Admitting women would Bring about our demise

Sir,
    I wish to comment on two articles in Freemasonry Today (Issue 14), regarding scrapping the festive board and also the issue of promoting the cause of lady masons.
    David Wyatt suggests scrapping the festive board. While we must examine ways to address the shortage of candidates, but I do not believe that scrapping the festive board is one of them.
    Festive boards no doubt derive their origin from those far-off days when our ancient brethren held meetings in taverns around a table. It was not uncommon for them to combine lodge business with refreshment (hence the meaning of "table lodge").
    We hear of brethren being referred to as "knife and fork masons." This is not because they do not take an interest in lodge proceedings, but because for them the social get-together at the festive board is the culmination of a happy evening.
    It is an opportunity to entertain guests and meet up with old friends. This is particularly so for London lodges, which on average meet only four times a year.
    Lodges on the continent of Europe do meet later. For example, in Italy they meet around 7-8pm. Even so, the after proceedings is usually the climax to the evening.
    It is rather unfair for Bro. Wyatt to imply that masonry for some brethren is a main occupation or obsession, and for some senior members a "be all and end all."
    We have many older brethren who, having retired from their previous occupation, are only too pleased to be able to devote more time to their lodge, and to the Craft generally.
    Their contribution in terms of time and experience for the benefit of younger members and the Craft should not be under-estimated.
    On the article by RW Bro Fox on the need to change our ways, he appears very keen to promote the cause of lady masons. Not only does he suggest they use our premises for meetings, but goes as far as to say he is convinced the time will come when we will have joint meetings. This might give the impression he is in favour of co-masonry.
    I am not against lady freemasons having their own lodges. The wives of many brethren belong to such lodges, and whether lady masons or not, many of our wives and partners do sterling work helping with social and charity activities.
    I believe the basic principles for our Grand Lodge recognition which states quite clearly that Grand Lodges shall be composed exclusively of men, and there should be no masonic intercourse with mixed lodges or bodies admitting women, has stood the test of time.
    Should Grand Lodge deviate in any way from this principal, it could bring about the demise of pure antient masonry as we have practised it for more than 250 years.
    Leslie Hicks, Broadstairs, Kent

Freemasons' Hall is essential to London

Sir,
    Having read the interview with Tony Marchington (Issue 14), I am concerned about even a somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment regarding selling Freemasons' Hall in London.
    Does Tony Marchington know about the shrinking number of decent venues in London and the increasing costs? Has he heard about the scandalous situation of the Grecian Temple in the Great Eastern Hotel? Although it is listed and should therefore be restored, the developers have mothballed it, thus depriving around 60 lodges of their customary venue.
    Without Freemasons' Hall, London lodges would be in a parlous position, possibly having to pay up to £400-£500 a night for room hire in the livery halls.
    They would also encounter an increasing shortage of cheaper, suitable upstairs rooms in pubs, some of which are being converted into cocktail bars.
    No, Tony, we cannot afford to flog Freemasons' Hall. Now, if it was the Connaught Rooms (somewhat tongue in cheek)!
    Peter Dodd, London

