the moral attribute that the partners in the House were proud of its smallness, proud of its darkness, proud of its ugliness, proud of its incommodiousness. They were even boastful of its eminence in those particulars, and were fired by an express conviction that, if it were less objectionable, it would be less respectable. Tellson's (they said) wanted no elbowroom, Tellson's wanted no light, Tellson's wanted no embellishment . . . "
"Thus it had come to pass, that Tellson's was the triumphant perfection of inconvenience . . . "
" . . . Cramped in all kinds of dim cupboards and hutches at Tellson's, the oldest of men carried on the business gravely. When they took a young man into Tellson's London house, they hid him somewhere till he was old. They kept him in a dark place, like a cheese, until he had the full Tellson flavour and blue-mould upon him. Then only was he permitted to be seen, spectacularly poring over large books, and casting his breeches and gaiters into the general weight of the establishment."
My brethren, it occurs to me that you may have wondered if this quotation from Charles Dicken's "Tale of Two Cities," was talking about a bank (which it was) or a Masonic Lodge!
Because, in many ways, it tells us about the perceptions and the values of the men who ran the bank. They did not care about the needs of the general society, or the needs and convenience of their clients, or even the people who were their employees. Their only concern was to keep things from changing. What was good enough for their fathers was good enough for them -even though their world trembled on the edge of revolution.
It seems to me the directors at Tellson's were very much like the power structure in many Masonic lodges today -out of touch with their world -and breathing deeply of the dust. The central question that I want to raise and discuss this evening is this: What is Freemasonry in the context of how Masons (and society) perceive it, and has this perception changed over time?
It's an important question because, if the fraternity's perception of itself and the public's perception of it indeed changes over time (and my premise is that it does), then perhaps one of the keys to Freemasonry's survivability is that it can only thrive when it moves on a path which is compatible with the perceptions and expectations of the general public. And, could it be that Freemasonry thrives best when it is in a state of change?
So, let's look at a bit of history in relation to this idea.
If you were to ask the Mason in the 19th century who the Masons were, he would tell you they were a great philosophic order. He would probably say that the Masons had taken simple lessons in morals and ethics, and developed these as guides for their members' personal and spiritual growth. And truer words could not have been spoken. Because the philosophic and religious undertones which found their way into the several Masonic lectures during the very late 18th, and early 19th century era, were fully developed and interpreted around the turn of this century by men like Newton, Pike, Waite, Haywood, Vail, Buck, Pound, and Mackey -all 19th or early 20th century Masonic writers.
And if you were to ask the man on the street who the Masons of the same period were, he would say, "Oh, they are a great secret society -perhaps the father of all such societies." And again, truer words could not have been spoken.
We had a match. At the turn of this century, and well into its first quarter, it was popular to belong to secret societies. It was a fellow of questionable class indeed who did not belong to at least two or three such groups. And the great 19th century deist religious movement, along with the philosophic debates which centered around morals and ethics were the themes that excited the Victorian mind.
But, Freemasonry was around before it was popular to be a secret society. If you would ask the Mason in the late 18th century who the Masons were, he would probably tell you they were the lecturists -a group of men whose intellectual and creative abilities molded the basic tenets of the Craft into a greater and richer source of wisdom and understanding. And, truer words could not have been spoken. Led by the Englishmen Calcott, Hutchinson, Dunckerly, Oliver, and William Preston, and expanded by American, Thomas Smith Webb, Freemasonry of this period evolved from the simplistic ritual stages of the early speculative days to a system of formal lectures which have not been equaled or bettered in 225 years.
And, as for the man on the street, he would tell you that Masonry in the latter part of the 18th century was a social club for gentlemen which exacted political and social influence in many endeavors of public and private life. Once again, his words would be true. Certainly, in the early days of America, the constitutional principles and legislative assemblies had more to do with the practices and the ideals of the Masonic lodges than in any other group not organized for partisan purposes. In Europe, civil society was invented in the new enclaves of sociability of which Freemasonry was the most avowedly constitutional and aggressively civic. What was true for the private societies of the 18th century was also characteristic of Freemasonry.
Again, we had a match. It was popular to be involved with an organization that had a unifying language of power, that demonstrated ordered behavior, and with an overlaying ideology of improvement in things moral and material. Ethics in tandem with self-interest. It was a powerful idea, indeed!
But, Freemasonry was around before it was popular to belong to a formalized school of ritual, or even a social club for gentlemen with political and civic interests. If you would ask the Mason of the late 17th or early 18th century who the Masons were, he would likely tell you, "Oh, they were the merchants, traders, and artisans who met for the purpose of mutual protection, economic security, and socializing among the brethren." To the man on the street, this would have been loosely translated as a group of men of a somewhat rowdy nature who met in organized drinking clubs above the taverns and inns on a regular basis for the purpose of fellowship, feasting, and conviviality. Again, both would have been correct in their assessment.
Any brother who has looked into the Masonry of this period can tell you that there was no rigidly adopted ritual. In fact, prior to the second decade of the 18th century, there is not a single reference to Masonic degrees in any minutes of any lodge in existence. A young man who aspired to be a Mason was simply made one, usually in the anteroom adjoining the lodge. The process was not much more than the simple taking of the oath, along with learning the "passes" and signs. There was no memory work, no formal instruction, and little lodge protocol. The process of becoming a Mason was short. Very little was communicated in the way of moral and intellectual truths. Lectures were a matter of each brother's personal knowledge about the history of the "Old Charges", the symbolism of the emblems, and the several moral virtues. The Master of the lodge would usually ask the questions, and the brethren would answer them in a round-robin fashion, with the candidate listening in. Candidates were simply "entered" on the rolls. And the men met more for fellowship and the security of fraternity than for intellectual improvement.
Once again, we had a match. Membership was available, on recommendation, to all sorts and manners of men -all of good repute, sharing the benefits of fellowship and brotherhood together -with simple entrance ceremonies, and few secrets. It was hard not to be enamored by the opportunity.
Of course, Freemasonry was around before it was popular to be a social club. If you were to ask the Mason of the late 16th and 17th century who the Masons were, he might tell you they were the men of the operative craft, or builders, guilds, formed to provide mutual protection and job security for their respective trades. Or, depending on where you were geographically situated, you might also be told the Masons were the scholars, teachers, mathematicians, scientists, geometricians, astronomers--all learned men -men of knowledge -formed together to teach and educate--to bring enlightenment to the non-ecclesiastical world. And the man on the street would have routinely noticed and recognized the guildsmen, or perhaps even been associated with the related educational movement. It was revolutionary in its mission, and reforming in its political structure.
Again, we had a match. An organization representing the economic strength of the culture, in tandem with men determined to bring knowledge and enlightenment to families of the day. Once again, Masonry was a unique and respected movement.
Now, having taken an almost embarrassingly general trip through our fraternity's past, let us now move back to the present for a moment, and visit the Masonry of the 20th century.
If you were to ask the Mason of today who the Masons are, he would probably tell you (if he was inclined to say anything at all) that the Masons are a great charitable institution--giving away some $1.4 million each day. And, truer words could not be said. If we have done anything at all in this century, we can certainly say we have taken the old traditional ideal of a personal, private, Masonic charity, and turned it into a major, public institution of philanthropy, aimed primarily at crippled children and burn victims, literacy, sight improvement, and medical research.
But, as for the man on the street, if he was asked today who the Masons are, he would probably say, "I don't have the foggiest idea. Aren't they some kind of cult?"
Whoa! Wait a minute. What's going on here? What's happened? Isn't there a match, like we found in the other 400, or so, years?
Of course, there is--but the public doesn't know it! And the key to our survivability depends on our own understanding of the reasons why this is true.
You see, throughout our long and illustrious history, Masonry has always been in the process of change. It has been a different organization in every century. And sometimes it has gone through more than one metamorphosis in the same generation. It is a different organization today than it was 50 years ago. It will be a different organization in the next century than it is today. It has always been popular and/or respected by the culture because it has always adapted to the expectations and social mores of that same culture. It has retained its important values in each generation, of course, but it has always added to the institution the very best of what each generation brought to it.
Freemasonry was the enlightenment in the 17th century. But, it did offer mutual protection and economic security for its members, as well. And, it kept that, and added the important ingredient of socialability during the next century. It kept that, and added the important element of philosophical and intellectual improvement during the 19th century. And kept that, and then added its great charitable influence during this century. And it has kept that.
So, what is wrong? Why aren't we still growing instead of declining at the fastest rate in our history?
The reason is that, for the first time in our history, we have let the culture in which we live pass us by.
Now, how did this happen? I would submit to you that the dynamics began to change after WW II. For the first time Masons stopped thinking at a time when the rest of the culture began a significant self-evaluation of everything. We became degree mills, and stopped our outside involvement. But we were lucky for a while. Nobody noticed. We were able to float through the fifties, and we saw growth primarily because our society was a very similar one to the 30's and 40's.
And then, the most significant society-altering event in our century occurred.
It was the Vietnam War. It didn't work. There was something not right about it--and that something was that it could not be symbolized. There was no symbol system built around it. We violated a basic truth -people simply will never accept a war that they cannot symbolize. In WW I, it was a "war to end all wars." People could rally around that powerful an image. In WW II, it was a war to bring democracy to the world. It was easy to endure a struggle for such a glorious cause. The Korean War wasn't easy because it really couldn't be symbolized. It worked only because we remembered the atrocities of WW II, and we rallied once again out of fear that this might again happen.
But there was no clear purpose in Vietnam. No clear threat. No resounding mission that we could create symbols around. There was not even a real clear purpose that we were trying to win. The result was that a counterculture arose that was anti-political, anti-government, anti-institutional. It created the first generation gap our society has ever known. It's impact on Masonry was that sons did not want to follow their dads into the fraternity. And dads weren't too excited about them joining anyway, and for the wrong reasons. Dads thought their sons had lost the basic values and were not devoted enough to family, God, and country to be good Masons. The sons thought the older generation had forgot the basic values, and could no longer be trusted to lead America to the loving, caring, peaceful society they wanted it to be. Both were patriotic. Both had the same values. But they understood and symbolized patriotism and the virtues in different ways.
The impact on Freemasonry was dramatic. A gap was created between the Masonic world and the American culture. We became internally focused, moved into our tiled recesses, and closed our doors to the outside world. It was safe. There was no risk that the society we didn't particularly trust might somehow change us. We didn't know that it wouldn't have mattered anyway because the sixties generation that we didn't trust didn't join anything.
But now their sons are just beginning to enter the workplace. Some surveys suggest they are made of the right stuff. And they will be joiners.
And we have a match for them!
The task is not to change the values of Masonry, but to find a way to communicate with this generation which has always symbolized differently. It is the very thing we were always good at in the past. So, how can we connect with them today?
We have to understand that the men who will ultimately make Masonry thrive, are not yet Masons. And we've got to meet our future brothers on their terms. Again, this is a thing which, in the past, we have always done so well. But today, we either have to think like they do, or put them in leadership positions in our place. They will not think like us. They cannot assimilate their culture around our rules. But they can symbolize their needs around our values. They have already told us their needs. We know their expectations of the organizations they will join. They want fraternity, fellowship, community attachment, charitable causes, family involvement, and opportunities for leadership. Again, we have a match. The goals of Freemasonry are consistent with their goals.
