Ignorance is bliss

Sir,
    Andrew Davies is to be congratulated on his highly erudite article (Issue 14). Among other things, it states quite correctly, that the popular view of Freemasonry is based on ignorance and unsupported innuendo in much the same way as the treatment of witches has in the past.
    The Papal Bull In Eminenti, issued by Pope Clement IX on 28 April, 1738 was also mentioned and, although not said, is a perfect example of the confused, if not downright, underhand actions taken against Freemasonry.
    It was never of any great theological significance, as it was never read ex cathedra, and in many significant countries it was never published. However, the story still got around and, instead of clarifying matters, the end result was total and utter confusion. If that was the intention, then it was very successful.
    In Eminenti is referred to in Mozart’s The Magic Flute with the words:
    “It is said that any who swear allegiance to their cause is cursed.”
    Yet, at the same time, the Holy Roman/Austro Hungarian Empire was being ruled by people like Count Esterhazy, who was a Freemason, as were many of the other ruling aristocrats. The Esterhazy family was probably the greatest and wealthiest landowners in the Empire, and any attempt at their excommunication could have been politically catastrophic.
    Certainly, one man of undoubted great faith was happy to ignore In Eminenti. It was Leopold Mozart, who was proposed by his son.
    With regard to Professor Axford’s article, beware names, as they don’t always mean what you may think. He quoted “Ashford” as meaning a ford on a river marked by ash trees, which makes eminently good sense. It’s a shame that it may mean nothing of the sort.
    The name of the town now called Ashford in Kent almost certainly had something to do with a ford, as it’s on the river Stour (pronounced Stoor unless you want to get. a good laugh at the Stour Lodge) – but ash trees?
    According to the Doomsday Book, circa 1086, it was called Allia Essetesford, which, even then, was very civilised, having not only a church, but also enough prepared ground to grow cereals for two, presumably, water mills.
    Noel A French, Mozart Lodge No 1929, Cranbrook, Kent

Was Beethoven a Freemason?

Sir,
    I refer to the article “Masonic Music” by Yasha Beresiner in Issue 13. Much in the article was of great interest and help, but may I draw your attention to one area of disappointment.
    It is perhaps inappropriate to claim that “we know of the active membership in the craft of such immortal composers as…Beethoven…”
    I am not aware of this, and would greatly appreciate from you an indication of the evidence used to support the claim.
    Gerald Reilly, Frinton-on-Sea, Essex

Yasha Beresiner replies: There is no doubt of the initiation of Franz Josef Haydn into Freemasonry in Lodge Zur Wahren Eintracht in Vienna in 1785, as recorded in the minutes of the Lodge.
    There is very little additional evidence of Haydn’s involvement in the Craft in general or, indeed, of his progressing any further than the entered apprentice's degree.
    With regard to Beethoven, it would appear that any available evidence of his being a Freemason is untenable. The mention of his name in my article in Freemasonry Today is an error which has been perpetrated in my book Masonic Curiosities, published in September by the ANZMRC. .
    I would, however, refer to the article by Bro Lennart Rabes on Beethoven and his Masonic Song 'Maurerfragen' in AQC 80 (the transaction of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge No 2076), 1967 pp-144-150.
    This paper shows that two of Beethoven's songs have direct Masonic references, although whilst the music was composed by Beethoven, the words are by F G Wegeler.
    There was no intention on the part of Beethoven to compose Masonic music. The question Was Beethoven a Mason? is raised and discussed by Bro Rabes in some detail, with no final conclusion being reached.
    In the absence of any further evidence, the conclusion reached by various authors that Beethoven was a freemason must be seen as erroneous.

Penalties need the red card treatment

Sir,
    In previous issues you have published letters on “making Freemasonry less formal”. Questions of dress, protocol and the like were discussed. I have been expecting this correspondence to lead to a more serious topic – the remaining reference to the penalties.
    It was a great relief to me when, years ago, the penalties were removed from the obligations, and it has been my fervent hope that by now they would have disappeared altogether. I would also like to see the end of the poignard and the running noose in the first degree.
    It is not necessary to explain to the candidate (after the obligation) that penalties were once included in the obligation. It is also extremely unlikely that the junior deacon would “stand firm and do his duty” with either the poignard or the running noose.
    No doubt the question: “What about the signs?” will spring immediately to mind, but if one thinks about it, there is no problem. There is nothing wrong in explaining that “a man of honour and a mason would rather have….than improperly disclose, etc.”
    This need have no connection whatsoever with penalties that were never used, never intended to be used, non-masonic and redundant.
    Removal of all remaining references to the penalties will also remove ammunition from our detractors and bring us a step further into the 21st century.
    It was not long ago that an acquaintance, finding that I was a Mason, attacked the Craft (and myself) because “we promise to kill people”. My explanations were rebuffed with the question: “Why do you have these things in your ritual?” I found this very difficult to answer.
    In previous correspondence much was said about the need to make the Craft more attractive to young men. I agree that later meetings, relaxation of rules on dress, less formality at dinner (why on earth do we still call it the “festive board”?), and so on, could be advantageous. I also feel that getting rid of the references to penalties is equally important.
    I am not a “Young Turk” seeking controversy, but a Mason of nearly 40 years’ standing, and have been through the chair of two lodges. My views are based on my great affection for the Craft, my pride as a member and a sincere wish to see Freemasonry go from strength to strength, with the right people attracted to our ranks.
    Malcolm Bird, Chalfont St Peter, Bucks