Brigadier Jackson and Rose Croix

Sir,
    If Brigadier ACF Jackson was still alive - he died on January 3, 2000 - I wouldn't have bothered to write this letter. We were friends and corresponded with each other about the history of the Ancient and Accepted Rite for the past 20 years.
    An expert in the field, George Draffen, reviewed his well-known book, Rose Croix, issued in 1980, in AQC 92. He concluded: 'the thirty thousand or so members of the Rite under the Supreme Council for England and Wales are lucky to have an Illustrious Brother who has produced an interesting, a most readable and historically valuable publication'.
    A second edition, revised and enlarged, appeared in 1987. Before his death, Brigadier Jackson asked me, together with Bro. John Mandleberg, to prepare the third edition, which will include recently discovered material.
    An unfavourable review of the book's 1987 edition appeared in the autumn 2000 issue of Freemasonry today. Having told the reader he 'was "perfected" in the 18th degree not so long ago', the ritual of which he describes as 'made up of the moral commonplaces of old-fashioned Sunday schools', Tobias Churton concludes: 'Jackson's book appears to this reviewer as confused as its subject matter'.
    I won't comment upon his reaction to the ritual, but what about his qualification as an historian? Did Ramsay 'in 1737, publish a speech'? He did not. He pronounced it on December 26, 1736, and its earliest-known printed version is from 1738.
    Is the Grand Orient 'a mainstream French masonic order (founded in 1772)'? No. It was a Grand Lodge founded in 1773. Was Morin 'a French creole'? It was thought possible until the discovery of an official document, transcribed eight years ago in AQC 105, showing Morin was born in Cahors (France).
    'There is very little in Jackson's book to explain the many symbols employed in the ritual', writes Churton. This is answered in Brigadier Jackson's Introduction: 'The object of this book is to tell the story of how the Rite started, how it came to England and Wales and how it developed into its present important position.'
    If Churton looks for an explanation of the first degrees of the Rite, may I suggest he reads The Intermediate degrees 1°-17° (the 1990 edition, printed for the Supreme Council for England and Wales, was partly revised by Brigadier Jackson).
    He should also read A Commentary on the Rose Croix Ritual by the same author, reviewed in AQC 95 (1983) by Frederick Smyth.
    He wrote: 'This is a pamphlet which might well be added as a matter of course to those presented to the candidate at the end of his admission ceremony. It will add greatly to the understanding and thereby to the enjoyment of his membership of the Ancient and Accepted Rite' (a suggestion which, unfortunately, was likely not followed in Churton's case).
    If he looks for further historical information, I would recommend he subscribes to Heredom, the yearly Transactions of the Scottish Rite Research Society (Washington DC), the eight volumes of which are extant in Grand Lodge's Library in London.
    Lastly, if Bro Churton wishes to know a little more about the life, both profane and masonic, of a gentleman in whose book he thinks to have found - with an exquisite taste for delicate wording - 'a whiff of hieratic anal retention', he will find it in tributes written by Dennis Perrin and myself. They appeared a few months ago in AQC 112.
    Alain Bernheim, 33° Elect, CBCS

Minor irritants in the lodge

Sir,
    Re the letter headed 'Stop these Lodge Pests'. Although I cannot say the following are pet hates, they are nonetheless minor irritants.
    When a DC or Deacon, before taking his seat in Lodge, fishes about trying to get his wand in its stand while the patient Master waits for him to be seated before requesting the brethren to be seated.
    This is highly discourteous. He should take his seat when requested and then place his wand in its stand. Again, when a DC escorts a mason, the DC should pick up the step, not the other way about. A masonic two-step up the lodge room is highly undignified.
    The WM should announce the result of a ballot or the confirmation of minutes to the brethren, not to the secretary.
    Can one tell me why in some workings, at an Installation ceremony and during the addresses, the Wardens are requested to stand, yet the Master and brethren remain seated?
    While the above irritations do not raise my blood pressure, they are nonetheless quite annoying.
    Philip Toler, Dorking.

Who wants to be a millionaire?

Dear Sir,
    I exchange your magazine regularly with my blood brother who resides in Melbourne, Australia. He in turn sends me his local masonic magazine entitled The Victorian Freemason, which is of a similar make-up as Freemasonry Today.
    However, reading a copy of the Australian magazine I noted three pages devoted to an election of the Victorian Provincial Grand master. Each page was an election address by a different candidate for the job.
    There was a voting page where you identified your lodge and membership and the choice of candidate followed these pages.
    As I had never heard of us in West Kent being involved in an election of the Provincial Grand Master, I decided to enquire of the Provincial Office as to exactly we end up with a PGM.
    I was asked in turn: "Why, are you millionaire then?" I must admit that I did not realise this was one of the base qualifications, but was at pains to explain that as I pay dues to the Provincial Grand Lodge, I felt entitled to ask.
    I am not a millionaire, and I have no desire to be PGM. I just want to know how the incumbent is chosen. Eventually I was told that he is appointed by the Grand Master, and serves for as long as he wishes. He also chooses his officers, who serve for as long they retain his pleasure.
    Apparently there is one PGM who has served for 20 years. This all smacks of nepotism to my simple mind. It is farcical to suggest that the Grand master is an elected officer, but I would not like to put up another candidate.
    However, allegedly he is subject to a form of election. The Master of the lodge is definitely subject to election. In my lodge it is customary for the Senior Warden to be put up. However, it has been known for another to be put in opposition.
    I fail to see why this system cannot be extended to Provinces. After all, we pay part of our annual subscription to Province, and thus are in the same state as the 13 colonies of America who rebelled on the basis of no taxation without representation."
    T A Lynch, Sidcup, Kent

