THE DANGERS OF EXPEDIENCY

Sir,
    I would like to pass comment on two items that appeared in the last issue of Freemasonry Today (Issue 24) which, although on the surface may seem unconnected, I believe show a worrying trend within our fraternity – that of expediency.
    The first of these relates to the ‘One- Day Classes’ being performed in Connecticut whereby the three degrees are conferred on many hundreds of men in one day. The ‘reason’ cited for such ‘progress’ is that it meets the demands of the ‘busy modern man’. In my opinion this seems an incongruous anomaly. I always felt that the whole point of much of the hidden mystery of Freemasonry was that the secrets could only be begun to be understood after careful self-examination. A one-day class hardly encourages such a process. If these men have to be accommodated in such a manner because they are ‘too busy’ it begs the question of whether they will have the time to know themselves in such a manner and their masonic career may be sadly fleeting.
    Secondly, your letters page contained a diatribe on the demerits of the Royal Arch claiming that it was ‘too long…too complicated…[and] boring’ leading to resignations from the Order whilst the ‘working Freemason does not have the time to spend learning ritual.’ Again, I would express similar concerns as above that if they do not have the time to consider the ritual and the lessons therein are they taking their time to consider knowledge of themselves and their place in the Universe?
    I do not pretend that such knowledge – of ritual or oneself – necessarily comes easily and is not time-consuming but as Sam Ewing said, ‘Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves, some turn up their noses, and some don’t turn up at all.’ It should also be borne in mind that it is hard work that smooths the rough ashlar but by making concessions – be it on one-day classes or a ‘dumbing down’ of ritual – we are negating the need for this beneficial hard work.
    Mark Gannaway, Lentune Lodge, No. 8743, Lymington, Hampshire and Isle of Wight.

ONE-DAY CLASSES

Sir,
    It was with some concern that I read the article in the International News section of Freemasonry Today (Issue 24) regarding the Connecticut Lodge which had its Warrant withdrawn for refusing to accept the One- Day, Three Degree ceremony that was being forced on them by their Grand Lodge. I have a personal interest in the Grand Lodge of Connecticut; I met the Chaplain of Hiram Lodge, No.18, whilst on holiday in Paris and have been in contact since that time.
    These ceremonies seem to undermine everything that Freemasonry stands for. An individual makes a choice to become a Freemason and takes an obligation to this fact. He then progresses through the degrees learning as he goes and makes his personal obligations at each stage. How can one watch a demonstration of the three degrees and then sign a piece of paper and honestly say that he has made a personal obligation to the Craft? Without being physically involved in the ceremony it can have no sincere meaning.
    The other question this practice raises is what will happen at the regular meetings of their lodges if there is no work to be done? After all, the Master opens the lodge to employ and instruct the Brethren in Freemasonry. Will their meetings just become a social occasion? If there is no masonic degree work to be done in the lodge then there will also be no need to have any Lodge of Instruction. All this can only make us a weaker fraternity.
    Coming back to the case of St. John’s Lodge, No.2, which undeservedly had its Warrant withdrawn for failing to comply with this edict from their Grand Lodge. I feel strongly that Freemasons everywhere should lobby their own Grand Lodges to put pressure on the Grand Lodge of Connecticut to reinstate the Warrant of this lodge and allow them to continue the practice of true Freemasonry as they have done for the previous 249 years.
    A.R. Portchmouth, Master, Thistle Lodge, No. 5023, London.

WHY THE HOLY ROYAL ARCH?