And when we place them in leadership positions, then, we have to let them lead. You can be sure the new breed of Mason who is now joining and will be joining us--with the above expectations--will be determined to make a corporate difference in the name of Masonry. They will want to restore our fraternity to the prominence and respect it once enjoyed. Like our brothers of old, they will understand the great value of our stable niche in their turbulent times.
And, for the fraternity's sake, we must give them the reins to make our lodges relevant to their culture. And then, roll up our sleeves and work right along side them as brothers. Our role can only be one of guidance--not of authority. We will be bringing a culture to our fraternity who does not accept vertical hierarchy as a relevant and valid system of rule.
The Freemasonry of the next century, if it exists, will no longer be about authority, personalities, and outdated rules. It will be about brotherhood, education, fellowship, and opportunity. It will be what it used to be.
But for this to happen, we will have to begin communicating with our world again. And, for the men entering our fraternity today, we need to build a much stronger Masonic base under them than most of us have. Why? Because they lost the connection to us through their fathers. They have not lived in the same house with Masons, grew up around lodge meetings, or picked up in their culture the intuitive goodness of Masons and Masonry. And they are likely to have heard as much bad, as good about us.
My brethren, I sincerely believe that Masonic education is now more important to the future of Freemasonry than any other single renewal concept. And I'm not talking memorization here. I'm talking communication, education, enlightenment, training the mind to think, and then teaching the values, the beauty, and truth which is Masonry. If our future brothers learn up front what Masonry has always offered men who seek self-improvement, they will know far more than most lifelong Masons now know. And they will bring others to us who agree that these things are important.
We can indeed grow again if we, as an institution of Masons, begin to have expectations. We have to believe that the mission of Masonry is important to our society, and then prove that claim to it. We have to recognize that we have always survived because we knew how to make a difference in our culture. And we have to become impassioned with the goal that we have a birthright of creative involvement in all aspects of that culture -that we can still take up the mantle of Washington and Franklin, and the other truly great men in all walks of life who were Masons because Masonry made a difference.
My brethren, we are at another great threshold in our evolution. Perhaps the stakes are higher now, than in the past. We are perilously close to death. We can indeed die from comfort, ease, and complacency. And, we are temptingly close to a rebirth. We can thrive by reclaiming our rightful place at the head of human progress.
Let us create anew our rituals of ancient significance, with respect for ideas that have borne the tests of time, and with an openness to new ideas which reflect the needs of our own era. It is true that some things do not change. Yet we too must make our own mark upon the "eternal march of ideas." A modern contribution means our contribution. In Freemasonry, we too must carve out our own transcendent ideals. Our mark so far in this century has been that they are all but absent among us.
So, which will it be--will it be comfort, retirement, and isolation from our culture; which will ultimately bring a slow and painful death; like the bank and the men at Tellson's? Or, will it be effort, expectation, vision, cooperation, and change, where change is appropriate; which will ultimately bring respect and renewal?
My brethren, Freemasonry is always in the process of becoming. And the more we enable it to become, the more it will fulfill its true mission. "Change" is not a four letter word in my vocabulary. For the sake of our fraternity, I pray that it is not one in yours.
So mote it be!
----o----
Was John Paul Jones a Freemason?
John Paul (who would later add his uncle's name "Jones") was made a Freemason in St. Bernard's Lodge No. 122, Kirkcudbright, Scotland, on November 27, 1770. Houdon made a bust of Jones for the Lodge of Nine Sisters in Paris, France. He died in Paris on July 18, 1792, and was buried in the Protestant Cemetery there. For over 100 years his body remained in this resting place, then it was conveyed to America. In 1913 it was placed beneath the domed Naval Chapel at the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland. It is said that no other Naval Commander had so elaborate a tomb.
----o----
AND PRESIDENTS YORK, SCOTTISH, AND PLAIN VANILLA
By Paul Rich MPS and Guillermo de los ReyesNever explain your friends do not need it and your enemies will not believe you anyway. Elbert Hubbard, Motto Book, 1907
Part III in a Series
If one accepts the idea that Porfirio D!az used Freemasonry for political purposes during his long presidency of Mexico, the Mexican public's perceptions of Masonry are extremely important. They indicate how successful manipulation of Masonry for political purposes was. Alice Murray in an unpublished thesis claims that D!az became a Mason as part of his pax porfiriana, particularly as it applied to his conciliation policy towards the Catholic church, i.e., as a way to reassure the anti-clericals that concessions to the Catholic Church were tempered by Masonic rationalism. She does however acknowledge problems with the complexity of motives involved, and quotes D!az's close friend, Senator Jose Castellot:
Those who attentively observed the Masonic movement in those days claimed to have discovered certain political motives of . . . Porfirio D!az, to whom . . . was attributed the purpose of uniting all the Masons and taking advantage of them to give a veneer of liberalism, understood in the old sense, to his conciliation policy, and to "know better" those who called themselves "his new friends," and to watch more closely the discontented, congregating them in places where the less cautious could reveal their intimate feelings, safely unburdening themselves . . . [1]
The point requiring emphasis is that at times in Mexican history the image of Freemasonry has been much more significant than what Freemasonry in Mexico has actually been. Mexican Masons have been quick to reinforce the idea that Masonry is the protector of the Republic, guardian of the Revolution, and a source of democratic values. [2] It is no wonder the Presidents of the Republic have wrapped themselves in Masonic aprons.
The success of such a public relations exercise is rather remarkable, because on the face of it the Masons in Mexico seem about as removed from being a democratic movement as it is possible to be. Numerous schisms have generated enough bad publicity to illustrate that they at times have been autocratically ruled by leaders with pompous titles and derive their membership from a singularly unrepresentative portion of the Mexican population. Moreover, they have been closely identified with the ruling political party. [3]
This note is not to be taken as a confident prediction that further investigation is going to upset the prevailing self-image of Mexican Masonry an anti-clerical, liberal political movement. However, so far the evidence suggests that analysis in the past has lacked depth. The notion that Masonry in Latin America is intrinsically democratic [4] requires careful examination: "A candidate for Masonry in Latin America differs somewhat from his North American counterpart. First, he usually comes from the elite class of his society. He is highly educated and socially elevated in contrast with the balance of the population. Secondly, he comes from a religiously oriented background which he generally, prior to petitioning, has strongly rebelled against . . . Revolting against the pageantry of the Church, Latin American Masons tend to simplify their degree work to a series of lectures rather than employing dramatic ritual as we do in many of our degrees." [5]
Freemasonry in Mexico during the Porofolia was primarily Scottish, which covers a multitude of movements and certainly did not carry the same connotations that the word carries today. The two opposing parties of Mexican Freemasons in the early part of the nineteenth century were called Scottish and Yorkist. The two terms are widely used in Mexican history texts, but it is doubtful whether either the authors or students reading the books understand what they mean. In fact the parties were neither Scottish nor York in the sense that present-day Masons use the term, at one time practiced neither Scottish nor York Masonry as the term was generally used in the nineteenth century, and both at times followed Continental European rites of Masonry which are commonly called Scottish. [6]
The term York as often (but not always) used in the early nineteenth century in Mexico described a "plain vanilla" Masonry of the first three degrees. The term Scottish is more difficult to put into context, but a simple explanation would be that even in the Masonic wars in Mexico during the 1820's it was applied to a more complex degree system that included some highly exotic degrees. Readers of this journal will need a little reminder that the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century were a time of great confusion as far as Masonic degrees were concerned. Albert Pike, the great and still controversial interpreter of the Scottish Rite in America, wrote in his classic Morals and Dogma (1871):
Eight hundred Degrees of one kind and another were invented: Infidelity and even Jesuitry were taught under the mask of Masonry. The rituals even of the respectable Degrees, copied and mutilated by ignorant men, became nonsensical and trivial; and the words so corrupted that it has hitherto been found impossible to recover many of them at all. Candidates were made to degrade themselves, and to submit to insults not tolerable to a man of spirit and honor. Hence it was that practically, the largest portion of the Degrees claimed by the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, and before it by the Rite of Perfection, fell into disuse, were merely communicated, and their rituals became jejune and insignificant. These Rites resembled those old palaces and baronial castles, the different parts of which, built at different periods remote from one another, upon plans and according to tastes that greatly varied, formed a discordant and incongruous whole. Judaism and chivalry, superstition and philosophy, philanthropy and insane hatred and longing for vengeance, a pure morality and unjust and illegal revenge, were found strangely mated and standing hand in hand within the Temple of Peace and Concord, and the whole system was one grotesque commingling of incongruous things, of contrasts and contradictions, of shocking and fantastic extravagances, of parts repugnant to good taste, and fine conceptions overlaid and disfigured by absurdities engendered by ignorance, fanaticism, and a senseless mysticism. [7]
Although the York and Scottish Masons in Mexico in the early nineteenth century divided on political lines, it seems reasonable to suggest that the division possibly was as well partly based on ritualistic grounds. In an event, the changing of sides during the period rivaled that of the Vicar of Bray. An idea of the prevailing confusion can be seen in the career of Nicolas Bravo (1790-1854), who was President of Mexico in 1842-1843 and 1846 as well as a Scottish Rite leader. He supported the Emperor Iturbide, then in 1823 was one of those who overthrew him. He revolted against his fellow-Mason President Bustamante as well as giving the order for the execution of General Vincente Guerreo, who was head of the York Masons. [8]
The so-called Scottish version of Masonry which eventually prevailed in Mexico has been in the past characterized by almost innumerable degrees, [9] as already pointed out has at times been fiercely anti-clerical, [10] and contrasts with the less overtly political Masonry prevailing then and now in Britain and its dependencies a branch which as we know gives pride of place to the three degrees of Apprentice, Fellowcraft, and Master Mason. [11] It is one variety of Scottish Masonry which became particularly the egregious enemy of the Church:
Even if one were critical of a "world conspiracy," refrained from regarding the Grand Master of the Italian Freemasons, Andriano Lemmi, with his pathological hatred of the Church, as representative of all lodges, and made a distinction between the Roman and all other organizations, it must be stated that we are dealing here with the intellectual leaders of the time who waged a ruthless war against the Catholic Church, no matter how the humanitarian ideals of that movement are evaluated. This and the successes of the Freemasons within Catholicism itself, especially in Latin America, cannot keep us from considering what impact the intensity of the Catholic struggle against the Freemasons had for the consolidation of group-consciousness in the face of the enemy. Even Leo XIII differentiated in his encyclical Humanum Genus (20 April 1884) between individual Sectatores, who, he said, are not without blame, but do not participate in the malicious actions and do not have a clear picture of the ultimate goals of Freemasonry. But the encyclical begins with a reference to the Invida Diaboli, and it ends with the request to the world episcopate to uproot this "wicked pestilence" (impuram luem) because an attack as vicious as theirs requires an equally vicious defense . . . Leo XIII reiterates the prohibition of membership under penalty of excommunication which his predecessors had proclaimed. [12]
Today to American Masons the term Scottish Rite as it is usually employed applies to a number of degrees forged into a system out of the chaos of the nineteenth century, generally thirty-three in number. That some of the degrees in the modern Scottish Rite in some form were practiced in Mexico in the early nineteenth century is suggested by the degrees purveyed by various colorful characters who claimed to hold high office in the Rite in Mexico. The first of these Masonic buccaneers were Joseph de Glock D'Obernay, who surfaced in Paris before 1819 asserting that he held the 33d in New Mexico and Spain. He spent sometime in England, where he annoyed the Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge, the Duke of Sussex, and then went to Jamaica where he collected (and apparently kept) joining fees. [13]
Paris at the time seems to have been a haven for New World Masonic personalities of an entrepreneurial bent, for evidence indicates that there was a representative of the Scottish Rite resident there in the 1830's "for various Spanish possessions in the New World." His name was Henri Dupont Franklin and he had a "Golden Book," a diary and record book that 33d members were required to keep. [14] Also in Paris in the 1830's was a gentleman calling himself the Count de Saint-Laurent, "a somewhat flamboyant South American" who supposedly had commanded part of the Mexican navy and claimed that he was "Sovereign Grand Commander for the Supreme Council for New Spain, Mexico, etc." and to have Masonic documents signed by Frederick the Great of Prussia which he had obtained from a dead Viceroy of Mexico! [15]
De Glock, Franklin and St. Laurent were involved with degrees which seemingly only interested a small group of people. It is unlikely that the majority of those who in Mexico who called themselves Scottish Masons were initiated into the full assortment of so-called higher degrees of what became the present Scottish Rite, although given the chaos of the times it is possible that a number of now forgotten degrees were communicated as well as some that have survived as part of the now Scottish Rite.
The Scottish Rite in the 1820's in Mexico drew its membership from those of Spanish blood, the titled class, Catholic clergy, and the military. The Scottish Masons, although having would appear to be a conservative constituency, opposed not only the Spanish monarchy but the short monarchy of Iturbide (1821-1823). This does not seem to have been on ideological grounds because in the later conflict between the Scottish and York Masons the Scottish Masons were characterized as being "centralists" who favored an autocratic government. The Yorkists, who by 1828 had 102 lodges in Mexico, were identified with federalism and with the liberalism of Miguel Hidalgo, the father of Mexican independence. [16]
The degrees generally conferred in this period by the Yorkists and the Scottish Riters were probably just the first three. The Yorkists had the support of Joel R. Poinsett, Past Deputy Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of South Carolina and United States minister to Mexico. [17] Poinsett in 1826 had obtained charters for Yorkist lodges from the Grand Lodge of New York. These authorities would have been for the so-called blue lodge or first three degrees and certainly not for the "higher" degrees. [18]
Mexican historians consistently have used the terms Scottish and York without much consideration of their changing meanings. Most of those who have written general histories of Mexico have not been Masons. While not at the very start, the appellation Scottish in nineteenth-century Mexico would seem to have first applied to the lodges working the first three degrees but which were composed partly of Spanish conservatives, and then came to be a term referring more to the Continental and anti-clerical nature of the lodges than to the ritual. Later, in the time of Diaz's Grand Mastership, the thirty-three degrees do seem to have been conferred in an order somewhat resembling the present ritual "ladder". In America during the period 1880-1929 the Scottish Rite degree work was transformed by the use of stage apparatus and elaborate backdrops, but how much of this went on in Mexico is unknown and in any event, "Recently scholars of fraternalism have focused on the social structure and historical context of ritual. However, exactly how theatrical techniques were employed to enhance the initiation experience and to define Masonry's "sacred space" have not yet been explored." [19]
A conclusion that can be drawn from this account is that the term Scottish Freemasonry as a description of the secular Masonry practiced in Mexico is too general and generic a term. The spirit of Mexican Freemasonry is an egregious Latin Scottish Freemasonry, characterized by outrageous turmoil, repeated schisms and exuberant agitations generally absent from Victorian and certainly from the current politically discreet Anglo-Saxon lodge rooms: "The Latin race often insists on doing many things that Anglo-Saxon Masons consider unlawful and irregular. The same is true in political government, the history of the Mexican nation is no more serene than that of Mexican Freemasonry." [20]
Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry has had its share of quarrels and divisions, and in some ways all Masonry is an atavistic reminder of this feuding, the degrees being the fossil remnants of past disputes. [21] Mexican Freemasonry has waxed, waned and warred in curious ways, which may help account for its peculiar treatment in Mexican historiography.
K.W. Henderson, who is a world authority on different Masonic systems, states flatly that "Mexico is the most Masonically diverse country in the world. It possesses nearly thirty Grand Lodges . . . The task of producing even a synopsis of Mexican Masonic history verges on the encyclopedic." [22] Henderson believes that this complexity is linked to the Mexican political situation. The national bodies he lists as currently functioning include the Grand Lodge Valle de Mexico, the York Grand Lodge of Mexico, the Grand Lodge of the Mexican National Rite, the Valley of Anahuac, and the Ancient Valley of Anahuac. [23] Adding to this confusion, each Mexican state has its own Grand Lodge, some of which charter local lodges in other states.
We have concentrated on the early nineteenth century because the history of eighteenth-century Masonry in Mexico remains to be written. It surely has a connection with developments in Spain. A lodge in Gibraltar in 1727 is regarded by some as the start of organized Masonry in southern Spain, and in 1728 in Madrid there was a lodge whose master was a representative of the Stuart Pretender. [24] A lodge in Cadiz in 1749 in 1749 claimed an astounding eight hundred members, and there were supposedly over one hundred lodges in Spain by 1750. [25]
This expansion was despite Pope Clement XII issuing his Bull in 1738, In eminent, which excommunicated all Freemasons and kept to the Pope himself the right to absolve them and the 1751 Bull (Providas) of Benedict XIV repeating Clement's injunction. [26] The same year King Ferdinand VI of Spain outlawed Masonry, partly because of a report made by the Catholic priest Joseph Torrubia. Father Torrubia by papal brief was allowed to take Masonic oaths and was credited with joining 97 Masonic lodges in Spain. [27] That these developments were not, at least in a minor way, mirrored in Mexico seems unlikely.
There is evidence of Masonry in various parts of the Spanish empire. Two Masons were tried by the Inquisition in Manila in 1756, and when in 1762 the British captured Manila they proceeded to have military lodge meetings in the Cathedral of Intramuros. This military lodge was in fact organized by members of a Gibraltar lodge. [28] The Council of the Regency of Spain and the Indies in 1816 issued a Royal Letter Patent in 1816 against the Freemasons:
One of the most serious evils that afflict the Church and State is the growth of the order of Freemasons, so repeatedly proscribed by the Sovereign Pontiffs and by all Catholic Sovereigns of Europe . . . It is to the advantage of the spiritual welfare of the faithful and for the peace of the nations to prevent, with the most scrupulous vigilance, the meetings of this class of people, and having already discovered in the Indies some of those wicked secret religious societies . . . order and command that all Judges in those dominions of the ordinary Royal Jurisdiction . . . shall proceed against the above mentioned Freemasons . . . [29]
Masonry in Spanish possessions was regarded as a political threat. One Catholic author unhesitatingly blames Masonry for the loss of the Philippines: "It was a paradox of history that Spain itself, especially after the revolution and the dissolution of all orders in 1835, began to weaken its own position in the country through the positive support of Freemasonry. The association of Philippinos with lodge brothers of the United States in the neighboring Asiatic countries . . . fostered the movement for independence, and, ultimately, much to the surprise and disappointment of all parties concerned, brought about the American occupation of the country." [30] Another authority finds Masonry at the root of the Church's difficulties in Spanish America in the nineteenth century: "The class now in power, which had been strongly affected by Freemasonry, was not yet ready for a rationalistic laicism most of the constitutions still embodied Catholicism as the state religion but was in favor of the main principles of the Enlightenment . . . ". [31]
The Mexican Inquisition hunted people with Masonic connections: in c.1785 a Mexican, Manuel Zuralds, along with a Frenchman and an Italian, were tried for being Masons. [32] Masonry was active during the Spanish rule of Mexico but it really comes on center stage during the chaos of Guadalupe Victoria's term as president of the infant republic, a period distinguished by the two principal political and Masonic groupings of the day styling themselves as the Yorquinos and the Escoseses. As an authority puts it, "Masonic meetings, of course, were held in secret, and, because the lodges were inviolable, all manner of cabal could be plotted behind closed doors with little fear of exposure." [33]
In 1824 King Ferdinand VII of Spain had issued a decree prohibiting Masonry as a principal cause of disturbance in American and Spain. [34] Ferdinand's concern seems well founded, [35] and to have applied not just to opposition to Spanish rule but to internal disturbances between Mexicans. [36] The revolt mentioned earlier against Victoria in 1827 found the Scottish Riters supporting the vice president, Nicolas Bravo, while the Yorkists lined up behind the president. [37]
Although Masonry thus involved many of Mexico's patriots, the American involvement in Mexican Masonic affairs also was an early one. Robert Gould, whose celebrated history of Freemasonry makes up its ubiquity in lodge libraries for what it lacks in accuracy, notes establishment of lodges by the Grand Lodge of Louisiana at Veracruz and Campeachy in 1816 and 1817, and at Alvarado by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in 1824. But for all that the major Masonic event of the period was the collision between the Scottish and York Riters, as Morris explains:
Soon the entire population of the country became divided into two factions, the Escocceses and the Archons. The former were in favor of moderate measures, under a central government, or a constitutional monarchy. The latter were the advocates of republican institutions, and the expulsion of the "old" or native Spaniards. The Escocceses originally the "Scots Masons" numbered among their members all who, under the ancient regime, had titles of nobility, the Catholic clergy, without exception; many military officers, together with all the native Spaniards of every class. The republican party, according to one set of writers, viewing with dismay the program of their opponents, resolved "to fight the devil with his own fire," and therefore organized a rival faction, on which they bestowed the name of Archons, the members of which were supposed to be adherents of the York Rite. [38]
This period of Masonic fratricide was followed by another distinct era in Mexican Masonic history, that of the presidency of Juarez. [39] Juarez was Grand Master of the National Grand Lodge which had been established in 1825, and his Masonic allegiance is usually coupled with his anticlericalism. [40]
The National Grand Lodge seems to have been dependent on the personality of Juarez. When he died in 1872, that institution vanished: "It probably suffered a quiet decline and disappearance, partly because of the death of Juarez and partly because of the revolutionary change by the rise of state Grand lodges and the federal Gran Dieta . . . ".[41] The vacumn did not long remain, and the ambitious Diaz lost little time in acquiring Masonic powers.
NOTES
For full citations see earlier articles in this series.
ENDNOTES
[1]. qtd. Luis G. Zalce y Rodriguez's Apuntes para la historia de la maoneria en Mexico, Vol.1, 321, qtd. Alice Mary Murray, "Diaz and the Church: The Conciliation Policy, 1876-1900," M.A. Thesis, Mexico City College (now The University of the Americas-Puebla and The University of the Americas-Mexico City), 89.
[2]. In the 1820's at the time of the York and Scottish troubles in Mexico there was considerable feeling in the United States that Masonry was antithetical to democracy: "One of the major elements which went into forming the new Whig party was the Anti-Masonic party, an anti-elitist group which had emerged in the late 20's to fight the presumed influence of a Masonic cabal, of which Andrew Jackson was thought to be a member." Seymour Martin Lipset, The First New Nation: The United States in Historical and Comparative Perspective, Norton Edition, 1979, W. W. Norton, New York and London, 1979, 84.
