"Don't expect perfection in a man because he is a Freemason. If you do, you will be disappointed. Masonry makes a man better, but no human agency can make him perfect. If he is a Mason, you have a right to presume he is a good man, but do not condemn Masonry even if a few Masons turn out bad. Even the Great Teacher Himself had a Judas. The aim and purpose of Masonry is to receive none but good men, keep them good and make them better. Judge the institution not by a few failures, but by the average of its successes. That average is high and it consequently gives standing to its members, but it cannot be an infallible guide."
Author unknown
[via WBro Russ]
Monday, November 21, 2011
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
JACHIN AND BOAZ: The Hidden Power by Thomas Troward
"AND he reared up the pillars before the temple, one on the right hand, and the other on the left; and called the name of that on the right hand Jachin, and the name of that on the left Boaz." (II Chron. 17.)
Very likely some of us have wondered what was the meaning of these two mysterious pillars set up by Solomon in front of his temple, and why they were called by these strange names; and then we have dropped the subject as one of those inexplicable things handed down in the Bible from old time which, we suppose, can have no practical interest for us at the present day. Nevertheless, these strange names are not without a purpose. They contain the key to the entire Bible and to the whole order of Nature, and as emblems of the two great principles that are the pillars of the universe, they fitly stood at the threshold of that temple which was designed to symbolise all the mysteries of Being.
In all the languages of the Semitic stock the letters J and Y are interchangeable, as we see in the modern Arabic "Yakub" for "Jacob" and the old Hebrew "Yaveh" for "Jehovah." This gives us the form "Yachin," which at once reveals the enigma. The word Yak signifies "one"; and the termination "hi," or "hin," is an intensitive which may be rendered in English by "only." Thus the word "Jachin" resolves itself into the words "one only," the all-embracing Unity.
The meaning of Boaz is clearly seen in the book of Ruth. There Boaz appears as the kinsman exercising the right of pre-emption so familiar to those versed in Oriental law--a right which has for its purpose the maintenance of the Family as the social unit. According to this widely-spread custom, the purchaser, who is not a member of the family, buys the property subject to the right of kinsmen within certain degrees to purchase it back, and so bring it once more into the family to which it originally belonged. Whatever may be our personal opinions regarding the vexed questions of dogmatic theology, we can all agree as to the general principle indicated in the role acted by Boaz. He brings back the alienated estate into the family--that is to say, he "redeems" it in the legal sense of the word. As a matter of law his power to do this results from his membership in the family; but his motive for doing it is love, his affection for Ruth. Without pushing the analogy too far we may say, then, that Boaz represents the principle of redemption in the widest sense of reclaiming an estate by right of relationship, while the innermost moving power in its recovery is Love.
This is what Boaz stands for in the beautiful story of Ruth, and there is no reason why we should not let the same name stand for the same thing when we seek the meaning of the mysterious pillar. Thus the two pillars typify Unity and the redeeming power of Love, with the significant suggestion that the redemption results from the Unity. They correspond with the two "bonds," or uniting principles spoken of by St. Paul, "the Unity of the Spirit which is the Bond of Peace," and "Love, which is the Bond of Perfectness."
The former is Unity of Being; the latter, Unity of Intention: and the principle of this Dual-Unity is well illustrated by the story of Boaz. The whole story proceeds on the idea of the Family as the social unit, the root-conception of all Oriental law, and if we consider the Family in this light, we shall see how exactly it embodies the two-fold idea of Jachin and Boaz, unity of Being and unity of Thought. The Family forms a unit because all the members proceed from a common progenitor, and are thus all of one blood; but, although this gives them a natural unity of Being of which they cannot divest themselves, it is not enough in itself to make them a united family, as unfortunately experience too often shows. Something more is wanted, and that something is Love. There must be a personal union brought about by sympathetic Thought to complete the natural union resulting from birth. The inherent unity must be expressed by the Individual volition of each member, and thus the Family becomes the ideally perfect social unit; a truth to which St. Paul alludes when he calls God the Father from Whom every family in heaven and on earth is named. Thus Boaz stands for the principle which brings back to the original Unity that which has been for a time separated from it. There has never been any separation of actual Being--the family right always subsisted in the property even while in the hands of strangers, otherwise it could never have been brought back; but it requires the Love principle to put this right into effective operation.