Sir,
    Profound, it most certainly must be; boring, it most certainly is not; essential and rewarding, it justifiably is; slightly complicated…perhaps? The Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch – to give this beautiful section of masonic rite its correct title – has been with us since time immemorial and continues to be placed with equal importance, in masonic terms, to that of the three Craft degrees. Indeed, there can be no better explanation in literal terms of its rightful importance than that quoted in the Book of Constitutions as a ‘Preliminary Declaration’, i.e., ‘…that pure Antient Masonry consists of three degrees and no more, viz., those of the Entered Apprentice, the Fellow Craft, and the Master Mason, including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch’. It therefore follows that the Holy Royal Arch is not some or other minor ‘Side Order or Degree’ but constitutes its rightful place as the ‘experiential’ completion of the Master Mason’s Third Degree.
    Without, hopefully, divulging too much to the uninitiated, the ceremony of ‘Exaltation’ sets out to provide deep and meaningful steps along the continuing path of virtue and science and, in order to assist newly exalted Companions in forming positive links with that of a Master Mason, provides an element of reflective process – partly brought about through an examination of historical and symbolical perspectives. Naturally, some may find the ritual ‘far too long’ or ‘far too complicated’ (Letters to the Editor, Freemasonry Today, Issue 24) but there should be nothing more appropriate than for a mason to ably and sublimely obtain a greater knowledge which assists him in ‘raising his own superstructure perfect in its parts and honourable to the builder’ and being rightly encouraged so to do! This, of course, applies to all masons as from our very initiation into Freemasonry we were recommended to seriously contemplate the Volume of the Sacred Law morally and spiritually. Our regular progress through Freemasonry brings us all to the position of whether we should seek to complete our fundamental moral and spiritual education by entering the Holy Royal Arch or perhaps we should just remain in the shadows of enlightenment and let the bright morning star just sadly fade away?
    Simon P. Pine, Waltham Cross, Hertfordshire.

Sir,
    With reference to Letters to the Editor, Freemasonry Today (Issue 24) ‘Changes in the Royal Arch’, I am surprised that one of his disenchanted flock actually runs a Lodge of Instruction! Does this individual not try to instil in the attendants of that Lodge the enthusiasm to encourage the desirability of following the dictates of rote learning or does he willingly accept second-rate delivery by those ‘bored’ by the whole ‘archaic set-up’ and who, if not with us, would be missed?
    For my part, I was (almost) sorry when they decided to dispense with that ‘unfathomable’ section of the Mystical Lecture – the Aleph, Beth, Lamed and the Ja, Bul, On et al. This, together with the responsibility of the MEZ to deliver the whole of the Mystical Lecture – after having fought through the ritualistic pitfalls contained in the Exaltation Ceremony itself – was a true challenge.
    When serious consideration is given to the views of those who wish to tailor the ritual to fit their own preferred input this will sound the death-knell for accepted ritual. Let us remember that ‘Perfection belongeth only to the Lord’; and let us not forget that our hearts should go out to that Brother who messes it up – but done with such sincerity – and is deserving of our support as we should be grateful for his sincere attempts in maintaining a continuance of whatever the ritual practiced may be.
    Freemasons of yesteryear were not all brilliant ritualists having eons of time to sit around polishing up their bit. They were ordinary people with ordinary responsibilities. Being married, or not, is not the issue. Commitment is! This, sadly, is not the case with some of our brethren today.
    Alvah Clarke, Chaucer Chapter, No. 1540, Clerkenwell, London.

Sir,
    When we are initiated we are charged to make a daily advancement in masonic knowledge. I was initiated at the age of thirty-eight years. During the past thirty-two years I have run my own business. I have also been fortunate to be Master of three Craft Lodges, two Royal Arch Chapters, one Mark Lodge and Sovereign of a Rose Croix Chapter. Being a busy individual I still found time to learn the various rituals of these degrees.
    However, a Freemason contributes more than simply presenting the ritual at our respective meetings. There are those who contribute as organists and have never progressed to the respective chairs. This does not make them less worthy of our regard and esteem.
    Please cease from complaining that the modern young Freemason does not have the time to study the rituals. Where there is a will, there is a way: I travel two hundred and eighty miles from my office in Wolverhampton to attend my Lodge in Middlesex and a similar mileage to attend my Lodge at Sindlesham in Berkshire. I do not consider that this, in itself, is out of the ordinary nor worthy of merit, of congratulations or reward. I just enjoy my Freemasonry.
    Anthony M. Sharkey, Harrow on the Hill Lodge, No. 7735, Kenton, Middlesex. Bearwood lodge, No. 8664, Sindlesham, Berkshire.

