ONE-DAY CLASSES Sir,
    Julian Rees is to be congratulated on his perceptive and well-presented article in the last issue of Freemasonry Today on the subject of Grand Masters’ One-Day classes held in some Grand Jurisdictions in this country. Thankfully, in Alabama, where I am a member (for 35 years) it has not yet come to that but who knows what the future will hold?
    His observations about this being a financial thing are right on the mark as are his analyses of the state to which Freemasonry in the USA has regressed today. I have done some personal analyses of masonic membership in this country based upon membership data and it would seem that, lamentably, given the current state of things, Freemasonry will go the way of the Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias and similar organizations in less than twenty years.
    When we learn that Freemasonry, as the article says, must be ‘first and foremost a very personal endeavour, with important lessons to be learned from the ritual in terms of moral and spiritual growth’ instead of trying to make masons wholesale and relax requirements just to increase numbers, we will be much better off – even if our numbers do diminish significantly.
    George L. Marshall, Jr., 33º Grand Lodge of Alabama, Montgomery, Alabama, United States.

Sir,
    With regard to your article ‘United States Grand Master’s One-Day Classes’ in the last issue of Freemasonry Today: rest assured that many of us on this side of the Pond don’t think much of the idea. While I did go to one of the first ones to see what they were like, I had a poor impression. The exemplar was shown on closed circuit television (although the work was done in the assembly room, it was difficult to see everything) and the ‘raising’ was done with the candidates seated in chairs by individual mentors. I refused to do it this way and made my candidate lie on the floor. I refuse to participate in any more such classes.
    Some Grand Masters don’t like the idea and simply refuse to let such classes be held during their year.
    As to the Lodge in Connecticut having its charter suspended when it refused to participate, there might be more to the story. Here in Arizona, no Lodge is required to participate in the One-Day Classes and are allowed to initiate their candidates in the usual manner if they so wish. In fact, there usually are not more than two One-Day Classes each year and many candidates in all Lodges go through in the normal way.
    To defend the practice, many candidates who have gone through the One-Day Classes have become active members. But I do think they have missed something and would discourage any candidate to participate. The idea was largely an extension of the large classes used to get candidates into the Scottish Rite, and to a lesser extent, into the York Rite.
    Bruce Johnson, Librarian, Grand Lodge of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, United States

Sir,
    It was reassuring to read the letters in Freemasonry Today (Issue 25) which were opposed to the ludicrous practice of One-Day Classes that are currently undermining Freemasonry in the United States.
    The most important question arising from the above is: what is the United Grand Lodge of England going to do about it? Surely the time has come for it to withdraw its recognition of any Grand Lodge which condones, let alone encourages, such appalling events as One-Day Classes?
    Chris A. Hutchins, The Elizabethan Lodge, No. 7262, Christchurch, Hampshire and Isle of Wight.

Sir,
    Having just read your article ‘United States Grand Master’s One-Day Classes’ in Issue 25, I feel compelled to share my feelings on this matter.
    As a recent initiate into Freemasonry I can still very clearly remember every aspect of my initiation, starting with the feeling of trepidation, waiting to be admitted into the Lodge for the first time. Then the exciting and austere atmosphere of the ceremony as well as how special and very much part of the organisation I was made to feel both during the formal part of the evening and at the Festive Board afterwards.
    In my humble opinion, my proposer and seconder, both respected masons of long standing, were and still are exceptional, taking me to visit other lodges and guiding me through the intricacies of masonic activity. Over the nine months between my initiation and raising they helped me to learn and prosper under their tutelage and friendship.
    I feel a great deal of sympathy for those Brethren in the United States who are not able to enjoy these experiences which to me were, and are, so important. I can also understand the need for improving the way in which the Craft recruits, with some Lodges being awash with candidates and others slowly decaying into anonymity. Mass Classes however are not the way forward and I sincerely hope that this practice never makes its way across the Atlantic.
    Ian Heaviside, Eardulph Lodge, No. 6645, Chester-le-Street, Durham.

A CONTRARY VIEW Sir,
    Let me introduce myself as amongst the first Freemasons in the Grand Lodge of New York to oppose the exercise in what I refer to as ‘McMasonry’, otherwise known as the Grand Master’s Class. It is still, despite denials by Grand Lodge officials, widely resented by the Brethren of the State of New York, but, the article is so full of misinformation as to be a disgrace not only to the author for his either (1) deliberate misinformation or, (2) total lack of research as to disgrace both himself and Freemasonry Today. It is so rife with misinformation and riddled with fantasies as to be suitable for fodder by the legions of anti-masonic sites throughout the world.
    So even I must join in the chorus that the article should be retracted and corrections made. And not with a glib and cynical tongue but with due contrition.
    Steven S. Miller, Grand Lodge of New York, New York, United States

ST. JOHN’S LODGE, CONNECTICUT Sir,
    With reference to the letter from A. R. Portchmouth in the last issue of Freemasonry Today regarding One-Day Classes and the withdrawing of the Warrant of St John’s Lodge, No. 2, I also have a personal interest in this matter as my Brother-in-Law is a Past Master of St John’s Lodge: he was, and most definitely is, opposed to the One-Day Classes.
    I am happy to report that there having been Grand Lodge Elections in Connecticut, the previous Grand Master was not re-elected and that his successor has seen fit, on appeal, to restore the Warrant to St. John’s Lodge.
    Bob Mayberry, Thistle & Rose Lodge, No. 6644, Corby, Northamptonshire.

ROYAL ARCH RITUAL Sir,
    I think the strength of reaction in your last issue to the critic of the Royal Arch Ritual in Freemasonry Today, Issue 24, confirms that there are still some of us who not only value the rituals so brilliantly devised by our forbears, but realise the fundamental relevance of them to masonry in general and to the creation of a better world today.
    Of course it requires a certain effort on our part and of those around us if we are ever to appreciate them fully, just as it does to appreciate the heritage of the Volume of the Sacred Law. Not to put too fine a point on it, it is a lifetime’s study and this takes personal discipline and proper guidance.
    Those seeking a ‘quick fix’ should certainly not turn to Freemasonry!
    It has been proved over and over again that to tamper with established rituals of any kind on the grounds of ‘modernising’ or ‘simplifying’ is counterproductive, although I appreciate why it is done. Please, revisers, beware – stop and consider – for you risk losing in the process of revision (which usually means shortening) things so precious which may never be regained.
    Colin Bissell, Eastbourne, East Sussex

Sir,
    I was surprised and saddened to read a letter from Lewis J. Holmes in Freemasonry Today, issue 24, relating to the Royal Arch and with which I strongly disagree.
    My understanding of the Royal Arch ritual is that it is certainly a challenge and even though the recommendation for qualification for admittance is that of being a Master Mason for a minimum of twelve months, it is usually considered more suitable for those who have passed the Chair. The two main reasons being that, having made the considerable effort to attain the Master’s Chair, they would be used to learning ritual and their achievement could stimulate them to learn more.
    The Royal Arch is certainly more difficult to learn as, usually, there is no regular Chapter of Improvement where the words can be quietly absorbed and one must draw on one’s own resources in order to give a creditable performance. This, I believe, is one of the first lessons to be learnt.
    It also may be a reflection of one particular Chapter’s style and before these two Companions resign they might consider enquiring from their Visiting Grand Officer if there is another Chapter they could visit which could hopefully re-stimulate their interests.
    Though the Royal Arch may, at times, appear to be somewhat impenetrable and one may need guidance in order to appreciate the many-layered nature of its ritual, once the first step has been taken I would hope that these Companions will discover the considerable awards waiting for them.
    Jeffrey Monnickendam, Friars Hiram Chapter, No. 1349, Freemasons’ Hall, London

Sir,
    It was with sadness that I read the letter from L. J. Holmes in the Spring Issue of Freemasonry Today. That a Companion with twenty-five years experience of Royal Arch masonry could treat the ritual so superficially is distressing. Freemasonry is described as a ‘peculiar system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols’. The symbolical lecture is a prime example of this. How anyone could describe it ‘as beyond comprehension and boring’ defeats me. I have lost count of the number of times I have chided Brethren and Companions for listening to the ritual without hearing it!
    The passages of scripture, when properly read, are full of meaning and contribute greatly to the import of the ceremony. I would agree with your correspondent that the Exaltation ceremony is too long. To sit through the ceremony and then listen to all these lectures is excessive and manifestly unfair to the candidate. A strong case can be made for completing the Exaltation ceremony with an abbreviated form of the mystical lecture. In the present day, when many Chapters experience difficulty in finding candidates, one meeting per year could be devoted to the presentation in full of all three lectures.
    Thomas C. Denholm, Past Grand Superintendent, Provincial Grand Chapter of Nottinghamshire, Nottingham