When this begins to work in the knowledge of its right to do so, then there is the return of the individual to the Unity, and the recognition of himself as the particular expression of the Universal in virtue of his own nature.
These two pillars, therefore, stand for the two great spiritual principles that are the basis of all Life: Jachin typifying the Unity resulting from Being, and Boaz typifying the Unity resulting from Love. In this Dual-Unity we find the key to all conceivable involution or evolution of Spirit; and it is therefore not without reason that the record of these two ancient pillars has been preserved in our Scriptures. And finally we may take this as an index to the character of our Scriptures generally. They contain infinite meanings; and often those passages which appear on the surface to be most meaningless will be found to possess the deepest significance. The Book, which we often read so superficially,hides beneath its sometimes seemingly trivial words the secrets of other things. The twin pillars Jachin and Boaz bear witness to this truth.
Very likely some of us have wondered what was the meaning of these two mysterious pillars set up by Solomon in front of his temple, and why they were called by these strange names; and then we have dropped the subject as one of those inexplicable things handed down in the Bible from old time which, we suppose, can have no practical interest for us at the present day. Nevertheless, these strange names are not without a purpose. They contain the key to the entire Bible and to the whole order of Nature, and as emblems of the two great principles that are the pillars of the universe, they fitly stood at the threshold of that temple which was designed to symbolise all the mysteries of Being.
In all the languages of the Semitic stock the letters J and Y are interchangeable, as we see in the modern Arabic "Yakub" for "Jacob" and the old Hebrew "Yaveh" for "Jehovah." This gives us the form "Yachin," which at once reveals the enigma. The word Yak signifies "one"; and the termination "hi," or "hin," is an intensitive which may be rendered in English by "only." Thus the word "Jachin" resolves itself into the words "one only," the all-embracing Unity.
The meaning of Boaz is clearly seen in the book of Ruth. There Boaz appears as the kinsman exercising the right of pre-emption so familiar to those versed in Oriental law--a right which has for its purpose the maintenance of the Family as the social unit. According to this widely-spread custom, the purchaser, who is not a member of the family, buys the property subject to the right of kinsmen within certain degrees to purchase it back, and so bring it once more into the family to which it originally belonged. Whatever may be our personal opinions regarding the vexed questions of dogmatic theology, we can all agree as to the general principle indicated in the role acted by Boaz. He brings back the alienated estate into the family--that is to say, he "redeems" it in the legal sense of the word. As a matter of law his power to do this results from his membership in the family; but his motive for doing it is love, his affection for Ruth. Without pushing the analogy too far we may say, then, that Boaz represents the principle of redemption in the widest sense of reclaiming an estate by right of relationship, while the innermost moving power in its recovery is Love.
This is what Boaz stands for in the beautiful story of Ruth, and there is no reason why we should not let the same name stand for the same thing when we seek the meaning of the mysterious pillar. Thus the two pillars typify Unity and the redeeming power of Love, with the significant suggestion that the redemption results from the Unity. They correspond with the two "bonds," or uniting principles spoken of by St. Paul, "the Unity of the Spirit which is the Bond of Peace," and "Love, which is the Bond of Perfectness."
The former is Unity of Being; the latter, Unity of Intention: and the principle of this Dual-Unity is well illustrated by the story of Boaz. The whole story proceeds on the idea of the Family as the social unit, the root-conception of all Oriental law, and if we consider the Family in this light, we shall see how exactly it embodies the two-fold idea of Jachin and Boaz, unity of Being and unity of Thought. The Family forms a unit because all the members proceed from a common progenitor, and are thus all of one blood; but, although this gives them a natural unity of Being of which they cannot divest themselves, it is not enough in itself to make them a united family, as unfortunately experience too often shows. Something more is wanted, and that something is Love. There must be a personal union brought about by sympathetic Thought to complete the natural union resulting from birth. The inherent unity must be expressed by the Individual volition of each member, and thus the Family becomes the ideally perfect social unit; a truth to which St. Paul alludes when he calls God the Father from Whom every family in heaven and on earth is named. Thus Boaz stands for the principle which brings back to the original Unity that which has been for a time separated from it. There has never been any separation of actual Being--the family right always subsisted in the property even while in the hands of strangers, otherwise it could never have been brought back; but it requires the Love principle to put this right into effective operation.