Shedding light on the Third Degree

Dear Sir,
    Anthony J. Pigg (Letters, Issue 14) is correct, on sense, regarding his comments on Michael Baigent's article The Revolutionary Charge of the Third Degree (Issue 14).
    The scriptures constitute our main source of light. But who wrote the scriptures? They were written by people who had illumination in various ways.
    Michael Baigent's article is referring to the ability or gift of people who, like pious seers of old, Ezekiel, Haggai, St. John, St. Paul - are able to receive illumination of significance.
    God appeared to Moses in the burning bush as a light: "And the Angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the burning bush."
    Exodus, Chapter 19 v 11: "And be ready against the third day, for the third day, the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai." At verse 18 we read: "And Mount Sinai was altogether on smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire. .."
    What about the light that comes as a vision through dreams by which the prophets set down or interpreted the will of the Almighty? Light from above!
    In Numbers, Chapter 4, there is an account of the heathen seer announcing the advent of Christ: "And the Spirit of the Lord came upon him. ...there shall come a star out of Jacob and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel. Out of Jacob shall come he who shall have dominion."
    Also, consider the "still small voice" which rises to guide all of us, even on very mundane problems and matters. Isn't this a light from above? My discrimination between right and wrong, good or bad, is often based on intuition, not on my knowledge of law or doctrine.
    Let us try to understand Michael Baigent and appreciate his worth and commitment as a masonic scholar and teacher.
    Roland Amaewhule, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

You are never too old to become a Master

Dear Sir,
    I enjoyed the article by Dee May (Issue 14) about that very brave submariner and mason Tommy Gould and his achievement on becoming a Master for the first time at the age of 80.
    His belief that he is probably the oldest person to do so is, unfortunately, unfounded.
    My father, W.Bro. Frank Wright, became Master of the Royal York Lodge No. 315 for the first time on 6 April 1999 at the age of 83. He is the current IPM of the lodge, and last December celebrated his 85th birthday.
    Dad came late to masonry, being initiated in March 1992 by my younger brother, W.Bro. Norman Wright, the first of us to join masonry. He also initiated me five years earlier.
    We seem to have done things in reverse order. Dad also had an eventful war, although nothing to compare with the actions of W.Bro.Tommy. As a member of the Sussex Yeomanry he was called up in 1939, sent to France and Belgium as part of the British Expeditionary Force, and then evacuated from Dunkirk.
    After retraining and re-equipping, his regiment was sent to the desert as part of 8th Army, where he took part in the battle of El Alamein. Later he took part in the Sicily landings and was badly wounded whilst still on the beach.
    Eight months of hospital and convalescence in Egypt followed after which, by unauthorised and unconventional means, he independently made his way to Italy. After several weeks of searching, he managed to join up with his regiment.
    He fought through the remainder of the Italian campaign and ended the war in Germany, from where he was eventually demobbed.
    David Wright, Burgess Hill, West Sussex