FREEMASONRY AND THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY

Sir,
    I look forward with eager anticipation to my copy of Freemasonry Today. Sad am I, therefore, to read that the flames of the ‘little local difficulty’ between Freemasonry and the Archbishop of Canterbury are still being fanned despite his letter of 23rd January. I have shown a copy of this letter to many Brethren who had been hurt by the purported views of Dr. Williams and without exception it was well received and they are mollified.
    My reading of your article on page 6 (Issue 24) leads me to think you are being just a little disingenuous. You have linked particular extracts from the Archbishop’s letter to a conversation with a Press Secretary in which no firm undertakings were given; you have chosen a headline suggesting that the Archbishop has withdrawn from a commitment he had clearly not yet made (and perhaps had no intention of making). I infer that you want your readership to conclude that the Archbishop has done little or nothing to improve the situation. Clearly, from a full reading of his letter, this is not the case.
    A cynic might conclude that you are looking to prolong the argument rather than acknowledging the step the Archbishop has taken. Furthermore, just because a Press Secretary has not fulfilled the hopes of a representative of Freemasonry Today (who is he in the grand scheme of things?) in securing a meeting with the Archbishop at this juncture does not negate the possibility of continued dialogue between Dr. Williams and Grand Lodge. That, surely, is the level at which any useful debate must take place. Out of their discussion might come a ‘study group’ if one is thought useful.
    My advice to brethren concerning the compatibility of Freemasonry with Christianity (or any other religion) has been to continue to act in conformity with the principles and tenets of the Craft and to be good followers of their professed religion. No criticism can then be levelled at them, the Craft or their religion, and thereby the world will know that we are indeed men of honour. It may not be the easiest course to follow but I believe it to be the best.
    Let us all be just a little more gracious and not so high-minded in our approach to this delicate situation. I dearly love my Church and my Freemasonry; there is no good reason why either of them need be permanently damaged by this misunderstanding of each other’s positions. Let those of us who are not directly involved not do or say anything to jeopardise the possibility of dialogue between the rulers in the Craft and the leaders of the Church. No good is served if channels of communication are closed due to some people being perceived as too stiffnecked. In other words: Audi, Vide, Tace!
    The Revd. David Bowen, Rector of Lugwardine-with Bartestree, Weston Beggard and Dormington, Provincial Grand Chaplain for Herefordshire.

THE SPIRIT OF FREEMASONRY

Sir,
    To say the very least I am very happy to be subscribing to Freemasonry Today which is a fountain of masonic knowledge. We here on this side of the pond are anxiously awaiting the next issue.
    For years, as responsible Craft leaders have been only too aware, the failure to properly prepare the candidate for his new duties and privileges is both a failure on the part of the Craft to discharge its just obligations to him and a weakness in the fundamental system of initiation; a flaw which incurs the damage of weakening the whole structure by attempting to build enduring walls with rough ashlars and untempered mortar.
    Moreover, it is not solely a matter of teaching the new member the ceremonies he has gone through; it is necessary that he become imbued with the spirit of Freemasonry and to believe in, as well as to understand, its purpose and ideals. Our fraternity does not rest on compulsion or military rule; if its own members are at odds with its aims it becomes a house divided against itself.
    In many cases when masons cause dissension in a lodge it is not out of malice or a desire to make mischief but only because they do not understand the rules and laws. It is not only the candidate that profits by a lodge system of masonic education but the lodge itself is strengthened.
    I wish you well as you labour in the quarries of Freemasonry.
    Jay L. Austin, Oakland Gardens, New York, United States.

MASONS ON CRUISE SHIPS

Sir,
    Many masons have travelled on the MV Victoria over the years, a cruise ship of the P&O Line . She was sold to a German line last November. I, along with Trevor Clarke of Halsey Hall Lodge, No. 4752, and our wives were on a cruise last year and at a masonic cocktail party hosted by the Captain we enquired as to the fate of the Minute Book and other masonic memorabilia.
    We were informed that we should write to P&O and request that they be sent to the Library and Museum of Freemasonry as a record of all the meetings and monies raised on her during her time with P&O. We did so and am delighted to say that the Curator, Mark J.R. Dennis, has written to say that they have now received all the above and so this history will not be forgotten. Mr. Dennis also informed me that masonic meetings on ships go back to the 1750s to one on a warship.
    Martin K. Freeborn, Gateway of Friendship Lodge, No. 8363

MASONIC DESIGN

Sir,
    I enjoyed very much the article ‘Raised from Adversity’ (Freemasonry Today, Issue 24). I am fortunate to own an example of the Sunderland lustre jug featured. The transfer is identical but my jug has a little overglaze colour. The masonic emblems are interesting, the Star and letter ‘G’, the Square and Compasses and the T over H of the Royal Arch. The Sunderland Museum attributes the jug to the Garrison factory, Sunderland.
    A recent television series on Napoleon revealed that it was the HMS Northumberland that transported Napoleon to his exile on St Helena in 1815. So one can see why potters working in a sea-faring community would choose to commemorate that particular vessel.
W.F. Jackson, Athelstan Lodge, No. 9033, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset.