Mysteries of Promotion

Sir,
    With reference to a letter from Philip W. Piggott in Freemasonry Today, Issue 32, I could not disagree more with the views of the writer.
    How on earth can he respect ‘three very good masons’ who take umbrage and resign ‘after being upset at being bypassed for promotion.’ Should a mason resign on these grounds then surely he is not fit to receive an honour anyway and, in my opinion, has stayed in the Craft for the wrong reason.
    No, Philip, I do not reckon that that is the reason for the reduction in the membership. Twenty years, or even ten years ago, a prospective member could arrange for time off work without too much trouble. However, in today’s economic climate it is far from easy. In fact, it is likely that a married man with a young family would be most reluctant to take days off from his holiday entitlement.
    Having served twenty years as Secretary of my Mother Lodge, ten years as Secretary of the Lodge of Instruction and now Scribe E of two Chapters, I admit to being delighted at being honoured with Grand Rank but I would never have considered resigning had I not been so honoured.
    John H. Fenn, South Woodford, London.

Sir,
    I was intrigued by Philip Piggot’s letter in Freemasonry Today relating to promotion. As a society of men who profess to have secrets, as opposed to the popular misconception of a secret society, then the secrets and mysteries for the reasons for promotion and initial provincial honours - or lack of them - will almost certainly remain so.
    When I received my first Provincial honour I had carried out twenty-four ceremonies and presentations in lodge since vacating the Master’s chair and was proud to be offered a Grand Rank; until, that is, on the installation day at Freemasons’ Hall when I was sitting next to a mystified Brother who confessed he had done nothing since his time as Master and only rarely attended Lodge of Instruction. He was bewildered as to why he had received any appointment at all.
    Needless to say, I looked forward to my next promotion but not with the anticipation and enthusiasm I had felt before.
    Clive J. Vernon, Amwell Lodge, No. 6459, Hertingfordbury, Hertfordshire.

Sir,
    I was interested to read the letters from Philip Piggott (Mysteries of Promotion) and Chris Base (Spelling) in the Spring edition of Freemasonry Today. These letters were printed separately but, for me, touched on the same topic, that of recruitment and retention.
    We all bemoan the fact that attendance and membership are dropping but, collectively, we seem to do little to address the fundamental issue which to me is a failure to understand and appreciate that we live in, and recruit from, the modern world.
    The issue raised by Philip Piggott touches on far more than simply promotions. When we join the Craft we take vows of secrecy relating to aspects of Freemasonry which we, as masons, need only share with each other. We do not take any vows to keep secret any communication from our lodges to our Provinces or to Grand Lodge. Nor, indeed, are we ever advised that the Craft practices any kind of secrecy in our dealings with each other. I feel that this is particularly relevant to the issue of promotions but also relates to how we now take the Craft forward.
    The Craft recruits from the outside world. That world has moved on. Gone are the days when employers had the right to keep secret files on employees. All public service bodies are obliged to disclose the majority of the information which they hold under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act. In short, the potential recruits to our organisation live in a world where petty (and often discriminatory) secrecy has become a thing of the past.
    I stress that this is not about individuals. I have absolute faith in the Secretary of my lodge and have no doubt that the majority of Secretaries and, indeed, all our members act in good faith. There are two things at stake here. Firstly, that we should remove any doubt or suspicion in the minds of those who seek promotion or are promoted. If the reports we write about each other consist of the whole truth why would anyone seek to keep them secret? Secondly, we need to adopt the reasonable and logically held principles of the outside world. Our procedures do not represent perfection cast in tablets of stone. If we fail to move on, we fail to survive - it’s as simple as that.
    Every application to join our Order contains a declaration on the front page relating to the Data Protection Act. Will it take a rush of applications under that Act from disgruntled members to make Grand Lodge see the modern world staring us in the face or will we carry on acting as if we are caught in the Victorian era while the Order dwindles around us?
    Ian Gallehawk, Rivermead Lodge, No. 8278, Welling, Province of West Kent.

Sir,
    With regard to your ‘Letter from the Editor’ in the Spring issue of Freemasonry Today on the subject of promotion, ‘t’was ever thus’. Thomas Dunckerley, as Provincial Grand Master of eight counties wrote to Grand Lodge in 1786, ‘...to appoint a greater number of blue and red aprons...I find of great advantage...as it attracts gentlemen...who seem ambitious...’ and again, ‘I am not only lov’d but fear’d...preferments on the one hand and discipline on the other has (sic) produced the money...’ for the Hall.
    But, Sir, you are spot on: two hundred years on we should be more grown up than cub scouts and, as you say, put the emphasis on practising what we preach in the ritual, and especially, if we are given rank or office, practise humility. Dunckerley built a wonderful structure for those for whom lodge or Provincial office or rank, for its own sake, seem the ‘be all and end all’. That structure, further embellished over the centuries, now needs simplifying. We need to stress that real service to masonry is done outside the structure, quietly practising masonic principles in our ordinary lives at home and in the community. Real masons know that ‘rank is but the guinea stamp, the man himself the gold.’
    David Wyatt, Newent, Gloucestershire.

Sell Freemasons’ Hall?

Sir,
    Freemasonry is going through a difficult patch at the moment especially in London and the bigger cities. A building like the temple in Great Queen Street has a sound investment structure and the estate management team should be using its worth to spread the cost over many years. I understand the surcharge for this is in the region of £11.00 per member. This, together with an increase in the charitable donation (which is not optional) is going to be a bridge too far for many members.
    Proper estate management would have had a fund running for this purpose - after all, it has been a known problem since the new lifts were first installed in the 1960s and 70s when the asbestos was first found.
    The building is significant to our organisation but not many lodges can afford to meet there and definitely cannot afford to dine there.
    So, in my opinion, as we have had to make so many changes to our rituals and meetings in order to step into the real world, we should consider whether now is the time to realise our problems with falling membership and do the right thing.
    The site is worth a fortune; it is the most inhospitable place to get to on public transport and could be reshaped for modern times and we could house our administration, museum and so on in a purpose-built new building in a more practical and hospitable area.
    Ken Robinson, Uckfield, East Sussex

Costs of Freemasonry

Sir,
    I belong to a small rural lodge in the Province of Suffolk of which I was Master in 1997. I enjoy my masonry and do what I can for the lodge ‘without detriment to myself or connections.’ I do not aspire to climbing up the ladder and eventually becoming a Grand Officer but to being just a good Freemason and person.
    Our lodge building is owned by its Brethren. We pay for its maintenance and upkeep from the funds raised by Brethren and we do not ask, nor do we receive, any help from either Province or Grand Lodge. Yet, the faceless Mandarins of Grand Lodge are imposing a much increased levy on us to maintain their splendour. Do they realise what they are doing? I doubt it very much; they seem to live in total isolation from the rest of us.
    Let me then spell out a few facts: a vast number of Brethren, like myself, live on a pension and have to cut our coats according to the cloth. Since I retired I have given up several things that I enjoyed but which are now financially beyond my reach. These include allowing my pilot’s licence to lapse and giving up a masonic side degree to name but two.
    Then we have the younger Brethren who have families and large mortgages to cope with as well as the vast cost of everyday life. These younger Brethren will have to prioritise their finances and I would suspect that Freemasonry will be the loser.
    The older Brethren, many of whom have made masonry their life and hobby are going to cut back on membership of lodges. Four members that I know of from my own lodge are going to give up their membership and there have already been three resignations from founder members of a Chapter that I am in. In general conversations that I have had in the Provinces of both Suffolk and Norfolk many good masons are thinking along the same lines. They will not cut out their masonry but will become permanently invited guests of the lodges that they give up.
    What will this do? It will decrease the income of those lodges and some will not survive. If a Masonic Hall has several lodges in it and Brethren drift away from those that cannot survive and they do not join another lodge then, in time, the whole structure will break down and those Masonic Halls will not have enough capital to maintain them and Freemasonry will spiral in a downward direction at a far greater rate than it is doing at the moment.
    I would therefore urge Grand Lodge to think again on what they propose and use some of the large amount of contingency money to fund the essential repairs and maintenance to Great Queen Street and not have to rely on Brethren from the Provinces who find it hard enough to maintain their own lodges rather than to keep Grand Lodge in the manner that it has become accustomed to.
    Brian Coleman, Ormesby St. Margaret, Norfolk.

Music in Lodges

Sir,
    I have followed the correspondence regarding music and the lodge with great interest and would like to add my own observations.
    I joined Freemasonry twenty years ago but prior to that had played in our small dance band for many Ladies’ Festivals. My lodge had a guest organist and he approached me, suggesting that I might like to take over. It was with some trepidation that I did so but once I started I decided that this would be the best way I could contribute to masonry. So for the last seventeen years I have held this office and no other, playing for several lodges and chapters. Much dance music is played from a melody line and chord symbols and I have arranged all my lodge music in this way. There is plenty of classical music available in this form too. My jazz experience has been helpful in enabling me to improvise for promenades and I slip in a few appropriate tunes for the Installation of Officers. I put all I can into being a good organist and my advice to anyone with a reasonable ability is to have a go. Many lodges are crying out for an organist and although I am sure there are excellent recordings available they cannot do fill-ins nor adjust their tempo to suit the singers. Let’s keep music live.
    Eddie Stubbings, Lodge of St. Mary, No. 1312, Braintree, Essex.

Cost of Regalia

Sir,
    I feel that Bro. Illingworth, in his ‘Regalia v Charity’ letter in Freemasonry Today Issue No. 32, cannot be right in his belief that simpler and cheaper regalia would mean that the money saved would somehow result in higher contributions to Masonic Charities. Human nature being as it is, I very doubt that, and any such savings would be spent on other things.
    I am a member of sixteen different masonic Orders and hold a Provincial Honour and so have quite an extensive collection of Regalia. This, with the symbolism and history of Freemasonry is something I and many others enjoy and were amongst the aspects of the Craft which we found attractive in the first place. If this is shorn away and we were to adopt the Spartan regalia regime suggested by Bro. Illingworth, I feel that some would leave Freemasonry or not join in the first place and this would actually diminish the amounts paid to the charities by those lost Brethren.
    I deplore this tendency to expect people to adopt a frugal and miserable existence. One can enjoy life and still give of one’s surplus to good causes and the less fortunate.
    Stephen J. Foley, Reading, Berkshire.

Cycling Masons

Sir,
    Whilst taking part in an endurance cycle event - the 1200 kilometre Paris-Brest-Paris circuit - I met fellow masons in unusual circumstances.
    After one thousand kilometres of cycling I was at a rest stop and across the room a fellow rider laid his crash helmet on the table. In reflective tape at the rear he had made a square and compass. I took my weary frame over and we managed to communicate in a strange mix of languages.
    Our interest in his helmet drew others and at that point a number of Brethren momentarily became united. But we left the checkpoint and never met again, This brings me back to Britain, may I, through Freemasonry Today, ask if there are any other masons, in particular in the north of England, interested in cycling?
    Martyn Bolt, Cambodunum Lodge, No. 3953, Lindley, Yorkshire, West Riding.

Replacing the Gauge With a Centimetre Rule?

Sir,
    Recently, at an initiation, while the Candidate was being presented with the Working Tools, it occurred to me that, as he was a young man, he may not have had experience of Imperial measurements. This is certainly the case of my grandchildren who have no concept at all of feet and inches.
    This led to a train of thought that should Freemasonry now move into the 21st century and substitute the 24-inch gauge with the 60.96 rule?
    Alternatively, do we replace the gauge with a metre rule and introduce a metric day - say 100 second to a minute, 100 minutes to an hour, 10 hours to a day, 10 days to a week, and 100 weeks to a year. We could dispense with months as they are wholly irregular.
    Does this open a wholly new field of time with Freemasonry leading the way?
    F. D. Simpson, Selby, North Yorkshire.

Emperor of Austria: a Freemason?

Sir,
    In his letter to you in the Winter 2004 Issue of Freemasonry Today, Bro. Shepherd states that Karl I, Emperor of Austria, was a Freemason. I am rather puzzled by this assertion and wonder whether the worthy Brother can substantiate it? Perhaps one could ask H.I.H. Otto von Hapsburg, Karl’s son, who is, I believe, 93 years old and still going strong.
    Regarding the views of the Roman Catholic Church vs. Freemasonry, Bro. Axel Pohlmann in his report ‘Not a Crime but a Sin’ in the same Issue has outlined their present official stance.
    However, you may be interested to hear that we have quite a number of Roman Catholics in our ranks in German lodges. I happen to be one of them and, as a convert, thereby clearly stating that I am a Freemason, I was accepted into the Roman Catholic Church.
    H. Kleeberg, St John’s Lodge ‘Zu den drei Säulen an der Isar’, Munich, Germany.