It is time to end our complacency

Sir,
    I find myself agreeing with Bernard Drazen and Colin Bissell (Letters, Issue 15) that we ought to reconsider the position of the festive board.
    For some time now I have been asking the question: do we need one after every meeting? I believe that the answer is 'no, we do not.' A buffet would suffice, and is a far healthier option, too.
    Many Lodges in my Province are struggling to retain members, let alone recruit new members. We need to look at the structure of the after-proceedings.
    I would not miss the sometimes strained atmosphere of a festive board, at which there is often less than 20 sitting down to a four-course meal, seated in a layout which is not condusive to conversation.
    When I was Master of my lodge, I introduced seating in the form of a square, so that everyone was facing each other and able to hold a conversation without having their back to someone.
    It has become something of a burden to toast in full numerous Grand and Provincial Grand Officers when often there are (a) no Grand Officers present, and (b) no visiting Provincial Grand Officers.
    What is wrong with a Toast to The Queen and the Craft, The Grand Master and Grand Officers, The Provincial Grand Master and Provincial Grand Officers and the follow-on toasts to the Master etc. We should, however, retain our traditions in full for Installation nights.
    I recently had to withdraw a proposal that we change our lodge meeting to a later time, although I believe a majority of members would have supported it.
    Why? Well, the masonic hall is used by so many, for lodge meetings and rehearsals, that for us to have put back our meeting by half and hour would have delayed another lodge, whose practice follows on immediately after our lodge meeting. It was suggested that there would be a formal protest to the Hall Committee if we went ahead, and that the caterers would not be happy.
    This means that, as a lodge, we are no longer in control of our own destiny, although we try to accommodate some of our members who find difficulty getting to the meetings for 6.30pm. I believe that this attitude shows a lack of understanding and foresight and may be detrimental in the long term.
    Why do freemasons insist that "We've always done it that way?" so we can not change anything. When will we learn that if we do not start to think about what we are, and the way we conduct our meetings, we will join the dodo and other extinct species.
    Perhaps it will take numerous lodge amalgamations and closures to awaken the slumbering giant. I believe that we are too comfortable in our complacency.
    Fred Lomax, Standish

Let's stand by tradition

Dear Sir ,
    I keep reading letters to Freemasonry Today from brethren who want to change different parts of the ceremony and the festive board, shorten them, change the times etc, principally because they consider that they do not reflect today's society.
    Hurrah. The way today's society has changed into one of total hype - just watch children's TV if you don't believe me and you will understand why kids today are stressed out. I fully appreciate an organisation in which there is peace, tranquillity and understanding: freemasonry.
    Why do we want everything to reflect today's society? Why are we so intent on throwing away our traditions. Traditions which other countries have thrown out and now regret.
    As for changing the ceremony so that it takes less time - tell that to a golfer and ask him why waste all that time chasing round 18 holes. Simpler for just one hole and the best of three balls.
    Also, I notice that the congregations of two faiths, Jewish and Muslim, have not changed their prayer books and stayed with the original prayers, ceremonial and teachings, have large and growing congregations.
    Yet the English protestant faith, which keeps changing, having just brought out another change to common worship, is modernising and moving away from the original and has reportedly a shrinking congregation.
    One reader suggests removal of the penalties. Why? These are the practical aspects of the explanation of the ritual. The junior deacon's action would be no different to that of a judge who should impose a prison sentence, but lets the person off with a caution - is that wrong?
    The obligation states that nothing should be written down, but all the rituals are printed. If all this is taken to its logical conclusion it would be a case of entering the lodge building, saying hello and going home! !
    There is always some part of the ceremony that some brother does not like, while others feel that it is correct. Our ceremonies have evolved over many years and are accepted by most and, if for nothing more than their historical significance, should not be changed.
    It is human nature to be inspirational. We hold in high esteem those who achieve high station in life through study or hardship; or even one may add the hours of talking to one's self when learning ritual when Master of the Lodge.
    To cite the ceremony and similar items as putting brethren off then, by the obverse argument, it is attractive to many. I have heard some complain why learn all the ritual? My answer is why do anything?
    Everything worth having demands a personal sacrifice. If brethren feel that freemasonry is worthwhile they will sacrifice sufficient time and energy to make it work for them.
    Changing the ritual will not increase membership or change the public perception of masonry, while bringing the public in to experience the actual ceremonies is only for the curious.
    Grand Lodge is at last pursuing the unprovoked attacks on the craft by using the law and countering all the arguments at a national level. It is up to brethren and individual lodges to be more open in their day to day contact with the public, not change the ceremonies.
    But, while there are parts of the ceremony I am not keen on, l am willing to accept them as it is these parts other brethren hold dear. Therefore, I feel that I am tolerant enough to accept the present situation and would not vote for any change.
    Freemasonry should be seen as something different. Different to Probus, Rotary and other organisations. After all, one most appreciates those things which are hard won.
    Ray Pearson, Gloucester