[3]. E.G. several of the Masonic lodges in Puebla meet in a church, which was allocated to them after the Revolution and which the government has provided as a lodge hall ever since.
[4]. However, consider this opinion: "[Jacobinism] . . . quickly spread from Mexico to the extreme south, found support in the Masonic clubs antagonistic to the Church, and demanded general equality, including that of races." Oswald Spengler, Decisive Years, 176, qtd. Samuel Ramos, Profile of Man and Culture in Mexico, trs. Peter G. Earle, University of Texas Press, 1962, 122.
[5]. Bruce D. Hudson, "Freemasonry in Latin America," Philalethes, Vol. XXIII No.3, June 1970, 52.
[6]. "It should be noted that the word for "Scottish" or "Scots" as an adjective in France until about mid-XVCIII century, was "Ecossois". This, and any other archaic French spelling . . . [now appear] as "Ecossais". Both words have, of course, identical meaning." A. C. F. Jackson, Rose Croix: The History of the Ancient and Accepted Rite for England and Wales, rev. ed., Lewis Masonic, London, 1987 [1980], xii.
[7]. Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry Prepared for the Supreme Council of the Thirty-Third Degree for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States and Published by Its Authority, Charleston, 1871, reprinted L. H. Jenkins, Richmond (Virginia), 1930, 326.
[8]. Denslow, IV, 375.
[9]. These were degrees during the early nineteenth century which, it might be added, were sold by travelling charlatans and even tagged for public derision by Masonic opponents. See "A Brief History of the Anti-Masonic League of Dublin, Popularly Called The Spurious Prince Masons and Designated by Themselves "The Grand Chapter of Ireland"; with a Few Comments on That Mendacious Libel, Styled "A Few Words on the Rose Croix Degree," Published by This Grand Chapter: Also Some Remarks as to Part Acted by the "Freemason's Quarterly Review" in Propagating and Circulating Said Libel", Published from original Documents by Verax, Dublin, 1844.
[10]. The eighteenth degree is sometimes accused of including a mock mass. See Jackson, 30.
[11]. "It is indubitable and beyond challenge that there was a Second Birth of Masonry in Continental Rites. If Masonry began in a Tavern it aspired subsequently to a Palais Esperiteux of the Holy Grail. And the great rites remain among us, notwithstanding the imbecile decision of 1813 [reorganization of the Grand Lodge of England], that something called "pure and ancient Freemasonry" consists of craft degrees [the first three degrees] and the holy royal arch [a widespread "perfecting" fourth degree]." Arthur Edward Waite, The Secret Tradition in Freemasonry, Kessinger, Kila (Montana), 1991 [1934], 166-67.
[12]. Roger Aubert, et al., The Church in the Industrial Age, Burns & Oates, London, 1981, 216-17.
[13]. Jackson, 143-55.
[14]. Ibid., 61.
[15]. Ibid., 77, 80. "All that one can say is that his statement that it came from Mexico can be rejected and that there is a convenient story that the original was burnt in America." Ibid., 81.
[16]. H.T.French, "The Place of Masonry and Holland Lodge No.1 at the Founding of the Republic of Texas," Transactions, Texas Lodge of Research, Vol.XXI, 22 June 1985 - 15 March 1986, 158-59.
[17]. The Christmas flower is named after him, as he brought the plant back from Mexico.
[18]. French, 159.
[19]. C. Lance Brockman, "Documenting the Scenery Used in Scottish Rite," The Scottish Rite Journal, Vol. C No.9, 13.
[20]. Coil, Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, 412.
[21]. "In every European country, local circumstances produced significant differences in the success and social influence of freemasonry and these are worth some consideration." Roberts, Mythology of the Secret Societies, 43.
[22]. K. W. Henderson, Masonic World Guide, Lewis Masonic, London, 1984, 155-56.
[23]. Ibid., 157-58.
[24]. "Nobody has a good word for the Duke of Wharton. He is called dishonorable, irresponsible, erratic and some even charge him with disloyalty to England. He joined the Roman Catholic Church in 1728 and is commonly supposed to have been the founder of the Gormogons, a group which accomplished nothing but to attempt ridicule of Freemasonry. he finally joined the Franciscan Order and died in poverty in 1731 at the age of 33 years. He is castigated in Pope's Moral Essays, Epode I ["Wharton, the scorn and wonder of our days, whose ruling passion was the lust of Praise."]." Coil, 470. "In 1726 he left England, never to return, and the next year found him fighting against the British at the siege of Gibraltar. For this he was outlawed by England and shorn of his title and estates in 1729. In the same year he formed a lodge in Madrid which lasted until 1768 . . . " Denslow, IV, 314.
[25]. Roberts, 44. However, see Ibid., 83.
[26]. Ibid., 68.
[27]. Denslow, IV, 248.
[28]. Christopher Haffner, The Craft in the East, District Grand Lodge of Hong Kong and the Far East, Hong Kong, 1975. "The Archbishop of Manila wished to raze the Cathedral to the ground for this profanation, but did not get authority from Spain to do so, and the Cathedral lasted until the Second World War." Ibid.
[29]. Haffner, 12.
[30]. Aubert, 193.
[31]. Roger Aubert, et al, The Church Between Revolution and Restoration, trs. Peter Becker, Burns & Oates, London, 1981, 169.
[32]. Denslow, IV, 364.
[33]. Michael C. Meyer and William L. Sherman, The Course of Mexican History, 4th ed., Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1991, 317.
[34]. Haffner, 13.
[35]. In 1830 the Collector of Customs in the Philippines was reprimanded for allowing the importation of Masonic books, and in 1831 when the United States consul died the erection of a monument on his grave was forbidden because of its Masonic emblems. Haffner, 13.
[36]. Filipinos date the continuous history of Freemasonry from the establishment of lodges by two officers of the Spanish navy, Admiral Malcampo and Vice-Admiral Mendex Nunez. The 1856 establishment of lodge La Primera Luz Filipina, is observed as the anniversary. Haffner, 52-53.
[37]. Meyer and Sherman, 319.
[38]. Robert Freke Gould, The History of Freemasonry: Its Antiquities, Symbols, Constitutions, Customs, Etc., Vol. VI, T. C. & E. C. Jack, Edinburgh, n.d., 370. Gould's History first appeared in 1903. Cf. George F. Adams, "Freemasonry in Mexico," Philalethes, Vol. XXIII No.3, June 1970, 54.
[39]. "During the period 1833 to 1860, which included the United States-Mexican War of 1848, all branches of Mexican Masonry were dormant." Coil, 413. The early part of this period coincides with anti-Masonic activity in the United States.
[40]. See Aubert, 269-70.
[41]. Coil, 413.
----o----
In Memoria James D. Carter, FPS 1907-1994
James David Carter was born at Evant, in Coryell County, Texas [fifty miles west of Waco], on January 27, 1907. He was educated in the Lone Star State, earning his B.A. at North Texas Teachers College [in Denton], his M.A. at North Texas State College [likewise in Denton], and his Ph.D. at the University of Texas in Austin, with a dissertation entitled Freemasonry in Texas: Background, History, and Influence to 1848 - one of the very few doctoral theses that have dealt with the Craft. His main career was in teaching, first in the public system and later at the University of Texas.
He became a Mason in Bee House Lodge, No. 550, in his hometown of Evant, and on to become Master, and then District Deputy Grand Master. He was the first Master of the Texas Lodge of Research, in 1958. He was particularly active in the concordant orders. As a serious researcher and a professional historian, he produced a number of articles and books that traced the evolution and heritage of our fraternity In 1963 he wrote Education and Masonry in Texas to 1845. Then he went on to tell about The First Century of Scottish Rite Masonry in Texas, 1867 - 1967 in 1967. He collaborated with Ray Baker Harris, in putting together the initial volume of the History of the Supreme Council 33d, S.J:, 1801-1861, in 1964; he continued the story, in a second volume covering the years 1861 - 1891 [in 1967], and then a third for 1891 - 1921 [in 1971].
He was the recipient of many Masonic honors. He was proclaimed a member of the Society of Blue Friars in 1967, and later the same year he was made a Fellow of The Philalethes Society. He was married to Lowell Lona Burnery, and they were the proud parents of three daughters. After several years of poor health, he died on September 28, 1994, and the age of 87.
We cherish his memory in our hearts.
So mote it be.
----o----
THE RITES AND LODGES OF FEMININE FREEMASONRY AND CO-MASONRY
by Michael L. Segall MPS
As you well know, dear Brethren, and to the great distress of men, women were soon attracted to Freemasonry. I'm not sure of the sources of this early infatuation, for which we can imagine multiple reasons. Already in the time of King Louis XIV and Molire did not miss the occasion to turn it into a play learned women got together in their salons to debate, like men and most often with men, the fashionable intellectual topics of their time.
When dawning Speculative Freemasonry, at the beginning of the 18th century, began bringing Brethren together in Lodges, neither Rome nor women could stand men speaking behind closed doors of things about which they wouldn't know everything. Rome, as far as it was concerned, excommunicated. Women, distinctly cleverer, exerted enough pressure for feminine Masonry and co-Masonry to be born.
Let's define what we are talking about. Throughout the history of Freemasonry women's Lodges or Grand Lodges admitted men at least as visitors. Not doing so would have evidently gone against the very purpose I just mentioned. For this reason, it is not easy to distinguish between women's Masonry and co-Masonry.
Would a Lodge of the Feminine Grand Lodge of France, admitting sometimes more Brethren visitors than the Sisters present, be less co-Masonic than a Lodge created to be co-Masonic? And that one of the Lodges of the Grand Orient which admit women? I think that the difference among the various levels of "mixedness", if there is a difference, lies in the area of the membership of the Officers' Line and in the area of initiations. Let us define three major types:
Type A co-Masonry would be a Lodge or a Grand Lodge having, indifferently, male or female Officers or Grand Officers and that would initiate applicants of both sexes.
Type B co-Masonry would admit visitors of both sexes to its stated meetings, but would have Officers and Grand Officers of one sex only, and would not initiate candidates of the opposite sex.
Type C co-Masonry would have Officers and Grand Officers of both sexes, admit visitors of both sexes, but would initiate applicants of one sex only.
Quite vague and uncertain distinctions, after all, further complicated by the mix of masculine and feminine rites and rituals and by the fact that women sometimes work masculine rites and men, feminine ones (when visiting the OES, for instance). What really matters is that in all cases we find men and women working together in the same Lodge, definitive criterion of co-Masonry. The conclusion is evident and must be drawn. In the present state of Masonic rites and rituals, there are only two kinds of Lodges or Grand Lodges: men's and co-Masonic.
This having been said, let us have a look at this Freemasonry that calls itself and considers itself feminine, in its three historic avatars. It must be realized that it appears very early, 17th century in its primitive form, and takes as early as the 18th century, after having spawned a multitude of short-lived splinter Lodges and rites, the form of the Adoption rite, ancestor of the OES. This rite will be nearly wholly replaced in Europe, in the 20th century, by a feminized version of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite and in the Anglo-Saxon Masonic world by the Order of the Eastern Star. A single women's Lodge in France, Cosmos #76 of the Feminine Grand Lodge, still works the Rite of Adoption. It's a great pity since Adoption is, of the two main feminine rites, the only really ancient one and the only one that is not a late and pallid copy of a masculine rite.
The rite of Adoption is of pure traditional origin and few other rites have its initiatic and symbolic richness, often borrowed from the Operatives, and maybe also from a certain knighthood. This rite is also more ancient than most current masculine rites because, according to rituals and documents in the archives of the GL of France, the rite of Adoption was born in France in 1744. Its development was slow, and it always had fewer members than male Masonry. Only three Lodges were created until 1777, all three in Paris. Become very active as the 18th century was drawing to its end, and until the beginning of the 20th century, the rite of Adoption has long played in France and continental Europe the same role as the OES in the USA. It is now disappearing over here but still very strong in the USA, in its OES form. The OES borrows about half of its rite and rituals from the rite of Adoption, a quarter from Emulation and another quarter from its inventor, Bro. Rob Morris.
Within our classification as defined earlier, the rite of Adoption is of course a co-Masonic rite of the type we have called "type C". Let's see why. Originally, Lodges of Adoption were created by regular male Lodges of the local Grand Lodge, and their lady Officers were seconded by male Masons, members of the male founding Lodge. At the time, the only female members were the wives, widows, sisters, mothers and daughters of Freemasons, but very rapidly other women were admitted who had no particular kinship with male Mason members. Adoption Masonry numbered, at the end of the 19th century, about 150 Lodges and 5,000 members. After WW1 the rite of Adoption, while declining, emancipated itself from male supervision. Brethren only kept coming as visitors. This presently nearly vanished rite existed in at least three forms: the four-degree Primitive Rite (Apprentice, Companion, Mistress and Perfect Mistress) the French Rite with five degrees (adding to the former degrees that of Elect Sublime Scottish Lady (Ecossaise) or Sovereign Illustrious Scottish Lady) and the "Ten Degree" rite, seldom worked and copying in part the SR degrees. The second of these rites is the only one still worked and, as I said, by a single Lodge.
The most prevalent of the three Adoption rites was the French Rite in five degrees, currently nearly extinct, and I will describe its First Degree Lodge in slightly more detail. The Lodge, lighted by five Luminaries, represented the Terrestrial Globe and, just as our Lodges possess four Cardinal Points, the Lodge of Adoption was divided in four regions called "Climates". The East was the Climate of Asia; the West, the climate of Europe; the North, the Climate of America and the South, the Climate of Africa. In the East, in the Climate of Asia and under a red canopy, sat the Grand Mistress, flanked by the Worshipful Master. In front of her was an Altar bearing a Bible and a Gavel. To her left sat the Sister Orator seconded by the Brother Preparator, to her left the Sister and Brother Secretaries. In the West, in the Climate of Europe sat, to the northern side (left when entering the Lodge) the Sister Inspector seconded by the Brother First Supervisor (or Warden) and to the southern side (right when entering the Lodge) the Sister Trustee, seconded by the Brother Second Supervisor (or Warden). The other offices were that of the Almoner, the Treasurer, the Expert, the Master of Ceremonies and the Inner Guard and were occupied by both a Brother and a Sister. All but the Expert, the Master of Ceremonies and the Inner Guard sat behind small, pentagon-shaped tables.
Along the sides of the Lodge were, on each side, four statues or paintings. They represented, allegorically, Wisdom, Strength, Justice, Truth, Prudence, Temperance, Charity and Honor. Curiously, Beauty is not represented. Along the two sides of the Lodge were two rows of chairs. Sisters sat in the front rows, North and South, Brethren on the rear rows. On the floor, in the center of the Lodge, was placed a painting allegorically representing the four Climates, subdivisions of the Terrestrial Globe. The Lodges were usually called Ladders.
A few words now about the origins of women's Masonry. As everyone knows, whenever we have to study the history of Masonry before the 18th century, written documents are cruelly lacking. Hardly more than a score were found. The situation is worse concerning women's Lodges, because there is NO contemporary document left and we must advance very carefully. There are nevertheless some documents and particularly coincidences allowing us to reasonably assume a lineage which, if maybe not initiation or Operative, is at least corporative.
We have evidence of female or mixed corporations during the Middle Ages and later. We know that the daughter of Erwin von Steinbach, the architect of Strasbourg cathedral, was said to belong to the Stonecutters Guild. We know, from Operative documents, that at least insofar as the Carpenters' Guilds are concerned, widows could take over the work of their deceased husbands without having to transmit it to another Companion. Curiously, the third degree of Adoption has a carpentry symbolism and tradition rather then a stonecutters' tradition, as we have. We also know about lace-makers' and candle-makers' guilds, mentioned by Wirth. Women could also be members of the suede tanners' guild, together with men.
Documents belonging to the archives of the S.C. of France mention some interesting and heretofore unpublished examples, particularly on the corporations of the town of Rouen, listed in the "History of Ancient Corporations of Arts and Trades and Ancient Religious Confraternities of the Capital of Normandy", published in 1860 by abbot Quin-Lacroix.
Still extant are the statutes of the corporation of candle-makers, dated 1360; those of the thread-makers, dated 1394; that of the linen makers and merchants, dated 1700 and those of the embroiderers, dated 1709. In 1616 a female Knighthood was created by Ann of Austria, Queen of France, under the name "Order of the Celestial Necklace of the Holy Rosary". Although it only lasted about 50 years, it had some influence on the women's organizations soon to be born. A Mixed Egyptian Order is created in 1634, probably Masonic, but about which we know very little. In 1637 appears the Society of the Palladium or of the Companions of Penelope, a kind of women's Freemasonry created to exalt virtue and wisdom. Rituals of this Society still exist, including rituals of initiation to the degrees of EA and FC.
Some have asserted that post-1717 women's Masonry was fabricated by men just to "amuse the ladies". It is nevertheless certain that it was not possible for recent speculative Masons who remained anonymous (why?), to have entirely fabricated, in a few years of the 1730's, such a rich and complex symbolism just to "amuse the ladies". In my personal opinion, there has been a determined will to suppress, discredit or at least put women's Masonry under male control throughout its long history.
Having dealt quite a bit with the Lodges of Adoption, their birth, their ancestry and their rite, I will not detail the Eastern Star, familiar to most USA Masons if quite unknown elsewhere, but go directly to the Grand Lodges of the Human Right, Droit Humain or DH in French.
The history of the DH is quite interesting. A first "Mixed Scottish Symbolic Grand Lodge of the Human Right" was created on April 4 1893 by Maria Deraismes, age 64, Anne Feresse, 72, Georges Martin, 48, and his wife, Marie Martin, 45. Georges Martin was a long time mason already. Maria Deraismes was made a Mason in a men's Lodge some years before, under circumstances I will detail a little later. In 1899, the DH became the "International Mixed Masonic Order of the Human Right". Like many 19th century male Grand Lodges and like some contemporary (and recognized) Scandinavian and German Grand Lodges, the DH is governed by a Supreme Council 33rd of their particular brand of the A&ASR.
Its Constitution, revised in 1920 after many stormy episodes, gave it its main and most interesting characteristic, besides that of receiving both Brethren and Sisters in its Lodges. The DH is the first and still the only such body to be constituted on an international scale rather than on a state or national base. Controlled by an international Supreme Council headed by a Sovereign Grand Commander, alternatively a man or a woman, located in France, it is governed in each country by an autonomous, elected National Council headed by a Grand Commander. National federations and jurisdictions of the DH exist, to the best of my knowledge in France, of course, as well as in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, the Latin American countries, Greece, Indonesia, Lebanon, the USA, Australia, Belgium, England, Finland, Italy, India, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain and the Scandinavian countries. Still plagued by occasional schisms giving birth to additional, small co-Masonic groups, the DH is nevertheless doing well and has continuously increased its membership since WW2.
The story of Maria Deraismes is quite interesting. In 1867 and in the particular atmosphere of the times, twelve Lodges seceded from the Central Grand Lodge, an avatar of the Grand Lodge of France, mainly on the matter of admitting women, and formed the Scottish Symbolic Grand Lodge, with Georges Martin as its Grand Orator. Curiously, because of internal conflicts on how best to integrate women, none was initiated for the following 15 years. As the story goes, a woman who was to become a well-known feminist and suffragette, Maria Deraismes, spied a number of Masonic degree ceremonies from a window set into the second story of the Temple of a Lodge called "The Free Thinkers of Le Pecq". The Lodge jumped on the occasion and, saying that a non-Mason having witnessed Masonic ceremonies had to be initiated immediately so that he or she could take the obligations and preserve the secrets, initiated her on the 14 January 1882. But for ten years she remained the only one. Then in April 1893 Martin, his wife, Maria Deraismes and Anne Feresse took things in hand and created the DH. The rest is history.
The most important women's Grand Lodge in France is the Feminine Grand Lodge, originally made up of the old Lodges of Adoption dependent of the male Grand Lodge of France. Beginning with 1901, the GL of France created a number of Lodges of Adoption in view of allowing women to participate to the intellectual and spiritual life of Masonry. These Lodges had nothing in common with the Adoption Lodges of the preceding two centuries. Corresponding each to a male Lodge of the Grand Lodge of France, bearing the same name, they worked under the supervision of the Federal Council of the Grand Lodge of France. The work in Lodge was the same, only the rite, a modernized form of Adoption, was different. The Sisters could not visit male Lodges at work.
At its Convention of 1935 and in view of the evolution of the feminine condition, the Grand Lodge of France decided to give these Lodges their complete independence and to help them create their own Grand Lodge. In 1936, a first Convention of the Lodges of Adoption creates the core of the future GL and the initial structures. But WW2 soon starts, and nothing else happens until September 1945, when the Grand Lodge of France abrogates the parts of its Constitution of 1906 which governed the Lodges of Adoption. In October 1946, the newly created Feminine Masonic Union of France holds its first Convention, elects its first Federal Council, Grand Officers and Grand Mistress. In 1952, it changes its name to Feminine Grand Lodge of France and in 1959 it abandons the rite of Adoption for the A&ASR. Since, the Feminine GL has acquired a Scottish Rite from the English Feminine Supreme Council, has created its own Supreme Council, and works all the 33 degrees of the A&ASR. Currently, the Feminine Grand Lodge of France numbers about 8,000 members in some 200 Lodges.
Like French male Masonry, French women's and co-Masonry is preoccupie by quality rather than quantity. The selection is tough and many candidates are rejected. The average Lodge has around 40 members, attendance is usually in the 70 to 80% and at each of the 20 to 24 meetings per year a FC or MM of the Lodge is expected to present an original lecture, thereafter discussed by the members of the Lodge. Like for practically all European Masonry, meetings are in the 1st degree except for passings or raisings.
I hope this article has helped my non-continental Brethren to understand the history and workings of women's Masonry, about the existence of which many had never heard, and of co-Masonry which, long considered by some Brethren as some minor, clandestine and devilish contraption, might become far closer and more familiar with the increasing pressure, in the USA but also in other countries, for the admittance of women into erstwhile regular male Masonry. The time might come when we will have to consider whether women's Masonry and co-Masonry don't possess their own brand of regularity, different from ours but equivalent to it.
----o----
Avoid run-on sentences they are hard to read.
No sentence fragments.
It behooves us to avoid archaisms.
Also, avoid awkward or affected alliteration.
Don't use no double negatives.
If I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times: Resist hyperbole
Avoid commas, that are not necessary
Verbs has to agree with their subjects.
Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
Writing carefully, dangling participles should not be used.
Kill all exclamation points!!!
Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Take the bull by the hand, and don't mix metaphors.
Don't verb nouns.
Never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
Last but not least, avoid cliches like the plague.
from Readers Digest March 1993 Issue
----o----
The Executive Board of The Philalethes Society
February 23, 1995
The Annual Meeting of the Executive Board was called to order in the Hotel Washington at 7:30 p.m. by the President, Forrest D. Haggard. There were present: the President, Royal C. Scofield, 1st Vice President, Robert G. Davis, 2nd Vice President, Allen E. Roberts, Executive Secretary, Nelson King, Editor, Wallace McLeod, Past President, Robert L. Tomlinson, President of Jerry Marsengill Chapter, and Keith A. Hinerman, Assistant to the Executive Secretary
The financial report of the Executive Secretary and the budget for 1995 were approved. It was concluded that the investments would continue to be made, primarily, with Merrill Lynch. Dues will continue at $25, with the joining fee at $5.00 until new brochures are printed, when the joining fee will again become $10 ($35 total for new members).
The officers will continue to be reimbursed for their out-of-pocket expenses while on the Society's business.
A discussion was held concerning the Society holding its annual meeting separate from the Allied Masonic Degrees. It was disturbing to find far too many small and exclusive bodies attached to Freemasonry consuming far too much time. It was concluded, however, that both of the principal bodies would be harmed by separating.
To clarify the duties of the officers, and the rules of the Society, a copy of the Bylaws was distributed to all interested in reading them.
To help promote the growth of the Society it was proposed to ask all members to inform the members of their Lodges of the benefits of belonging to The Philalethes Society. All members will be asked to recommend at least one new member during the year. It was also determined to waive the joining fee at semi-annual meetings.
It was unanimously agreed that Nelson King will become the 2nd Vice President in 1996. A successor to the Executive Secretary, when he feels he can no longer serve in this capacity, was discussed. A prospect, who desires to remain anonymous at the moment, was suggested.
It was agreed that a semi-annual meeting will be held in Kansas City on September 16. The 1996 semi-annual will be held in Minneapolis. In 1997 it will be held in San Diego.
The Editor's report was accepted with thanks. The Board agreed with him that non-members whose articles are published will be given a year's subscription to the magazine. He also reported on a CD Rom disk that reports favorably on Freemasonry. He will keep the members informed of its progress.
Robert Davis made a comprehensive report on a Masonic Clearing House. He will elaborate on this and it will be published in the magazine.
The Board agreed that Nelson King should receive the Award of Literature for 1994 for an article he wrote before being chosen Editor.
The Award for Lecturer for 1995 was to go to Robert G. Davis. Awards of Merit were approved for: Neil Shapiro, Scott Sherman, William Wine, Edward King, David Bosworth, Preston Burner and Richard Thorn.
The meeting was closed with prayer at 10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Allen E. Roberts, Executive Secretary
----o----
by John J. Olk, MPS
A student of American Freemasonry comes, very soon, to the opinion that all elements of our fraternity had their origin in England. This is, perhaps, a natural conclusion in that English Constitution Bodies have had the greatest influence in the establishment of our basic Craft, or Blue, Lodge organization. By definition, in the 1813 Constitution of the United Grand Lodge, the Holy Royal Arch is included. Thus, a majority of our York Rite Bodies are shown to have been imported from England.
However, further study will show that when we go "Beyond the Craft," we, in the United States, are, indeed, Masonic exporters. If the "Balance of Trade" concept can be applied to fraternal matters, we come close to balancing the accounts.
This paper will concern itself with three bodies that originated in the United States and are now practiced in most of the English-speaking world. Perhaps, English-speaking Masonry would be a better term more than a few are located in countries where English is not the native or dominant tongue. Those three are; the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, the Council of Royal and Select Masters, and the Order of the Secret Monitor.
The story of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite is too complex to be included in this paper. Suffice it to say that after a protracted period of disorder and near anarchy, strong leadership managed to formulate the two jurisdiction structures that we now know. The first Charter, and/or Constitution of the Scottish Rite established one Supreme Council in all member nations except for the United States where two are specified to be "as far separated, geographically," as possible.
In 1819, a patent was issued by the Supreme Council, in Charleston, to the Duke of Sussex. It authorized the formation of a Supreme Council for England with its Grand East in London. However, it was not acted on and it was not until 1845 that definitive action was taken to form a Scottish Rite Body in England.
A Patent was issued on October 26, 1845 to Robert Thomas Crucefix. It authorized the formation of the Grand and Supreme Council of England with Crucefix as the first Sovereign Grand Commander to hold that office "ad vitam." The letter of transmittal carried an unusual paragraph, as follows:
"No Jew Brother is ever to be received under any circumstances. None but Christian Brothers can be initiated."
As a result, the Accepted Scottish Rite, in England and all areas adherent to the English Constitution, is a Christian organization. In fact, the Northern and Southern Masonic Jurisdictions of the United States are the only Supreme Councils that have "de-Christianized."
Scottish Rite, in the United States, at one time included the degrees of Royal and Select Master. In the early Nineteenth Century, they released control of these degrees to the General Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons. Subsequently, Grand Councils were erected in the several States, and a General Grand Council came into being. There were periods of ennui and in some cases, Grand Councils surrendered their Charter and authority to the Grand Chapters. This did not prevail for more than a very few years and control was returned to Grand Councils. The control of the degrees was, meanwhile, ceded to them from the General Grand Chapter.
After a period of correspondence, the Grand Council of New York, in 1871, issued dispensations for the formation of four Councils in England. These Councils, in 1873 formed the Grand Council of England under the patronage of the Reverend Canon G. R. Portal, Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Mark Master Masons. Administered from Mark Masons' Hall, the Grand Council now exercises authority over four degrees; Most Excellent Master, Royal Master, Select Master, and Super Excellent Master.
At about the same time, the Grand Council of Illinois granted dispensations for the formation of Councils in Scotland. These Councils, then established, under the auspices of the Supreme Grand Chapter, of Royal Arch Masons, of Scotland, the Grand Council, Royal and Select Masters of Scotland. The Grand Council remains a part of the Grand Chapter, and the council, or "Cryptic" degrees are conferred in "Holy Royal Arch" Assemblies. The Grand Chapter Officers also function as Grand Council Officers.
At some time in the early Nineteenth Century, the "Order of the Secret Monitor" arose in the United States. Originally, it was an honorary, or "side" degree conferred by any Master Mason possessing it. It gradually lost popularity and was no longer conferred. This fact, along with the lack of a centralized governing organization, brought it under the umbrella of the Allied Masonic Degrees. It is still a part of the A.M.D. in America.
The degree was brought to England, about 1875, by Doctor I. Zacharie who was instrumental in forming a Grand Council of the Secret Monitor, in 1887. Two further degrees were added one of which "Supreme Ruler" pertains to the presiding officer. The original Order came under the jurisdiction of the Allied Masonic Degrees of England, and for years there was conflict over which Body was the "True" Order of the Secret Monitor.
The conflict was resolved in 1931 when C. W. Napier-Clavering effected the transfer of all authority from the Allied Masonic Degrees to the Grand Council of the Order of the Secret Monitor. He was able to exert influence because he was both Grand Supreme Ruler of the Secret Monitor, and Grand Master of Allied Masonry.
The expanded Order, under the strong centralized leadership, became very popular in England and the "Colonies." This was largely due to the fact that its ritual concerned the basic friendship and brotherly love of Craft Masonry. Also, it included, by design, the family unit and not simply the Brother involved.
The writer has been told, by an Australian Lady, the wife of a very active Brother Companion, and Sir Knight, that the Secret Monitor was her favorite of all Bodies. She stressed the factor of family involvement. Could there be a message here for American Freemasonry?
In Toronto, Ontario, in September 1994 there was a consecration ceremony involving the Order of the Secret Monitor. Under the aegis of the Allied Masonic Degrees, and dispensation from England, Conclaves of the Order of the Secret Monitor were created in the expanded three-degree form. This was done in anticipation of the creation of a Grand Conclave of the Order in Canada, followed by the transfer, of the Order, from the Allied Masonic Degrees.
Introducing this activity, by our Canadian Brothers, opens another facet of our theme of "Exported Freemasonry." Technically, when these Masonic activities cross the longest undefended border in the world, in either direction, they are "exported" and "imported." There are, however, several organizations which may be better described as "shared." The Ancient Arabic Order of Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, Knights of the York Cross of Honor, and the York Rite Sovereign College of North America come to mind immediately.
All three originated in America. All three, almost immediately, had members on both sides of the border. All three have constituent bodies Shrine Temples, K.Y.C.H. Priories, and York Rite Colleges, on both sides of the border. All three have Officers, in their respective International governing bodies, from both sides of the border. Q.E.D., they are shared between the North American nations.
Finally, a disclaimer. The author recognizes that documented Scottish Freemasonry predates that of England. However, English Freemasonry exerted a greater influence on the Colonial American fraternity than did those of Scotland or Ireland. The theme of this paper was the "Export of Freemasonry" and was not intended to expand arguments of British fraternal precedence.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
G.R. Newbury & L.L. Williams, A History of the Supreme Council 33 degree of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite for the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the United States of America, Supreme Council N. M. J., Lexington, Massachusetts 1987
A.G. Mackay, An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry Revised Edition by Hughan & Hawkes, The Masonic History Co., New York 1918
Keith B. Jackson, Beyond the Craft, Lewis Masonic, Terminal House, Shepparton, England
Annals, the Grand Council of the Allied Masonic Degrees of the United States of America, Volume IX, Part 2. Proceedings of the Ninety-ninth Annual Communication 1991
The Quaternion, Transactions of the Convent General, Knights of the York Cross of Honor
----o----
Parallels Between the Rule of St. Benedict and the Philosophy of Masonry
by Millard Lane Fretland, MPS
While engaged in research regarding medieval religious orders, I first encountered the contents of the Rule of Saint Benedict. This rule has governed the Benedictine monastic order of the Roman Catholic Church for more than fourteen hundred years. After reading the Benedictine Rule, I was immediately struck by the presence of direct parallels between the provisions of the rule and several important aspects of Freemasonry.
Saint Benedict is significant in history for many reasons, not the least of which was that he broke with the ancient idea that manual labor was contemptible. Benedict strove to give the society of his day a lofty concept of labor. (1) This tenet is exemplified by the entire Masonic fraternity which allegorically sets its members to that most noble of manual labors-the fitting of their minds as living stones "for that house not made with hands eternal in the heavens." Order has long been an important concept to Freemasons. Similarly, order is a central concept of Benedictine spirituality. As Masons are told to divide their time into three equal parts for work, service and refreshment, so too is the Benedictine day divided into three distinct portions devoted to work, prayer and recreation. (2) By the way the Benedictines divide their day, it can be seen that prayer is central to the monastic life. Prayer is of course found throughout Masonic practice as well. Before beginning any good work, the Benedictine monk is required by his rule to pray. (3) We as Masons are equally instructed not to enter upon any great or important undertaking without first "invoking the blessing of Deity. "
Perhaps the central symbolism of the three "Blue Lodge" Masonic degrees concerns the lessons of the "working tools" found in each. These are the figurative tools we as Masons are told to use to improve ourselves. Interestingly, Chapter Four of the Rule of St. Benedict is titled "The Tools for Good Works. " These Benedictine " tools " are a collection of admonitions for daily life such as "Guard your lips from harmful or deceptive speech. " The chapter ends with the statement
These, then are the tools of the spiritual craft. When we have used them without ceasing day and night and have returned them on judgement day, our wages will be the reward the Lord has promised . . . (4)
This allegory is obviously inherent in speculative Masonry. How it came to be so is curious in light of the fact that the Rule of St. Benedict was written prior to 547 A.D. (5)
The new candidate for the Benedictine Order is put off until he had persisted several times in asking for admittance. The rule refers to such a person as having been kept "knocking at the door. " Each new Masonic initiate is also said to have "knocked at the door " of the lodge.
During the initiation ceremony, the Benedictine candidate was divested of all his worldly goods and clothing and dressed in the clothes of the Order, acts common to reception into many monastic sects. All Masons have similarly experienced the same destitution of worldly possessions at the time of their initiation and have also been symbolically dressed in the clothes of the order when invested with the white apron.
After initiation, a new Benedictine brother is made to understand that from that day on he was not free to . . . shake from his neck the yoke of the rule which, in the course of so prolonged a period of reflection, he was free to either reject or accept. (6)
Both literal and figurative "yokes" of this sort are said to bind the Masonic initiate as well.
Bernard Jones and other Masonic historians have postulated that the ceremonies and philosophy of the early operative lodges of stone masons were possibly influenced by members of monastic brotherhoods or other ecclesiastics who acted as craft scribes. (7) Portions of the ecclesiastical influence could well have been carried from the operative lodges to the speculative craft.
Also, the Benedictine elements of Masonry could be proof that men who influenced formation of the speculative Craft had in mind a nonsectarian but quasi-monastic brotherhood with members bound solemnly to each other and dedicated to principles of Godliness, service to others, self-improvement and renunciation of worldly preoccupations. Although there is no documented evidence of such a purpose on the part of early speculative Masons, the theory merits further research based upon the many direct correlations between the central tenets of the Benedictine Rule and the philosophy and ceremonies of speculative Masonry.
Footnotes
1. Nigg p. 144.
2. Knowles, p. 4.
3. The remaining material in this section on the Benedictine Rule is taken from Fry.
4. Fry, p. 29.
5. Fry points out that St. Benedict died in 547 A.D. Fry, p. 9.
6. Fry, p. 79
7. Jones, pp. 59-60; 81-82.
Reference List
Timothy Fry, O.S.B., The Rule of St. Benedict, Liturgical Press; Collegeville, MN; 1982
Bernard E. Jones, Freemasons' Guide and Compedium, Barnes & Noble, New York, 1994
Dom, David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England, Cambridge University Press, 1950
Wulstan Mork, O.S.B., The Benedictine Way, St. Bede’s Press, Petersham, Mass., 1987
Walter Nigg, Warriors of God, Knopf, New York, 1959
----o----
by H. Edward Struble, MPS
At almost any gathering of thoughtful Masons, the future of our beloved fraternity, is a much discussed subject. It is my intention, in the following pages, to set forth my views on what I believe is in store during the next thirty years. Actually only one of two things will take place. Either The Masonic Movement will fade away and be lost, or it will continue to exist in one form or another. That is an over simplification of the subject but it establishes the premise of this writing.
First, ponder with me this possibility. Your mail arrives and, much to your surprise, there is a letter from Grand Lodge and you read
"Dear Sir; it is with the deepest regret that I must inform you of the death of the Masonic Fraternity. It died last Friday."
Your first reaction is one of disbelief . . . then anger--finally utter disappointment. You say to yourself, "How could this happen? Why wasn't I told earlier this could happen?" . . . you read further. The letter explains that the death wasn't accidental or a surprise, rather it might have been predictable. During the last few years, the organization has shown many symptoms of not being well . . . here are a few . . . Lack of Energy
Many officers and members seemed to lack the energy to strengthen the organization not much extra effort was displayed such as that extra effort which causes a brother to pick up another brother on his way to a lodge meeting, the offer to help out at a function or a meeting, volunteering to learn a difficult section of ritual or to be a member of one of the many vital committees, making no effort to learn to plan and execute interesting programs and meetings.
Loss of Vision
This was continual, though gradual, members became less able to see the opportunities to build and grow with the fraternity. Very few could see freemasonry returned to The so-called "golden era," when Masonic activities and masons were the warp and woof of the fabric of community life.
Loss of Memory
There was a tendency to forget about absentee and shut-in members, lack of visits to the old timers and the ill by the officers of the various bodies, members often forgetting to attend lodge meetings and district functions, and Dues payment being late or neglected.
Lack of Communication
Two symptoms that are practically the same were "difficulty with communications" Accompanied by "an inability to hear regularly." Masters have not always communicated with the members, and vice versa. Calls for volunteers quite often were not heard. Requests for changes were not always heard by masters. Requests for officers to attend practice and training sessions were often ignored. Some past masters stopped hearing altogether.
Loss of Charity
One of the major breakdowns came with the discovery that the organization was suffering from "cirrhosis of the giver" (cirrhosis means hardening and contraction) This started off gradually, and then became critical. The first signs, were, less interest in the regular charitable causes, i.e., Masonic homes, veterans programs, orphanages, eastern star homes, brotherhood funds, etc. Then followed a reluctance to give financial assistance to anyone other than those with Masonic connections.
Loss of Heart
The final blow was the "loss of heart." First evidence of this was the tendency not to be quite as concerned with the people in the community, especially the youth. "This loss of heart" kept the local lodges from attracting new, young vital petitioners, and that, sir, is what finally killed the organization.
All right, that was imaginary . . . or was it? Membership declines every year. North Carolina has almost 400 Lodges with approximately 70,000 members. I understand that a few years ago there was a net loss of a couple of thousand members. If the membership for an average Lodge in North Carolina would be 250 brothers, that loss would equal the closing of eight Lodges. This situation is not unique to North Carolina. It is wide spread. I know The Grand Lodge of New York is busy trying to remedy this with extensive programs, as are many more Grand Jurisdictions. The key to this decline may be the retort, "Never in my life time," by some members every time an innovative or new approach is suggested. Freemasonry was not born in its present form. Many changes have taken place down through the years and they must continue if it is to survive.
Each year almost every Mason knows of at least one solid, useful, dedicated citizen who would be an asset to the Fraternity, but who we have been unable to attract. Could it happen? Could Masonry die out? Many believe Freemasonry will always be here and don't worry about it. The same thing was thought of the Grange in its heyday. What has happened to the Odd Fellows? What has caused the reduced activities in the Demolay? What are we doing to make our Fraternity exciting enough to compete with Monday Nite Football, the bowling league, World Series, golf scores and TV?
Throughout every Grand Jurisdiction there are many Community Colleges and Universities. What, if anything, is, being done or can be done to attract, touch, and influence the young men that attend those institutions?
Whatever happened to:
Police Square Clubs & Degree Teams Fireman's Square Clubs & Degree Teams Fellowcraft Clubs Past Masters Clubs Masonic Bands Masonic Parade Groups on Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, etc.
If these things can be neglected and disappear, what is to keep the entire Fraternity from following suit? Do the weaknesses illustrated above that exist today portend a general weakening of the fraternal unity? If it is not to happen, it will be because Masons everywhere are being forced to face up to the problems, and are now starting to look for solutions. Mind you, I said solutions because all of us know that there is no one answer to all of the difficulties. There is no quick fix, and no one person will have the complete solution. What is needed most is an open mind and willingness to suggest daring and innovative steps which might lead to some solutions. Personally, I am of the belief that Freemasonry will survive, but only because the Fraternity as a whole will have moved into the 21st century.
In order to position ourselves to see what I think will happen in the next thirty years, let's now consider ourselves in the year 2024, looking back to review our progress
Many things are different, not just transportation and communication. A good example of this, there is no longer a drug problem with the young. In the year of 2002, The Masonic Medical Research Laboratory at Utica New York did the basic research, then a consortium of three pharmaceutical companies developed a drug that is included in each child's preschool immunization program. It is a one dose injection that lasts for fifteen years. Any one using any of the mind-altering drugs, in any form suffers an immediate loss of all body hair for a six month period. Youngsters do not care for the identifying appearance.
The divisive problem of Prince Hall Affiliation thankfully was settled, and now all Masons enjoy complete harmony, regardless of previous attachments. It came about in the year of 2003, prompted by a move made in 1999 by the Grand Lodge of Nebraska. They introduced a very simple but effective program of each District issuing dual membership cards to every member of the Prince Hall Affiliation. The Prince Hall Affiliation issued Dual membership cards to all of the members of F&AM of Nebraska, making everyone a member at large within the state. This led to a majority of members of both groups affiliating with a Lodge of their choice. This idea was the initial step, and other Jurisdictions incorporated it into their individual programs. By the year 2003, 95 per cent of all Grand Jurisdictions had adopted the program in some form.
In 1997, a giant step for Masonry was a program started by the Grand Lodge of Michigan. A "Reach Out" program aimed at college students. Very simply, very effectively, Lodges throughout the state contacted the Colleges and Universities in their area and set up a program which made sure that no students spent a Christmas, Easter, or Thanksgiving holiday alone on campus because of the lack of money or time required to get back to their homes. The Brothers of the Jewish faith took care of Yom Kippur, Hanukkah and Rosh Hashanah. The Lodges ran a big PR campaign aimed at these students and publicized the program. They spread the word with announcements on all the bulletin boards, and contacted all of the fraternities and sororities. Masons took these young people into their homes for those holidays, served them the traditional meal, and arranged for each student to make a phone call home. As follow up, each Masonic family sent a short letter to the students parents, telling them how much they had enjoyed the company of their children. This great program spread like wild fire, and today is part of most Masonic annual programs.
In 1998, The Shrine was suddenly faced with a disturbing situation. A new health care program was put in place by the federal government. The Shrine, rightfully so, had always used the fact that no one ever paid for treatment at a Shrine Hospital as a strong point in soliciting funds. Now the Federal program would pay for the treatment anywhere it was given. After a great deal of turmoil, The Shrine decided to promote their outstanding facilities and the highly professional medical teams which they had assembled, that specialized, in problems involving children. Around this same time the Shrine started talking in their press releases about men who were Masons first, and Shriners second. This had always been understood within the Shrine, but there had seemed to be a reluctance to inform the general public of the fact.
During the years of 1996, 97, 98, and 99 a gradual change turned into a dramatic move. Temples and Lodges started making under utilized space available to the communities. Day care centers were sponsored by the Eastern Star using space other than the Lodge room, to help solve a problem common to many communities. Senior Citizens' programs were afforded a comfortable place to meet. Increased use was made for the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts.
In the year 2000, at the annual Grand Master gathering, The Grand Master of Masons for the State of Indiana put forth a suggestion that was destined to change Freemasonry in The United States forever. His suggestion was that a committee be formed to explore the notion that Freemasonry should have a National Cause, worthy of Masonic Involvement, and of great worth to all citizens of our country.