Masonry and the armed services

Sir,
    I have read with interest and concern of the conflict between the United Grand Lodge of England and the Ministry of Defence, who appear to consider membership of the Craft incompatible with being a member of the armed services.
    This was not the opinion of General Sir Charles Warren (1840-1927), the first Master of Quatuor Coronati Lodge. He said that “Masonry had a great effect for good in assisting to keep up discipline in our army.”
    I am sure that many modern military leaders must feel the same, and maybe soon we will hear from them.
    Michael A Robinson, Market Harborough

Ministry ban slur

Sir,
    My wife and I recently had the pleasure of being guests at the Ladies' Festival of a Surrey lodge, the venue for which was RAF Headley Court, near Leatherhead.
    We were guests of the Worshipful Master, an old friend who has visited my London lodge more than once, and we enjoyed a very pleasant reception followed by an excellent banquet in delightful surroundings.
    The only sour note in an otherwise brilliant evening was the announcement that, due to an edict by the Ministry of Defence, no further masonic meetings would be permitted on the premises, despite this particular Lodge having used this venue on three previous occasions.
    As far as I know, no reason was given for this decision. But, it does not take much imagination to presume that the Ministry is seriously infected by the prevalent unjustified slurs on Freemasons.
    I trust that Grand Lodge will make renewed renewed representations to the Government about this unwarranted action by the MOD. Quite apart from the obvious injustice, does the MOD not have a duty to maximise the use of such properties, so that by debarring masonic functions they are depriving themselves (and the taxpayers) of such income?
    Dennys Wheatley, Esher, Surrey

Let’s keep the festive board

Sir,
    With reference to the Viewpoint articles (FMT Issue 14), while appreciating the overall views and comments by Dr. Fox and David Wyatt on the future of Freemasonry in general and on the festive board, I cannot agree with them entirely.
    My first consciousness of Freemasonry was in the late 1920s when I attended Christmas parties given by my uncle’s Lodge in Plymouth. Several of my uncles were Masons and, while they did not advertise the fact, they did not conceal it.
    Like Dr Fox, I was initiated in the 1950s but, unlike him, I was never told not to discuss Masonry, or let it be known that I was a Mason. However, due discretion was observed.
    I appreciate that times have changed, but is the pressure of work all that greater? Competition perhaps, but today many have the benefit of flexible working hours and even working from home. Such advantages were not open to us when we were working our way up the ladder.
    It was difficult to get from work by bus at 5.30pm, as I and some other brethren had no cars in those days, to attend a Lodge some distance away in time for the six o’clock start.
    On those occasions I wore my dark suit and white shirt to work and changed my tie on reaching the Lodge.
    I reached the Master’s Chair in 1964, having remained as Senior Warden for an extra year to allow an older brother to reach the Chair before he lost his sight.
    I had the Lodge room open to wives and friends on our Ladies Festival, something that is still carried on in my present Lodge.
    Admittedly during the 1950s and perhaps early 1960s meetings did carry on rather too long due to the toasts and entertainment at the Festive Board, especially on the Olde English (or in this case Welsh) Evenings.
    But the events were enjoyable. Now it is very rare for the evenings to extend beyond 10 pm. Perhaps they would be more enjoyable if the toasts could be modified and the speeches limited to allow for closer social contact at the Festive Board.
    However, I cannot see that scrapping the Festive Board would do anything to retain members. In fact, this would probably have the reverse effect, since the few younger men who are admitted these days seem to bond, as in days gone by, during their early contacts. They also encourage their friends to social events and even into Masonry.
    There are those in our Lodge who cannot always attend on time, and the older members step in to cover. Most of the lack of leisure time that many use as an excuse not to join Freemasonry, are perhaps more due to the growth of other attractions, via television, or golf.
    Incidentally, the latter, with apologies to golfing Masons, was the real ground for any plotting and colluding at work, something which I never encountered at Lodge!
    Derek Lang, Llangollen, Denbighshire