Petitions are the problem

Sir,
    The article Charity on a Grand Scale in the Winter edition of Freemasonry Today with its concern that help may not be reaching all those who may be qualified to receive it, raises a most important point.
    As a Provincial Grand Charity Steward in the Mark Degree I am aware of a number of brethren who I am confident could qualify for help from the Grand Charity or the RMBI, and after that from the Mark Benevolent Fund.
    However, through diffidence or misplaced pride, they will not seek help. It is not just a matter of lodge almoners failing to do their job properly or not showing care; it is the system of petitions which puts brethren off.
    It is too formal and humiliating. It should be left to the lodge almoner and the Provincial Almoner or Charity Steward to contact the Grand Charity in a quiet and private manner. The necessary means test could then be carried out in a similar private and tactful way, In this way, help could be rendered much more readily.
    The lodge need not then be involved, and the annuitant would be less likely to feel he was being pitied by his Brethren. The system needs streamlining.
    A. Peter Smith, Oadby, Leicester

Doubts over Noah

Sir,
    Congratulations to Matthew Christmas on what promises to be another interesting series of articles on individual Degrees and Orders. There is, however, one point in the Winter Issue that I consider to be a doubtful assumption. Matthew states that ..."Noah may well have been the early prototype or precursor of Hiram Abif."
    The Craft is allegorically based entirely on our associations with the skilled stone artisan, his accoutrements and his governing body of the day, the trade guild, from the 12th to the l8th century, and probably much earlier.
    At the formation of the Premier Grand Lodge in 1717, the Craft did not have any known ritual. This was composed in the middle and latter part of that century helped by the works of Preston, Hutchinson, Dunckerley and Hemming.
    It was formalised at the beginning of the 19th century by the Lodges of Promulgation and Reconciliation. This ritual obviously had to relate to that activity it was based upon, and therefore would exclude the possibility that Noah could have ever been considered for the position that Hiram Abif holds in our legends.
    There are, of course, hundreds of tales, fables and traditions that evolved from about 4200 BC that have gone on to be the basis of many masonic and non-masonic degrees.
    These are celebrated in fraternal settings by both men and women throughout the world today. Many are associated with freemasonry, but have no bearing whatsoever on the original intentions of the Craft, although falling under its banner.
    Mike Lawrence, Folkestone

Ritual needs fresh look

Sir,
    There appears to be no quick-fix remedy for the decline in the numbers of new candidates for freemasonry, coupled with an alarming increase in resignations within three years of initiation.
    One contributory reason for this unhappy situation might be that learning by rote is now almost extinct in schools. Candidates may be daunted by the sheer volume of the ritual they realise they may one day be required to learn.
    Obviously, our landmarks and traditions ought to be cherished and preserved, so any suggestion that the ritual could be read rather than recited from memory deserves to be vigorously opposed.
    The advent of the computer has helped to streamline meetings, and it is rare nowadays to hear the minutes of the previous meeting delivered verbally, having been circulated with the summons.
    Perhaps a little streamlining of the ritual itself could play a small part in reducing the perplexing exodus? I refer to those particularly obscure signs, tokens and words, communicated with austere mystification to candidates, whether being raised, exalted, advanced or perfected.
    They will never use themselves nor witness them again until the next candidate takes a similar step in freemasonry.
    The signs I refer to are not those of everyday recognition or progression, but the bits of incongruous ritual "as practised on the continent of Europe" or those meant to tie one's arms or fingers in knots as we attempt to make a double St Andrew's cross or some other sign.
    These signs have been quixotically passed down from time immemorial, and have to be religiously passed on to the candidate by every occupant of the Master's chair.
    What is the point? They certainly add to the mystique and solemnity of the occasion, but are they really relevant in 2001, as we attempt to convince candidates that we are taking an enlightened attitude towards freemasonry in the 21st century?
    Let us not be afraid to take a fresh look at our rituals to see if they can be simplified without losing their essential meaning.
    Barry Mitchell, Shoreham-by-Sea, Sussex.

