Excerpt: Dare We Be Masons?

"The danger in an organization such as ours is that, while it begins with ideals and principles, the organization may become the greatest enemy to those ideals and principles.

Some person has imagined a conversation between the devil and some angels. The angels proudly told the devil that a way had been found to defeat him. When he asked how it would be done, they told him that God was going to give men lofty ideals and challenging principles to be proclaimed to the world.

The devil just laughed, and told them that he could not be defeated that way, for all he would have to do would be to institutionalize the ideals and the principles, and it would only be a matter of time until men would forget the ideals and principles as they tried to keep the institution alive.

As I once heard a friend of mine explain, "first the idea creates the organization, then the organization chokes the idea." We can become so concerned about keeping an organization alive that we forget the ideas and ideals that give it birth. We begin by having a great ideal force our thinking and acting into new channels, and we end by serving an organization. Freemasonry must be a force to be used, and not a form to be served."

-- M.W. Bro. Rev. Dr. Thomas Sherrard Roy, PGM (1951-3) GLMA: Dare We Be Masons? 1966

Masonic Snobs by Bro Bliss Kelly, MPS [Okl]

Reposted from a recent email newsletter by Bro Ed Halpaus.

Original article appeared on the August 1960 issue of the Philalethes Society.

The Philalethes Society [or the Masonic Philalethes Society - MPS] is an international Masonic research society. The name is "derived from two Greek words, philos and alethes. It means lover of truth [Fiat Lux]. The Philalethes Society was founded on October 1, 1928, by a group of Masonic Students. It was designed for Freemasons desirous of seeking and spreading Masonic light.

In 1946 The Philalethes Magazine was established to publish articles by and for its members. The sole purpose of this Research Society is to act as a clearing house for Masonic knowledge. It exchanges ideas, researches problems confronting Freemasonry, and passes them along to the Masonic world.

Its membership consists of Members and 40 Fellows who are Master Masons in good standing in a Regular Masonic Lodge anywhere in the world. Today the Society has members within 185 Regular Grand Lodges."

----------------------

Masonic Snobs by Bro Bliss Kelly, [MPS, Okla].

In a Masonic Lodge all ranks are leveled and all distinctions donnish [banish?]. The general and the private are equals within the sacred walls of the Lodge, and the laborer, the professor, the mechanic and the industrialist, the common man and the famous meet upon that level which only Masons can truly understand.

Masonry has prided itself, that it regards no man for his worldly wealth or honors and that it is the internal and not the external qualifications of a man which should recommend him to be made a Mason.

These principles are impressed upon every candidate many times as he passes through the ritual of the degrees. If any one thing may be said to be stressed more than any other it is this insistence upon equality. It is also said that every man should be accorded that respect which is due him because of his achievements, but no true Mason expects anything more than respect from other Masons.

Why, then, are there some Blue Lodges which require all officers to appear at all communications dressed in formal clothing? Does this tend to promote the idea of equality? Does it create a desire to attend Lodge on the part of those who do not have (or want) formal attire? Or, does it make him feel out of place or on a lower level than those who strut in tuxedos?

When an officer of such a Lodge is asked such questions he explains formal dress adds dignity and impressiveness to the ritualistic work and proceedings of the Lodge.

This may be true but what kind of dignity? The stonemason who observes the judges of a supreme court, clothed in black robes and sitting in high-backed chairs upon elevated benches, is impressed with the dignity of the court. But is there any equality there? These judges have the power to take away his property, his wife, his children even his life.

There are those who would go to the other extreme. Recently, on a hot summer day, an Entered Apprentice degree was being conferred by a team without coats and a man who presided in the East wearing a battered straw hat and a wad of tobacco in his cheek, with no tie and his shirt unbuttoned at the neck. The candidate was not impressed; in fact, he never returned to receive the other degrees.

Contrasting this was a Master Mason degree conferred in a country Lodge which had the ancient pot-bellied stove for heat no carpets and painted boxes for pedestals and an altar. Yet, the proceedings were highly dignified. The team was composed of two farmers, one merchant, a lawyer, a rural mail carrier, a teacher and a certificate teacher of the work. It was impossible to determine, from appearances or actions, the occupations of any of them: The rural mail carrier, a teacher and Master: The candidate was almost overwhelmed with the great lessons of the degree, expressing a desire to begin working in the Lodge as soon as he could prepare himself.

Then there are those Lodges whose members seem to think they are superior in some way to members of other Lodges, and want to convert their meeting places into country clubs or town clubs, hoping to attract "high class" men as members. Is this Masonry, or merely a means of indirectly soliciting members? Can one Masonic Lodge be "better" or more "high class" than any other?