Change the festive board format

Sir,
    David Wyatt’s article (Issue 14) on retention of candidates is interesting and extremely thought-provoking and his views will undoubtedly invite further and vigorous comment, for and against.
    Coffee and sandwiches in an informal atmosphere following a regular meeting would be adequate, economical and most acceptable to many brethren, as against a lengthy festive board at an unattractively high cost these days.
    The protocol of the all-important toasts 1, 2 and 4 could still quite easily be observed, if so desired. Correspondingly, a later starting time of 7pm or even 7.30pm would also be more acceptable to the younger brethren. Installations, however, being the highlight of the masonic year, should preferably incorporate a festive board, with full wine-taking, toasts and speeches etc. Grand Officers should be seated according to rank, since it is also the Installed Master’s night, and is something special and unforgettable.
    The average masonic year of eight meetings could be cut to five, leaving out the cold and uninviting months of December, January and February. This would allow time out for those brethren who would rather sun-worship for a period with their families in a warmer climate during these winter months.
    Meetings starting October and finishing April would also be preferable to many younger brethren wishing to pursue other activities, embracing lighter evenings, late and early summer.
    Lodges happily awash with candidates (rare these days) could easily accommodate with double ceremonies. At the Installation Meeting, however, the earlier start times must of course still apply and the younger brethren must somehow find the time to attend, difficult though it may be. I recently attended a regular meeting at one of my joining lodges and I was delighted to sit at a festive board with everyone, regardless of rank, seated around one long oblong table. The atmosphere was happy and relaxed and I relished this change of festive board format. Are we not all taught that as Freemasons we are all equal, neither above nor below.
    I fully share David Wyatt’s thoughts with regard to the prevalence of autocratic rule in our Freemasonry, probably discouraging future recruitment and retention, and leading even to disillusion and also tension among the lower ranks when in the presence of the ‘grand elite.’
    Bernard Drazen, Preston

Ending the festive board would suit many masons

Sir,
    Bro David Wyatt's proposal (FMT Issue 14) to abolish, or at least modify traditional festive board after routine evening Lodge meetings struck a chord, for I have felt for some years that this would be an excellent idea.
    It would shorten proceedings, enabling slightly later starts to be made, and significantly reduce the annual cost of dining, which might be helpful with our charitable giving.
    This would suit not only younger, working masons, but also the older retired (fixed income) members, who often prefer a lighter meal, and to ensure an early finish often transfer to the non-dining list.
    By opting for a simple buffet supper, or even sometimes a deliberately frugal meal, with limited toasts, the tradition of “breaking bread together” would not be lost, and this is an important factor.
    The rather inhibiting formal atmosphere sometimes found would be lightened, perhaps enhancing, rather than detracting from social intercourse, and certainly more in keeping with modern preferences. Banquets could be reserved for the annual Installation Meeting, and the Ladies Night if held, thus accentuating these occasions.
    Colin Bissell, Eastbourne

Keep the banquet for installations

Sir,
    I was pleased to read David Wyatt's article “Scrap the festive board” (FMT, Issue 14). I agree with what he says, as I am sure will other masons will to scrapping the festive board and only dine/banquet on installation night.
    After meetings, if they wish, some brethren can stay behind and have a chat and a quick drink for 5-10 minutes before heading for home. Others might prefer not to stay.
    This also brings my attention to the cost of some festive board. The cost of dining in some lodges in London is about £30. Talking to friends about visiting other Lodges, the question asked during the conversation, is how much is the dining fee.
    It seems from my experience that when someone attends a meeting, that person is automatically assume to be dining. Surprise is shown when members say they are not. Therefore, I am sure that some masons decline an invitation because of the cost of the festive board.
    So, if the festive board is abolished and brethren only dine/banquet on installation, I am sure many more masons would like to visit as many Lodge meetings as they can.
    People are interested in joining, but cannot put in the time that some Lodges demand. Many people have different working patterns these days. Some do shift work or are on call.
    It will be difficult to get the time to attend meetings if you have a difficult boss. I know one Lodge that meets every Monday evening for Lodge of Instruction. I have a friend in that Lodge, and his wife sometimes mentions that her husband is always out on Mondays.
    This will be bad publicity for us because the wife will surely pass this to her friends, and will put off other friends wife to agree with their husbands to become masons.
    Another thought for London is about moving the Lodge meetings from Central London to the outer regions. The cost of parking in Central London to attend meeting is outrageous. It could be up to £8. Many masons, especially the young brethren, do have cars.
    The trains are not reliable and we are forced to use our cars. The mayor for London is having consultation about charging vehicles for coming into the city. I think Grand Lodge should start looking into this matter. It will be a hard decision to make.
    Lastly, I also agree that the task of contacting absent members and Lodge widows should not be left to the Almoner. This role, as suggested, could be split, with the Almoner leading a team of about three or four assistant almoners, depending on the list.
    These assistant almoners could be new Master Masons, as this will start to show and spread a truly caring culture throughout the Craft. Freemason should move with the times.
    Name and address supplied

Masonic reference to the Scriptures

Sir,
    I support Bro Pigg in his contention that the “Light which is from above” can refer to the Holy Scriptures. He refers to those perceptive words in the third degree charge; “It is that mysterious veil which the eye of human reason cannot penetrate unless assisted by that Light which is from above”.
    All the great religions have taught that true spiritual insight comes to us from two sources: reason and revelation. Our own unaided reason, however important in the process, is not enough. The Almighty has chosen other ways too, of revealing ultimate truths.
    Scripture is a primary way. Nature is another. Teachers, prophets and gurus have also been his chosen ones through whom He reveals truth.
    “A blinding divine light, pure mysticism” is another such source of truth. Michael Baigent is quite right to identify this, provided he does not exclude the many other sources of eternal truth that we are given – including Holy Scripture.
    Rev J Stephen Cooke, Provincial Grand Chaplain of Staffordshire.

Some remorse over Morse and Masons

Sir,
    I saw the Inspector Morse TV programme “Masonic Mysteries” which the Editor of Freemasonry Today mentioned in his editorial (Issue 14). As I always watch the Inspector Morse series, I wrote to the producer.
    I pointed out that, if reference to Freemasonry were to be made, even of a faintly hostile character, it would be well to consult a Freemason.
    I went on to point out that when Inspector Morse introduced a fellow police officer to a friend in that programme, he referred to that officer as being the “Grand Master” his Lodge.
    I informed the producer that the officer presiding over a private Lodge, as it is termed, is the Master and that there is only one Grand Master. He presides, I wrote, over the United Grand Lodge of England, to which all private Lodges are affiliated.
    I ended by stating that the present incumbent of that high office was a well-known and distinguished Mason. I did not expect a reply, but to my surprise received quite a contrite letter, assuring me that all efforts would be made to avoid such mistakes in future.
    John Long, Swanley, Kent

Royal Arch queries

I have recently completed writing up a talk applicable to the Royal Arch in which I state two problems for freemasons to ponder.
    First, I find it difficult to understand why our predecessors, in compiling the ritual of the Royal Arch, associated Ezra and Nehemiah with Zerubabbel, Haggai and Joshua.
    They were by no means contemporaries as 80 years or more separated their respective arrivals in Jerusalem.
    Second, Nehemiah arrived in Jerusalem some 10 to 12 years after Ezra, being moved by sorrow at the report of trouble and that the wall had again been broken down and the gates burned, 70 or more years after the temple was completed.
    With organising skill he completed the work of rebuilding the walls and gates in 52 days. Where our ritual refers to “with trowel in their hand and sword by their side” it is the rebuilding of the walls that we commemorate and not the rebuilding of the temple.
    I ponder very seriously why our predecessors misjudged this fact when creating the Royal Arch ritual.
    Can any of your readers supply reasons for the foregoing? I shall look forward with great interest to any explanations that may be given.
    Donald Lee, Tunbridge Wells

Clerical wear for clergy in the Craft

Sir,
    I wish to point out that the formal dress of the clergy is differentiated from that of other gentlemen. To judge by what is widely worn at Grand Lodge and Provincial Grand Lodges, there is considerable ignorance of the correct clerical dress.
    A knowledgeable clerical tailor told me that clergymen do not wear morning dress, but a frock coat. Neither do they wear striped trousers, but plain black.
    The clerical frock coat has a military collar, buttons to the neck (but only four are done up), double cuffs (with or without ‘froggies’) and black trousers.
    I suggest that when a clergyman is accorded Grand Rank or Provincial Grand Rank honours, it should be suggested in his letter of appointment that he needs to go to a clerical tailor.
    Rev Canon Frank Pickard, Towcester

Warwick memories

Sir,
    In November 1999, brethren of Paumanok-Port Washington Lodge No 855 F&AM (Second Nassau Masonic District, New York State), their ladies and other District members, spent ten glorious days in England.
    We visited brethren and their ladies of Sulgrave Lodge No 9462 in the Province of Northamptonshire and Huntingdonshire. Many Paumanok-Port brethren are also Sulgrave members.
    During our stay in Northamptonshire, we visited many surrounding sights, including a day visit to Castle Warwick and the Collegiate Church of St Mary, Warwick.
    The Masonic inscription that runs along the bottom rim of the pulpit states:
   
    To the Glory of the Great
    Architect of the Universe
    And to Commemorate the 60th year
    Of the reign of Queen Victoria
    The Pulpit was Erected by Freemasons
    Of the province of Warwickshire
    And Unveiled by the Earl of
    Warwick in the Presence of
    The Provincial Grand Master
    Lord Leigh
    And the Freemasons of the
    Province, October 14, 1897.

    We will again be flying from the colonies across the pond in September 2001 to visit with our English and Scottish brethren.
    Jay L. Austin, Paumanok-Port Washington Lodge No 855