Sons initiating fathers

Sir,
    The autumn issue of Freemasonry Today had the story on Nigeria showing a and the son a photograph of a father and son, with the father a Master Mason Worshipful Master.
    It is unusual to see this situation, the other way around being the more normal. However, as a Master in The Good Companions' Lodge No. 6005 in the Province of East Lancashire, I moved to the Midlands and became a joining member of The Tutbury Castle Lodge No. 2630 in Derbyshire.
    I encouraged my father into freemasonry, and with the permission of the Master and officers, initiated him into the lodge in May 2000. I then passed him and finally raised him last November.
    It is an unusual and thrilling experience to carry out all ceremonies for a friend or relation, more so for one's father.
    My father comes into Chapter in May and I will be the Principal Sojourner! Technically I am now a Lewis, but is there a term for the father of a mason?
    Barry A Jones

Installed in the Chair at 80

Dear Sir,
    I found the article about W Bro Tommy Gould VC in the Autumn 2000 edition of the magazine to be extremely interesting and I applaud his extreme gallantry.
    The article mentioned that W Bro Tommy was 80 years of age when he was installed into the chair of a Craft lodge for the first time.
    Our IPM, W. Bro C. Arthur Hubbard, was installed for the first time in January 1999, a month before his 87th birthday. Arthur was initiated into Lodge Northern Province No.1576 (SC) in Zambia in June 1967 and held the offices of Secretary, Treasurer and Director of Ceremonies. The Lodge was later put into recess due to a lack of members, and subsequently transferred to the Transvaal in South Africa.
    He was also affiliated to Shannondale Lodge No 816 (IC) in Ndola, Zambia in April 1970 and held the offices of Assistant Secretary, Senior Deacon, Junior and Senior Wardens. He was Master-Elect when he had to return to the UK, and so was never installed in hat lodge. He is an honorary life member of that lodge.
    Back in the UK, he joined the Farnborough and North Camp Lodge No. 2203(EC) in March 1982 and was a most capable Secretary from January 1984 to December 1997,
    Receiving Provincial honours in 1990, he became our Senior Warden for 1998, which was necessary to qualify him for election as WM under the English Constitution.
    Arthur has since been made an honorary member of the Caledonian Lodge of Uganda No 13(SC) which meets in Edinburgh, as he has friends in that lodge from his days in Africa.
    Brethren of our two Lodges make regular cross-border visits. The first such visit to us was at Arthur's installation in January 1999 when he met several brethren that he had not seen for many years. As WM he carried out all eight meetings.
    He rarely misses any of our weekly Classes of Instruction or monthly reference committee meetings. He is also a source of inspiration and guidance.
    He also has the rare distinction of being a current member of lodges under all three Home constitutions. Arthur would love to hear from any brethren who may have known him from the days of his service overseas.
    John Davis, Fleet, Hampshire

Going strong at 90

Sir,
    Reading the many interesting letters published in the Autumn edition of Freemasonry Today, I was very impressed with the record and very courageous details of the war service of Tommy Gould VC.
    However, going through the chair for the first time at the age of 80 years is not a record. In West Lancashire we have a Worshipful Brother, namely Bill Cambidge, who was installed into Morecambe Lodge 1561 for the first time in December 1998. In 1999 he celebrated his 90th birthday whilst still in the chair.
    Bill is still very fit and well and attends his lodge and many side degrees with great regularity.
    G C Galloway, Morecambe

South African VCs

Sir,
    I refer to Issue No 13 and your article "Beyond The Five Points" by Mrs Dee May on masons who have won the VC and GC. It may interest masonic researchers that Bro. Neville Coghill, who was awarded the VC for his efforts at Fugitives Drift, was also a member of a South African Lodge.
    This was Southern Cross Lodge No. 398 on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Scotland - the first Scottish Lodge established in South Africa.
    I attach these photographs of the graves of Brothers Mellville and Coghill, a little higher on the hill where they gave their lives.
    David Slingsby, South Africa

"Thank you" for inquiries

Sir,
    Following my letter "Sufferers Call" in the Autumn issue, I have received three replies from brethren with similar illness to myself. I have also received one from a brother whose wife had lupus for 40 years and one reply from Singapore. The response, bearing in mind its relative rarity among men, has been excellent.
    Several brethren have asked me what is lupus? It is, basically, an incurable disease of the auto-immune system. It has no known cause, is not contagious but, through drugs, is controllable.
    The auto-immune system, designed to protect the body, accelerates out of control and attacks the body, causing symptoms from rashes through to arthritic-type symptoms to damage to the major bodily organs.
    Thank you once again for publishing my original request.
    Stephen Gower, Dagenham, Essex

Are you happy?

Sir,
    If it isn't broke, don't fix it! That is the first law of the engineer. On reading the various letters clamouring for changes in the Craft, its rituals and after proceedings, I have to ask: are these brethren really happy in freemasonry?
    I especially criticise the letter from Bro Malcolm Bird in Issue 15. Not content with the removal of the traditional penalties from the body of our obligations, an unnecessary change in my opinion, he wishes to further bowdlerise them by a total removal thereof.
    There are various theories as to how these physical penalties arose, but one thing is clear, they were never actually inflicted as far as we are aware and, like many matters in the Craft, were allegorical.
    As to the Junior Deacon standing firm and doing his duty with the poignard, in the lodges I have attended, the Inner Guard would have theoretically performed that duty. As one who has been through the chair, and is a member of various other masonic degrees, I feel that we dispense with our history and traditions at our peril.
    It is true that Freemasonry has suffered from falling numbers over the 12 years since I was initiated. But, this is probably due to the economic recession from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s, with the obvious knock-on effect on the other degrees, coupled with the high profile smear campaigns against the Craft in recent times.
    Much of this was our own fault in adopting the old "never complain, never explain" approach, but thankfully we are more proactive and ready to defend freemasonry against slanders in the media and inaccuracies in TV dramas. Besides, as Dr Oliver said: "great numbers are not necessarily a good thing".
    I have to ask those who wish to dispense with parts of our ritual, compress the three risings into one, and make the festive board into a mere buffet, are you really happy as a mason?
    If you only want a gentlemen's dining club with charitable fund-raising aims, where you can have a nice meal and a drink with the lads, without strange words, funny signs and regalia getting in the way, there are many such organisations in the UK today.
    I, for one, love freemasonry as it is and would NOT wish to see it changed.
    Steve Foley

Cheshire's first cybermason

Sir,
    Regarding your article (Issue 15) on the person who became a mason via the Internet, last June, Oaklands Lodge No. 5356 in the Province of Cheshire, uploaded a web site at www.oaklandslodge.co.uk.
    A Mr Paul Baker visited the site, requesting information on how to join the fraternity. As his address was in north Wales, he was advised to contact the Grand for details of lodges in his area.
    Various letters were exchanged between Grand Lodge, Cheshire Province and the lodge, resulting in Mr Baker's initiation into Oaklands Lodge on in January.
    This is the first time in the Province of Cheshire that a candidate has been initiated as a direct result of a lodge's own web site.
    Michael John Leigh, Worshipful Master - Oaklands Lodge No. 5356

Dining in a cathedral

Sir,
    As secretary of a Cornish lodge, but as a Somerset provincial mason and an ex-chorister and vicar-choral of Wells Cathedral, I was interested in the article about the historic Lostwithiel masonic hall (Issue 15).
    Benevolent Lodge No. 446 met from 1892 in the Vicar's Hall attached to Wells Cathedral and in 1997 moved to the west cloister of the cathedral (the lower part of the west cloister wall dates from c.1230).
    The lodge now dines in the Vicar's Hall, which was completed in 1348. Incidentally, Benevolent Lodge is the only lodge to meet in a cathedral.
    As regards daylight/moonlight lodges referred to in Issue 15, several rural lodges still meet on or near the full moon, which means that occasionally they meet twice in a calendar month (eg, Lodge of Brotherly Love No 329 in Yeovil).
    D.G.Goldie, St Columb, Cornwall.