When this begins to work in the knowledge of its right to do so, then there is the return of the individual to the Unity, and the recognition of himself as the particular expression of the Universal in virtue of his own nature.
These two pillars, therefore, stand for the two great spiritual principles that are the basis of all Life: Jachin typifying the Unity resulting from Being, and Boaz typifying the Unity resulting from Love. In this Dual-Unity we find the key to all conceivable involution or evolution of Spirit; and it is therefore not without reason that the record of these two ancient pillars has been preserved in our Scriptures. And finally we may take this as an index to the character of our Scriptures generally. They contain infinite meanings; and often those passages which appear on the surface to be most meaningless will be found to possess the deepest significance. The Book, which we often read so superficially,hides beneath its sometimes seemingly trivial words the secrets of other things. The twin pillars Jachin and Boaz bear witness to this truth.
Masonic Disclaimer by Bro. Robert H. Meyer
"Each Mason must think for himself, and each is entitled to write whatever he wishes.
Masonry has no dogma. An official position would deny a man his right to think for himself and his right to follow the dictates of his own faith. Each Mason has a right to seek Masonry for what he wants to find. It is his right to believe as he wishes; BUT it is not his right to force that belief on others.
There are only three documents a Mason must abide by; the Ritual, the Constitution of the Grand Body in whose jurisdiction he lives and the by-laws of his Lodge, Chapter, etc. The Rituals embody the whole of Masonic instruction. The latter two contain the Laws, Rules and Regulations necessary for their government as is necessary for all organizations. Everything else is opinion.
Masonry has no dogma. An official position would deny a man his right to think for himself and his right to follow the dictates of his own faith. Each Mason has a right to seek Masonry for what he wants to find. It is his right to believe as he wishes; BUT it is not his right to force that belief on others.
There are only three documents a Mason must abide by; the Ritual, the Constitution of the Grand Body in whose jurisdiction he lives and the by-laws of his Lodge, Chapter, etc. The Rituals embody the whole of Masonic instruction. The latter two contain the Laws, Rules and Regulations necessary for their government as is necessary for all organizations. Everything else is opinion.
Benjamin Franklin on Freemasonry
Freemasonry has tenets peculiar to itself. They serve as testimonials of character and qualifications, which are only conferred after due course of instruction and examination. These are of no small value; they speak a universal language, and act as a passport to the attentions and support of the initiated in all parts of the world. They cannot be lost as long as memory retains its power. Let the possessor of them be expatriated, shipwrecked or imprisoned, let him be stripped of everything he has got in the world, still those credentials remain, and are available for use as circumstances require. The good effects they have produced are established by the most incontestable facts of history. They have stayed the uplifted hand of the destroyer; they have softened the asperities of the tyrant; they have mitigated the horrors of captivity; they have subdued the rancour of malevolence; and broken down the barriers of political animosity and sectarian alienation. On the field of battle, in the solitudes of the uncultivated forest, or in the busy haunts of the crowded city, they have made men of the most hostile feelings, the most distant regions, and diversified conditions, rush to the aid of each other, and feel a special joy and satisfaction that they have been able to afford relief to a Brother Mason.
Monday, February 21, 2011
A Mason
"A Mason is a man whose conduct should be squared by strict rectitude and justice towards his fellow-creatures [and NOT only towards his brethren & their 'widows & orphans' in Masonry!]; his demeanour should be marked by the level of courtesy and kindness; while uprightness of heart and integrity of action, symbolized by the plumb, should be his distinguishing characteristic; and thus guided by the moveable jewels of Masonry, he may descend the vale of life with joy, in the hope of being accepted by the Most High, as a successful candidate for admission into the Grand Lodge above."