FREEMASONRY AND THE ARCHBISHOP Sir,
    It could be suggested that the letter from the Revd. David Bowen (Freemasonry Today, Issue 25) indicates a misunderstanding. Firstly, it is not understood that Freemasonry Today is the independent voice of Freemasonry and has the potential to speak for masonry universal. There are many masons universally for whom the United Grand Lodge of England does not speak. Therefore it is not inappropriate for this journal to investigate and seek initiatives for masonry universal. Freemasonry Today obviously believes that a study group to meet with the Church of England would be useful and therefore it is trusted that it will continue to press for this.
    Secondly, the letter does not indicate that the position of the General Synod in 1987 and confirmed by the Standing Committee of the House of Bishops in 2002 is that, ‘There are a number of very fundamental reasons to question the compatibility of freemasonry (sic) with Christianity.’ The United Grand Lodge of England may think you can be both, the Church may think otherwise. This issue is not with the Archbishop in particular, rather with the Church leadership in general.
    And thirdly, the Revd. Bowen’s letter suggests, ‘…that those of us who are not directly involved should not do or say anything…’ How, for example, might that help every mason in a province that is sponsoring a two-year festival to support a Cathedral appeal? Perhaps the view could be taken that all it needs for misunderstanding to continue is for people to say and do nothing.
    Gerald Reilly, St. Osyth’s Priory Lodge, No. 2063, Clacton-on-Sea, Essex

LODGE IN FLORENCE Sir,
    The article ‘The Pope and the Spy’ in the last issue of Freemasonry Today is headed by a photograph of the entrance to the via Maggio in Florence with a caption suggesting that the Earl of Middlesex founded a Lodge there in 1733 even though early in the article it states that Dr. Antonio Cocchi was initiated into the Lodge on 4 August 1732.
    These comments are associated with the canard that Charles Sackville, Earl of Middlesex, was founding Master of the Lodge, based on a report of Baron Philip von Stosch. The assumption was also based upon the most well known early masonic artefact, the Sackville medal, otherwise known as the Natter medal because it was struck by L. Natter.
    Volume 105 of Ars Quatuor Coronatorum (1992) contains the definitive paper, ‘The English Lodge in Florence 1732-38’ by C. Matteo Pellizzi. This added to John Heron Leper’s paper in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, 58 (1945).
    In May 1732 a Mr. Shirley became ‘Chief Master’; he was succeeded in May 1733 by Sir Hugh Smithson. In 1735 it was a Mr. Fox; not until May 1736 was the Master Charles Sackville, Earl of Middlesex; later, in 1737, the Master was Robert, the second Lord Raymond who later became Grand Master.
    Comparison of this information with letters by Joseph Spence, tutor to Lord Middlesex, the existence of which was unknown to Matteo Pellizzi, is crucial. These state clearly that Spence and his charge did not arrive in Florence until July 11th, 1732, by which time the Lodge already existed.
    The celebrated 1733 ‘Natter’ medal which designated Lord Middlesex as ‘Carolus Sackville Magister Fl’ appears to be a masonic red herring as he did not at that time become Master of the Lodge.
    Joseph Spence and the Baron (and presumably Lord Middlesex) did meet; It would appear that Stosch sought to raise the status of the Florence Lodge and thereby his own membership of a worthy institution. But he must have been only too well aware that it was not the truth.
    Professor Allan Beaver, Radlett, Hertfordshire. Temple of Athene, Lodge of Masonic Research, No. 9541, Uxbridge, Middlesex.

BOAZ AND BECCLES Sir,
    Canon Tydeman in the last issue of Freemasonry Today says that he doesn’t believe a word of it when he was told of a Suffolk candidate reputedly saying, ‘the worst articifer in Beccles’. I suspect that the Canon did believe it really! This reminded me of something similar happening at an Initiation ceremony I attended some time ago. Our new Junior Deacon, who could not have been paying too much attention to what the Master said during the ceremony, instructed the candidate to repeat ‘so named after Boaz, the Great God of Darkness’ when asked by the Senior Warden ‘whence does this word derive?’ The Junior Deacon had made the mistake of guessing what the initials stood for whilst learning his words. The Director of Ceremonies, who apparently missed this gaff, could not understand why there was so much laughter in the lodge room at that point in time.
    I can report that the Junior Deacon in question started attending Lodge of Instruction after that experience.
    Peter Oakley, Quetta Lodge, No. 2333, E.C., Tarbela Dam, District of Pakistan.