The committee consisted of the Grand Secretaries of New York California, North Dakota, and Texas. (Grand Secretaries were appointed to insure continuity) The Grand Master of Indiana was elected permanent chairman of the committee. Their first report in 2001, agreed with the need for a National Program, but identifying the cause was not settled. The committee was instructed to report at the next meeting with a slate of causes narrowed down to four suggestions.
At the 2002 meeting, the committee reported the list to be:
1. Scholarship Program for the education of young folks to become teachers and educators.
2. National system of camps for children.
3. Scholarship Program for those wishing to become Nurses.
4. An extensive Research Program to study aging.
It was decided that each Grand Master would take the list back to his Jurisdiction and have the membership decide. Each Grand Master in his own way polled his Lodges.
At the meeting in 2003, the National cause for all Masonic Lodges in The United States became Education, with scholarships to encourage college enrollment for careers in teaching. When it was finally adopted, the Fraternity was faced with the monumental task of getting the program launched on a national basis. It had to be established, financed, administered, and publicized. An umbrella program was initiated for each requirement. Each Grand Jurisdiction established a Chairman to head up Finance, one to head up Administration, and one to head up Public Relations. All of this took four years to become nationally operational By the year 2007, the program was in full swing. From then on Masonic Lodges were mentioned in the same breath as Teaching Careers. The Grand Master of Indiana explained that he was prompted to think about a national cause because of the great success which The Shrine had enjoyed with their cause of service to Crippled Children. Everyone connected the Shrine with that cause. He felt it was time to bring the country's attention to the good which Masons do, so that no longer would the public ask "What do Masons do?" Financing the project at the Lodge level took a lot of imaginative effort. One thing that helped was when the National Health Plan took over certain programs that had been supported by various Masonic Bodies: i.e., The Knights Templar Eye Foundation, and the Order of the Amaranth contributions to the Diabetes Association. This action freed up many funds which then found their way into the Scholarship Program. A series of paintings was commissioned that depicted historic Masonic activity. The first showed George Washington at the altar taking the obligation of the Third Degree. These paintings were made into Numbered and signed prints which were offered for sale on a limited basis of 2500 copies, assigning fifty to each Grand Jurisdiction. They were 16"x 20", well-framed and sold for seven hundred and fifty dollars each. This effort produced a gross revenue of $1,875,000 and a net of $1,675,000 every other year. This amounted to $37,500 per Grand Jurisdiction. The original paintings were donated to The George Washington Masonic National Memorial in Alexandria, Virginia.
Various corporations wanted to be identified with this National Program, and ways were worked out so that they could participate without diluting the Masonic credit or control. The Scholarship program had a modest start. The timetable for growth called for a minimum of twenty Scholarships per Grand Jurisdiction for each of the first three years, building to an eventual goal of five hundred per Grand Jurisdiction. That goal meant twenty-five thousand Scholarships a year. Although this goal was not reached, by the year 2014, 89% was attained.
With the national recognition and good will created by this program, petitions for membership grew at a steadily increasing rate. By the year 2014, there was an increase of 610% over the national membership in the year 2000. The year of 2001 saw that the majority of the Grand Jurisdictions had adopted the practice of having candidates elect to memorize degree work or not. To make sure each candidate fully understood what was taking place, a series of lectures was given for each degree. These lectures were fashioned after the "Wisconsin Experience" that went into effect there in 1990. This activity brought many young men into the Fraternity. That was due to the fact that the potential candidate for membership was highly mobile and conscious of the limited family time available to him. He was oriented to a world of extensive information at his finger tips through computers, television, and high speed communication. So much information was at his disposal that this candidate was more comfortable with information management and its access, than with full content. Looking back from 2024, some problems also come to mind. For example, in 1998, The Women's Movement decided that Masonic Lodges were Anti-Feminist, since women were not permitted membership. They went to court with a suit against the Grand Lodge of Washington State in order to force the acceptance of female applicants. The case dragged out for two years and, in the end, the Masonic movement defeated the suit. Masonry won because it was explained that the Masonic Family always included the Order of The Eastern Star, Jobs Daughters, the Rainbow Girls, the White Shrine, and Daughters of the Nile as well as the Scottish Rite, the York Rite, Shrine, etc. All these organizations have programs which include wives, daughters, sisters and the entire family. The cost of the defense was met by Masons sending in one dollar apiece to the Defense Fund, a very effective exercise. It allowed all Masons a chance to participate.
Another problem started a great outcry by many Masons who belong to the various bodies beyond the Master Mason degree. In Illinois in 2008, the Grand Master met with the Grand Officers of the York Rite Bodies and the Scottish Rite, and with the Imperial Potentate of The Shrine. The subject of the meeting was the loss of active members at Lodge Level because too many Masons, upon completing the three degrees, promptly affiliated with these other bodies. Most had very little knowledge of Masonry and the teachings of the degree work. The Grand Master was convinced that the strengthening pattern of neglect was caused by a dilution of time and effort, brought about by premature involvement in the higher bodies. He felt that those bodies would be better served if new Master Masons were required to remain in the Lodge for a given period of time before a petition would be considered by any of these bodies. After several meetings and heated discussions, they agreed to have it submitted to the membership for consideration. At the Grand Lodge Annual Meeting the following year it was brought forward for a vote and it passed. The ruling called for Master Masons, after taking the third degree, to be required to wait two years, and to have a record of attending four meetings a year for each year, before any petition would be given consideration. News of Illinois' new ruling spread instantly and prompted an outcry from all points of the country. It was generally reported that this move would start a trend that would raise havoc with all of these concordant bodies. By 2011 Rhode Island, Montana, South Dakota, and New Mexico had adopted similar plans. Article after article was written about the situation. After the new program had been in effect for four years in Illinois, things had quieted down and they reported that the results were good and everyone had accepted the change. Evidently the plan had a great deal of merit, but it would not get National acceptance because the pressure brought to bear by the concordant bodies. Time has healed the rift and it is rarely discussed anymore. The initiation of the National Cause program prompted quite a bit of discussion because several members felt that this would start a movement promoting a National Grand Lodge. That concern was soon laid to rest as the program proceeded, with all authority being held by the individual Grand Jurisdictions.
This does not, by any means cover all that will take place within Freemasonry during the next thirty years. The progress that I visualize will be made, but never at the expense of the Masonic tradition, history, precepts or ritual, because therein lies our strength.
The foregoing represents some thoughts, some wishful thinking, and, hopefully, some ideas that will prompt others to stretch their intellectual Cable Tows. Such effort can only bode well for the Tomorrow of Freemasonry.
----o-----
The Philalethes Society Does It Again
The Northern Light: A Window for Freemasonry, of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite, has celebrated 25 years of publication. It Editor, Richard H. Curtis, FPS, extolled the virtues of the "Top 25 Masons" of the past 25 years. The Philalethes Society made out exceptionally well within this list . Philip Berquist, MPS, is there; then there were ten who were, or are, Fellows: James R. Case, Alphonse Cerza (Past President), Thomas W. Jackson, Norman Vincent Peale, Steward M.L. Pollard, Allen E. Roberts (Past President), John J. Robinson, James Fairbairn Smith, Harold Van Buren Voorhis, and Louis L. Williams. Dick Curtis, who has been with the periodical since its inception, should have been included in the list.
----o----
by Allen E. Roberts, FPS
Oregon - Idaho - Prince Hall Masonry - what's going on? This is a question we've been asked many times during the past several months. We've been hesitant to attempt to answer the question/s. Over the years we've learned there's usually three sides to every story - his, yours, and somewhere in the middle something resembling the truth. In this case it appears there is some truth to be found on both sides. Here's some of what we've learned:
It appears the Grand Masters of Oregon, Montana and Idaho met and discussed the possible recognition of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge in Oregon. The Grand Lodge of Idaho recognized the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Oregon because it had a chartered Prince Hall Lodge in Idaho. Oregon didn't grant recognition to PHM, and claimed Idaho had no right to grant recognition to another Grand Lodge within the jurisdiction of Oregon. When Idaho refused to rescind its action, Oregon broke off relations with Idaho. Montana has taken no action in this case. This remains the condition today
* * *
Prince Hall Masonry update: In this column in the last issue we praised the United Grand Lodge of England for finally recognizing the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. It did it on December 14, 1994. It noted that all PHM is descended from the Massachusetts Prince Hall Grand Lodge. In 1989 the Grand Lodge of Connecticut and the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut granted mutual recognition to each other. Grand Lodges that followed included: Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming; California has agreed to recognition, provided the PHGL does the same. Two Canadian Grand Lodges have also: Ouebec and New Brunswick. In March 1995 Massachusetts approved mutual recognition. The Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite and its Prince Hall counterpart have agreed in principle, but must wait for ratification by their Supreme Councils. In the words of a famous actor (whose name I can't remember!): "How sweet it is!"
* * *
Raymond H. Dragat, MPS, a 72year- Master Mason, received the 'Charles L. Twyman Distinguished Masonic award' of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut. Years earlier he had written a poem that began: "I'd like to think when life is done / That I had filled a needed post. / That here and there I'd paid my fare / With more than idle talk and boast. "
* * *
Robert O. Ralston, SGC, writing in The Northern Light: A Window for Freemasonry, of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite, recounted many of the achievements recorded in the past, and wisely added: "Masonry's mission must fit the times. The issue is not one of compromise but of taking responsibility, not one of turning our backs on the past but of anticipating the future with enthusiasm, not one of putting our tools aside but of actually putting them to work...
"There is a way to measure Masonic success. We can ask ourselves, 'Where have we broken new ground today? What are we building?'... What are we doing to make Masonry more attractive, more vital, more alive, more useful? "
* * *
Writing in The Wisconsin Masonic Journal, Grand Master Stanley R. Jagow said: "The position of Worshipful Master holds very little similarity to any other leadership role any man has ever held. It is closer to becoming the CEO of a small corporation for only one year than anything else. Therefore, the better that man is prepared, the more enjoyable his term is going to be. In Masonic terms, if his drawings [plans] are on the trestleboard and have been shared by the craftsmen, the better chance he has at having participation [this is the key]...Masons not only vote with ballot box. They also vote with their feet. " He emphasized that well planned programs must be carried out. Members judge a Lodge by what was done at the last meeting. Public relations are important and necessary to let the outside world know the beauties of Freemasonry.
* * *
Along with many others, we regret the demise of the American Masonic Review. Pete Normand, MPS, did an exceptional job of providing the Masonic world with behind the scenes information normally not available. His insight and comments were well-founded. From bitter experience we believed his expertise was doomed to failure. Over the years we've found too many of our members have not found the beauties of the philosophy of Freemasonry. Too many have not learned that the search for Truth has rewards far beyond our expectations. The Philalethes Society has attempted to make this search interesting since 1928. Even so, its membership comprises only a fraction of the number it should reach. We hope Pete's scholarship will continue to be shared for years to come, primarily through the pages of The Philalethes.
* * *
Kansas City, Kansas, will be the site for the Semi-Annual meeting of The Philalethes Society on September 16, 1995.
All indications are that this will be one of the most successful, Semi-Annuals in years. Several countries will be represented by Members of the Society. Cornerstone Computer Chapter, composed of Society members on the Masonic Forum of CompuServe, will be there in great numbers.
There will be demonstrations of how the computer can benefit Freemasonry in every area in today's world. These will show us how we can learn more about Freemasonry in a month than we normally could in years. Put the date on your must do calendar.