"It is useless to profess a knowledge of Freemasonry, if we do not frame our lives according to it. It is not enough to be acquainted with its doctrines and precepts, if we fail to reduce them to practice. In such a case, our knowledge will rather tend to our dishonour in this world, and will certainly be an additional article of accusation against us in the next. It would be very unreasonable to doubt the beneficial effects of our masonic precepts; but to admit them to be true, and yet act as if they were false, would be unwise in the highest degree."
p578 & p580, Robert McCoy's Dictionary of Freemasonry
"It is useless to profess a knowledge of Freemasonry, if we do not frame our lives according to it. It is not enough to be acquainted with its doctrines and precepts, if we fail to reduce them to practice. In such a case, our knowledge will rather tend to our dishonour in this world, and will certainly be an additional article of accusation against us in the next. It would be very unreasonable to doubt the beneficial effects of our masonic precepts; but to admit them to be true, and yet act as if they were false, would be unwise in the highest degree."
p578 & p580, Robert McCoy's Dictionary of Freemasonry
Monday, January 24, 2011
Five Points of Fellowship
The Five Points of Fellowship, as every Master Masons knows, contain the essence of the doctrine of brotherhood. But many a new brother asks, pertinently, “why are they called “Points?”
In the Old Constitutions, as explained in the Halliwell or Regius manuscript, are fifteen regulations, called “points.” The old verse runs:
“Fifteen artyculus there they soughton And fifteen poyntys there they wrogton.”
Translated into easy English, this reads:
“Fifteen articles there they sought And fifteen points there they wrought.”
Phillips “New World of Words,” published in 1706, defines “point” as “a head, or chief matter.” Moreover, an operative Masons “points” the seams of as wall by filling in the chinks left in laying bricks or stone, thus completing the structure.
In older days of the Speculative Art there were “twelve original points” as we learn from the old English lectures, done away with by the United Grand Lodge of England at the time of the reconciliation of 1813. They were introduced by the following passage:
“There are in Freemasonry twelve original points, which form the basis of the system and comprehend the whole ceremony of initiation. Without the existence of these points, no man ever was, or can be, legally and essentially received into the Order. Every person who is made a Mason must go through these twelve forms and ceremonies, not only in the first degree, but in every subsequent one.”
The twelve points were: Opening, Preparation, Report, Entrance, Prayer, Circumambulation , Advancing. Obligation, Investure, Northeast Corner and Closing; and each was symbolized by one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel for ingenious reasons not necessary to set forth here.
The twelve original points were never introduced into the United States, and are now no longer used in England, although the ceremonies which they typify, of course, are integral parts of all Masonic rituals.
Our Five Points of Fellowship are not allied to these, except as they are reflected in the word “points.” We also find this relationship in the Perfect Points of our Entrance, once called Principal Points. Dr. Oliver, famous, learned and not always accurate Masonic student and writer (1782-1867) sums up the Five Points in his “Landmarks,” as follows:
“Assisting a brother in his distress, supporting him in his virtuous undertakings, praying for his welfare, keeping inviolate his secrets and vindicating his reputation as well in his absence as in his presence.”
by which it will be seen that in Oliver’s day the Five Points were not exactly as they are with us now.
Strange though it seems, a change was made in the symbolism of the Five Points as recently as 1842, at the Baltimore Masonic Convention. Prior to that time, according to Cole, the Five Points were symbolized by hand, foot, knee, breast and back. After 1842, the hand was omitted, and the mouth and ear tacked on as the fifth. Mackey believed that:
“The omission of the first and the insertion of the last are innovations and the enumeration given by Cole is the old and genuine one which was originally taught in England by Preston and in his country by Webb.”
Some curiosities of ritual changes, though interesting, are more for the antiquarian than the average lodge member. Most of us are more concerned with a practical explanation of the Five Points as they have been taught for nearly a hundred years.