These are challenging questions in this fast-changing world, and merit serious discussion. Many believe that the attitude of the Masonic Fraternity should change to meet these conditions; that the mere recital of ritual is not attractive enough to bring rank-and-file members to Lodge meetings, and insist that something more must be offered.

Fraternization with other members at Lodge meetings, usually mentioned as a central attraction, has little to offer. The active workers and officers are too busy for anything more than friendly greetings and the others are mostly old men whose minds dwell in the past. What is there to do besides sit in uncomfortable chairs and watch incompetent degree teams stumble and falter in conferring the work?

Most Lodges have tried socials and evenings of entertainment for members and their families. Attendance is seldom good, and so very few of these are planned.

Some Lodges are now planning to build recreation and entertainment facilities around a centrally located Lodge hall. Some plan to add a golf course, swimming pool and other facilities where members and their families may enjoy themselves or the families can amuse themselves while members are attending Lodge meetings.

What would be the cost of all these things, and how high would dues and assessments have to be to pay for all this? Would this attract the well-to-do who could afford such luxuries and drive away the common man?

Wouldn't this make greater Masonic snobs out of the members of such Lodges?

After all, Masonry must be kept upon the level of equality and Masons must meet upon that level: otherwise, it will deteriorate into a social fraternity and lose its identity as Masonry, ancient and unchanging.

True Masonry needs nothing more than its landmarks and its ritual to make it attractive to every good man, when it is properly viewed. The difficulty seems to be that we expect Masonry to be all things to all men. It was never intended to be that.

When Masonry has conferred its degrees and taught its members the sublime principles for which it stands, it has laid that foundation upon which to build a righteous life, and its work is finished. From there on, it is up to the individual members to practice brotherly love, relief and truth, acting upon the plumb of rectitude, meeting upon the level of equality and parting upon the square of virtue and morality.

In that case there can be no Masonic snobs.

------------------------

This article by Bro Kelly; which was written more than half a century ago, is still true today as it is when it was first written in the 60's. Reaslistically, class distinctions can not be banished altogether - there were several political "philosophers" [Lenin and Mao, to name a few] who have tried to create such classless society but failed. It seems no amount of laws could and can dictate how human beings act. People will find ways to corrupt laws and find loopholes to circumvent for their own selfish ends.

Thus the way of Masonry - changing its adherents one at a time in their hearts. Teaching them that this world might not be perfect but we need to strive to be as upright as best as we could - not only towards our brethren, their widows and orphans but towards all mankind. And what better way to start the process but within ourselves [in our hearts]; in our Lodges and churches, and our community. Beginning with ourselves and day to day actions and hopefully by setting a good example we can convince others the way of Masonry.

As enunciated by Bro Joseph Fort Newton in his book, "The Builders" -

"... when Masonry, instead of identifying itself with particular schemes of reform, and thus becoming involved in endless turmoil and dispute, estranging men whom she seeks to bless, devotes all her benign energy and influence to ennobling the souls of men, she is doing fundamental work in behalf of all high enterprises. By as much as she succeeds, every noble cause succeeds; by as much as she fails, everything fails! By its ministry to the individual man--drawing him into the circle of a great friendship, exalting his faith, refining his ideals, enlarging his sympathies, and setting his feet in the long white path--Masonry best serves society and the state."

Grand Lodge Is Not Separate Entity by Elbert Bede, M.P.S.

It is something approaching a universal practice among Masons to erroneously speak of Grand Lodge as a separate entity; as though it were something apart from the Lodges from which it derives revenues for its support and upon which it imposes rules and regulations. I sense two reasons for this mistaken conception.

Within my memory it was the common practice to designate Lodges as "subordinate" and to speak of them as such. Some Grand Lodge codes may yet designate Lodges as subordinate. The Oregon code formerly used that expression. Happily, however, the inaccurate word has been replaced, or is being replaced in all codes by the more accurate "constituent," or reference is made to "Lodges," without any qualifying adjective, yet the idea expressed by "subordinate" still prevails among the greater number of the Brethren.

As a matter of fact, the Lodges, instead of being subordinate, control the operation of Grand Lodge. It is true that its officers, committee members and past elective officers, the last named usually being Past Grand Masters, are members of Grand Lodge; but every officer, every committee member and every past elective officer might be present in his capacity as such and yet Grand Lodge could not be opened. The representatives of a specified number of Lodges (seven seems to be universal) must be registered and present before the Grand Master may sound his gavel. No legislation may be enacted, no change in any law, rule or regulation may be made, no Grand Lodge officer may be elected or installed unless the representatives of the required number of Lodges remain present to maintain a quorum and the number required for a quorum was fixed by the representatives of the Lodges while assembled as a Grand Lodge. The officers, committee members and past elective officers are powerless to proceed as a Grand Lodge unless the representatives of the Lodges make it possible for them to do so. In my opinion, it might with more truth be said that Grand Lodge is subordinate to the constituent Lodges than that the Lodges are subordinate to the Grand Lodge.