For they have a practical explanation, which goes much more deeply into fraternal and brotherly relations than the ritual indicates. A man goes on foot a short distance by preference; for a longer journey he boards a street car, rides in an automobile, engages passage on a railroad or courses through the air in a plane. Service to our brethren on foot does not imply any special virtue in that means of transportation. The word expresses the willingness of him who would serve our own pleasure and refuse to travel merely because the means is not to our liking would hardly be Masonic.
We assist our brethren when we can; also we serve them.
The two terms are not interchangeable; we can not assist a brother with out serving, but we may serve him without assisting him. For a wholly negative action may be a service; suppose we have a just claim against him and, because of our Fraternal relations, we postpone pressing it. That is true service, but not active assistance, such as we might give if we gave or loaned him money to satisfy some other’s claim.
How far should we go “on foot” to render service?
Nothing is said in the ritual, but the cabletow is otherwise used as a measure of length. That same Baltimore Masonic Convention defined a cabletow’s length as “the scope of a brothers reasonable ability.” Across town may be too far for one, and across a continent not too far for another. In better words, our own conception of brotherhood must say how far we travel to help our brother.
Mackey expressed thus:
“Indolence should not cause our footsteps to halt, or wrath to turn them aside; but with eager alacrity and swiftness of foot, we should press forward in the exercise of charity and kindness to a distressed fellow creature.”
The petition at the Altar of the Great Architect of the Universe before engaging in any great and important undertaking is sound Masonic doctrine. To name the welfare of our brother in our petitions is good - but not for the reasons which the good Dr. Mackey set forth; the great Masonic student’s pen slipped here, even as Jove has been known to nod! He Said:
“In our devotions to almighty God we should remember a brother’s welfare as our own, for the prayers of a fervent and sincere heart will find no less favor in the sight of heaven because the petition for self intermingles with aspirations of benevolence for a friend.” Apparently we should pray for our friends because God will look with favor on an unselfish action on our part - which is un Masonic and selfish! Cole, writing years before Mackey (1817) said of his Third, our Second Point:
“When I offer up my ejaculations to Almighty God, a brother’s welfare I will remember as my own, for as the voices of babes and sucklings ascend to the Throne of Grace, so most assuredly will the breathings of a fervent heart arise to the mansions of bliss, as out prayers are certainly required of each other.”
This seems to be interpretable as meaning that we should pray for our brethren because we love them, and because, knowing our own need of their prayers, we realize their need of ours.
Anciently, it was written “Laborare est orare,” - to labor is to pray. If indeed prayer is labor, then to pray for our brethren we may labor for our brethren, which at once clarifies the Second Point and makes it a practical, everyday, do-it-now admonition. To work for our brother’s welfare is in the most brotherly manner to petition the Most High for him.
We often associate with the idea of a “secret” something less than proper; “He has a secret in his life,” “He is secretive.” “He says one thing but in his secret heart he thinks another” are all expressions which seem to connote some degree of guilt with what is secret. We keep our brother’s secrets, guilty or innocent, but let us not assume that every secret is of a guilty variety. He may have a secret ambition, a secret joy, a secret hope - if he confides these to us, is our teaching merely to refuse to tell them, or to keep them in the fine old sense of that word - to hold, to guard. to preserve. The Keeper of the Door stands watch and ward, not to keep it from others, but to see that none use it improperly. Thus we are to keep the secret joys and ambitions of our brethren, close in our hearts, until he wants them known, but also by sympathy and understanding, helping him to maintain them.
Even without this broad interpretation, the keeping of a brother’s confidence has more to it than mere silence. If he confides to us a guilty secret, since to betray him may not only make known that which he wishes hidden, but places him in danger. To betray a trust is never the act of a brother. In ordinary life an unsought trust does not carry with it responsibility to preserve it; in Freemasonry it does! No matter how we wish we did not share the secret, if it has been given us by a brother, we can not suffer our tongues to betray him, no matter what it costs us to remain silent, unless we forget alike our obligation and the Third Point.
“Do you stumble and fall, my brother? My hand is stretched out to prevent it. Do you need aid? My hand is yours - use it. It is your hand, for the time being. My strength is united to yours. You are not alone in your struggle - I stand with you on the Fourth of the Five Points, and as your need may be, so “Deo volente,” will be my strength for you.”
So must we speak when the need comes. It makes no difference in what way our brother stumbles; it may be mentally; it may be spiritually; it may be materially; it may be morally. No exceptions are noted in our teachings. We are not told to stretch forth the hand in aid “If,” and “perhaps,” and “but!” Not for us to judge, to condemn, to admonish . . . for us only to put forth our strength unto our falling brother at his need, without question and without stint.
For such is the Kingdom of Brotherhood.
More sins are committed in the name of the Fifth of the Five Points than in the name of liberty! Too often we offer counsel when it is not advice but help that is needed. Too often we admonish of motes within our brother’s eye when our own vision is blinded by beams. What said the Lord? (Amos VII, in the Fellowcraft’s Degree.)
“Behold, I will set a plumb line in the midst of my people Israel; I will not again pass by them any more.”
“In the midst of my people Israel” - not in the far away land; not across the river; not up on the mountain top, but in the midst of them, an intimate personal individual plumb line!
So are we to judge our brethren; not by the plumb, the square or the level that we are each taught to carry in our hearts, but by his plumb, his square, his level.
If he build true by his own tools, we have no right to judge him by ours. The friendly reminders we must whisper to him are of incorrect building by his own plumb line. He may differ from us in opinion; he may be Republican where we are Democrat, Methodist where we are Baptist; Wet where we are Dry; Protectionist where we are Free trade; League of Nations proponent where we are “biter enders” - we must not judge him by the plumb line of our own beliefs.
Only when we see him building untrue to his own tools have we the right to remind him of his faults. When we see a brave man shrinking, a virtuous man abandoning himself to vice, a good man acting as a criminal - then is his building faulty judged by his own plumb line and we may heed the Fifth of the Five Points and counsel and advise him to swing back, true to his own working tools. And finally, we do well to remember Mackey’s interpretation of the Fifth Point:
“. . . we should never revile a brother’s character behind his back but rather, when attacked by others, support and defend it.” “Speak no ill of the dead, since they can not defend themselves” might well have been written of the absent. In the Masonic sense no brother is absent if his brother is present, since then he has always a champion and defender, standing upon the Fifth Point as upon a rock.
So considered - and this little paper is but a slender outline of how much and how far the Five Points extend - these teachings of Masonry, concerned wholly with the relations of brother to brother, become a broad and beautiful band of blue - the blue of the Blue Lodge - the True Blue of Brotherhood.
- Source: Short Talk Bulletin - May 1931
Masonic Service Association of North America
In the Old Constitutions, as explained in the Halliwell or Regius manuscript, are fifteen regulations, called “points.” The old verse runs:
“Fifteen artyculus there they soughton And fifteen poyntys there they wrogton.”
Translated into easy English, this reads:
“Fifteen articles there they sought And fifteen points there they wrought.”
Phillips “New World of Words,” published in 1706, defines “point” as “a head, or chief matter.” Moreover, an operative Masons “points” the seams of as wall by filling in the chinks left in laying bricks or stone, thus completing the structure.
In older days of the Speculative Art there were “twelve original points” as we learn from the old English lectures, done away with by the United Grand Lodge of England at the time of the reconciliation of 1813. They were introduced by the following passage:
“There are in Freemasonry twelve original points, which form the basis of the system and comprehend the whole ceremony of initiation. Without the existence of these points, no man ever was, or can be, legally and essentially received into the Order. Every person who is made a Mason must go through these twelve forms and ceremonies, not only in the first degree, but in every subsequent one.”
The twelve points were: Opening, Preparation, Report, Entrance, Prayer, Circumambulation , Advancing. Obligation, Investure, Northeast Corner and Closing; and each was symbolized by one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel for ingenious reasons not necessary to set forth here.
The twelve original points were never introduced into the United States, and are now no longer used in England, although the ceremonies which they typify, of course, are integral parts of all Masonic rituals.
Our Five Points of Fellowship are not allied to these, except as they are reflected in the word “points.” We also find this relationship in the Perfect Points of our Entrance, once called Principal Points. Dr. Oliver, famous, learned and not always accurate Masonic student and writer (1782-1867) sums up the Five Points in his “Landmarks,” as follows:
“Assisting a brother in his distress, supporting him in his virtuous undertakings, praying for his welfare, keeping inviolate his secrets and vindicating his reputation as well in his absence as in his presence.”
by which it will be seen that in Oliver’s day the Five Points were not exactly as they are with us now.
Strange though it seems, a change was made in the symbolism of the Five Points as recently as 1842, at the Baltimore Masonic Convention. Prior to that time, according to Cole, the Five Points were symbolized by hand, foot, knee, breast and back. After 1842, the hand was omitted, and the mouth and ear tacked on as the fifth. Mackey believed that:
“The omission of the first and the insertion of the last are innovations and the enumeration given by Cole is the old and genuine one which was originally taught in England by Preston and in his country by Webb.”
Some curiosities of ritual changes, though interesting, are more for the antiquarian than the average lodge member. Most of us are more concerned with a practical explanation of the Five Points as they have been taught for nearly a hundred years.
For they have a practical explanation, which goes much more deeply into fraternal and brotherly relations than the ritual indicates. A man goes on foot a short distance by preference; for a longer journey he boards a street car, rides in an automobile, engages passage on a railroad or courses through the air in a plane. Service to our brethren on foot does not imply any special virtue in that means of transportation. The word expresses the willingness of him who would serve our own pleasure and refuse to travel merely because the means is not to our liking would hardly be Masonic.
We assist our brethren when we can; also we serve them.
The two terms are not interchangeable; we can not assist a brother with out serving, but we may serve him without assisting him. For a wholly negative action may be a service; suppose we have a just claim against him and, because of our Fraternal relations, we postpone pressing it. That is true service, but not active assistance, such as we might give if we gave or loaned him money to satisfy some other’s claim.
How far should we go “on foot” to render service?
Nothing is said in the ritual, but the cabletow is otherwise used as a measure of length. That same Baltimore Masonic Convention defined a cabletow’s length as “the scope of a brothers reasonable ability.” Across town may be too far for one, and across a continent not too far for another. In better words, our own conception of brotherhood must say how far we travel to help our brother.
Mackey expressed thus:
“Indolence should not cause our footsteps to halt, or wrath to turn them aside; but with eager alacrity and swiftness of foot, we should press forward in the exercise of charity and kindness to a distressed fellow creature.”
The petition at the Altar of the Great Architect of the Universe before engaging in any great and important undertaking is sound Masonic doctrine. To name the welfare of our brother in our petitions is good - but not for the reasons which the good Dr. Mackey set forth; the great Masonic student’s pen slipped here, even as Jove has been known to nod! He Said:
“In our devotions to almighty God we should remember a brother’s welfare as our own, for the prayers of a fervent and sincere heart will find no less favor in the sight of heaven because the petition for self intermingles with aspirations of benevolence for a friend.” Apparently we should pray for our friends because God will look with favor on an unselfish action on our part - which is un Masonic and selfish! Cole, writing years before Mackey (1817) said of his Third, our Second Point:
“When I offer up my ejaculations to Almighty God, a brother’s welfare I will remember as my own, for as the voices of babes and sucklings ascend to the Throne of Grace, so most assuredly will the breathings of a fervent heart arise to the mansions of bliss, as out prayers are certainly required of each other.”
This seems to be interpretable as meaning that we should pray for our brethren because we love them, and because, knowing our own need of their prayers, we realize their need of ours.
Anciently, it was written “Laborare est orare,” - to labor is to pray. If indeed prayer is labor, then to pray for our brethren we may labor for our brethren, which at once clarifies the Second Point and makes it a practical, everyday, do-it-now admonition. To work for our brother’s welfare is in the most brotherly manner to petition the Most High for him.