After Grand Lodge has been legally opened, each constituent Lodge is entitled to three votes if it has any representative whatsoever present, while officers, committee members and past elective officers have only one vote each. The constituent Lodges, therefore, have a great preponderance in voting power, and their representatives not only may control the acts of Grand Ledge, but are responsible for whatever laws, rules and regulations may be in the code for enforcement by the Grand Lodge or by the Grand Master.

It is true that the Grand Master, except for the few days of each year when his Grand Lodge is in session, is actually the Grand Lodge and rules the Fraternity in his jurisdiction, but he does that wholly through powers given him by representatives of the Lodges while assembled as a Grand Lodge, or through lack of restraint placed upon powers inherent in the office by ancient custom; but the Grand Master completes his term in office by reporting his acts and decisions to the assembled representatives of the Lodges, who may nullify anything the Grand Master has done while acting as the Grand Lodge. Happily, nullification of the acts of a Grand Master is not common.

Showing further the powers of the representatives of the Lodges, there is no appeal from their decisions when acting as the preponderant force in Grand Lodge; not even if they should illegally override the provisions of the code which they have themselves enacted .

A second reason why Grand Lodge has been pictured as a separate entity, as something apart from the Lodges, is that representatives of Lodges have so frequently played such a small part in Grand Lodge communications. Usually the representatives of Lodges are persons unaccustomed to giving voice to their ideas before such an assemblage as a Grand Lodge. The result often has been that officers and Past Grand Masters, accustomed to participation in Grand Lodge proceedings and to expressing themselves in assemblies, have seemed to take the proceedings out of the hands of the representatives of the Lodges. This has been, not because the officers and Past Grand Masters wished to play that part, but because the representatives of the Lodges hesitated to take the part that was theirs to take.

In Oregon, all Grand Masters of at least the last half dozen years have informed the assembled delegates, as soon as Grand Lodge had been opened, that they were the Grand Lodge, have urged them to participate and have given them every opportunity to do so. Representatives of the Lodges have followed that advice to such an extent that a new and healthful feeling toward Grand Lodge has developed.

Inasmuch as representatives of the Lodges may control the acts of any session of Grand Lodge, have power to enact any legislation they may desire and to defeat any legislation which they disapprove, and are responsible for the election of those who carry on the business of Grand Lodge for them, they should realize that any criticism offered by them of any action taken by the Grand Lodge of which they are a part is, in fact, criticism of themselves for having failed to exercise their prerogatives in accordance with the desires of the Brethren whom they represented.

Grand Lodge is not a separate entity. It is composed of constituent Lodges which, through their representatives are responsible for it and all its acts.

------------------------

Bro Elbert Bede - Editor and publisher of several periodicals. Born June 28, 1881. Retired in 1936, moving to Portland, Oregon where he purchased the Masonic Analyst, changing its name to Oregon Mason in 1938 and later to Oregon Freemason.

Raised in Chicago Lodge No 271, North Branch, Minnesota and later affiliated with Ashlar Lodge No 209 of Portland, Oregon. Raised in Cisago Lodge 232, Illinois. Member of Cottage Grove Lodge No 51, Oregon.

Bro Elbert Bede was editor of the Oregon Mason for many years. He was also an accomplished speaker, and in 1945 a number of his 3-5 –7 Minute talks were published together as a book; it seems to have weathered the years well. After his death thirty more of his talks were collected; and are published for the first time. They are not intended to be brilliant papers on Masonic education, or glittering gems of oratory, but just simple thoughtful addresses for the banquet hour. They have a distantly American flavor; but, if finding words doesn’t come easy to you, some of Bede’s talks could be adapted for use as well. For example, he has good thoughts on “Interpreting our Symbols.” “The Hour of Refreshment,” and “Why not Organize for Public Service?”

Famous for his masonic books, 3-5-7 Minute Talks on Freemasonry, 5-15 Minute Talks and 1st Landmarks of Freemasonry (1954).

As researched from various web sites. [MCBJ, Moderator]

-----------------------

Article above first appeared in the May 1946 Issue of the Philalethes.

Reposted by Ed Halpaus in [Corinthian] More Light #222 - Grand Lodge.