We often associate with the idea of a “secret” something less than proper; “He has a secret in his life,” “He is secretive.” “He says one thing but in his secret heart he thinks another” are all expressions which seem to connote some degree of guilt with what is secret. We keep our brother’s secrets, guilty or innocent, but let us not assume that every secret is of a guilty variety. He may have a secret ambition, a secret joy, a secret hope - if he confides these to us, is our teaching merely to refuse to tell them, or to keep them in the fine old sense of that word - to hold, to guard. to preserve. The Keeper of the Door stands watch and ward, not to keep it from others, but to see that none use it improperly. Thus we are to keep the secret joys and ambitions of our brethren, close in our hearts, until he wants them known, but also by sympathy and understanding, helping him to maintain them.
Even without this broad interpretation, the keeping of a brother’s confidence has more to it than mere silence. If he confides to us a guilty secret, since to betray him may not only make known that which he wishes hidden, but places him in danger. To betray a trust is never the act of a brother. In ordinary life an unsought trust does not carry with it responsibility to preserve it; in Freemasonry it does! No matter how we wish we did not share the secret, if it has been given us by a brother, we can not suffer our tongues to betray him, no matter what it costs us to remain silent, unless we forget alike our obligation and the Third Point.
“Do you stumble and fall, my brother? My hand is stretched out to prevent it. Do you need aid? My hand is yours - use it. It is your hand, for the time being. My strength is united to yours. You are not alone in your struggle - I stand with you on the Fourth of the Five Points, and as your need may be, so “Deo volente,” will be my strength for you.”
So must we speak when the need comes. It makes no difference in what way our brother stumbles; it may be mentally; it may be spiritually; it may be materially; it may be morally. No exceptions are noted in our teachings. We are not told to stretch forth the hand in aid “If,” and “perhaps,” and “but!” Not for us to judge, to condemn, to admonish . . . for us only to put forth our strength unto our falling brother at his need, without question and without stint.
For such is the Kingdom of Brotherhood.
More sins are committed in the name of the Fifth of the Five Points than in the name of liberty! Too often we offer counsel when it is not advice but help that is needed. Too often we admonish of motes within our brother’s eye when our own vision is blinded by beams. What said the Lord? (Amos VII, in the Fellowcraft’s Degree.)
“Behold, I will set a plumb line in the midst of my people Israel; I will not again pass by them any more.”
“In the midst of my people Israel” - not in the far away land; not across the river; not up on the mountain top, but in the midst of them, an intimate personal individual plumb line!
So are we to judge our brethren; not by the plumb, the square or the level that we are each taught to carry in our hearts, but by his plumb, his square, his level.
If he build true by his own tools, we have no right to judge him by ours. The friendly reminders we must whisper to him are of incorrect building by his own plumb line. He may differ from us in opinion; he may be Republican where we are Democrat, Methodist where we are Baptist; Wet where we are Dry; Protectionist where we are Free trade; League of Nations proponent where we are “biter enders” - we must not judge him by the plumb line of our own beliefs.
Only when we see him building untrue to his own tools have we the right to remind him of his faults. When we see a brave man shrinking, a virtuous man abandoning himself to vice, a good man acting as a criminal - then is his building faulty judged by his own plumb line and we may heed the Fifth of the Five Points and counsel and advise him to swing back, true to his own working tools. And finally, we do well to remember Mackey’s interpretation of the Fifth Point:
“. . . we should never revile a brother’s character behind his back but rather, when attacked by others, support and defend it.” “Speak no ill of the dead, since they can not defend themselves” might well have been written of the absent. In the Masonic sense no brother is absent if his brother is present, since then he has always a champion and defender, standing upon the Fifth Point as upon a rock.
So considered - and this little paper is but a slender outline of how much and how far the Five Points extend - these teachings of Masonry, concerned wholly with the relations of brother to brother, become a broad and beautiful band of blue - the blue of the Blue Lodge - the True Blue of Brotherhood.
- Source: Short Talk Bulletin - May 1931
Masonic Service Association of North America
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)