Once, in a certain PHA grand lodge in the southern region of USA, a man who was an irregular mason wanted to become a regular mason.
After 7+ years of being clandestine, he finally saw the light and there were many brothers who were happy for him and vowed to be there during his raising.
Then, his inept WM had a "problem" with the candidate: he was a Muslim. In the south, being a black Muslim is much of an anomaly compared to the east coast or mid-west. The befuddled WM did what every incompetent WM would do and seek answers from uninformed brethren read past masters. They all told him the same thing "don't"...he met a well-informed one who said go ahead...but with a 4 is to 1, he did something even worse: he talked to his deputy district grand master.
"Would he obligate to a bible?" the man asked.
"He said he may to the first 2 degrees, but he wants his third on a Koran." the WM replied
"I would not allow a Koran on an altar in my district."
So, the confused WM went back to the PM who told him to raise him and let him know the remarks of the District Deputy.
The PM was in shock, he had traveled all over the world and in his military experience seen the Koran on the altar of a few military PHA lodges that had members who were Muslims.
Since he had the Grand Master's ear, he decided to have a chat with him on the District Deputy's remarks. But instead, he was shocked on what transpired one evening in a lounge with the GM and the WM sitting with him.
"No Muslim will ever be a Mason in my jurisdiction as long as I am alive" GM said
"What?" PM replied in shock
"No Muslm. Absolutely not. Prince Hall is a Christian fraternity"
After he composed himself, the PM told him "Ok. That is fine, put it on paper."
"No."
"Well, if that is what you feel, then as Grand Master you have to put it in an edict."
"I won't..." GM replied, then turning to the WM he said "...you have heard what I said. If I hear that man is a mason, I will have you expelled for contumacy"
A couple of years later, the same GM slipped this opinion into a communication sent throughout the country. It was met with shock and disgust. He retracted his statement and killed the plans he had later of declaring that jurisdiction as a Christian jurisdiction. The only hint left of that debacle is a couple of lines in his Grand Session address where he affirmed the Three Great Lights in his jurisdiction as The Holy Bible, the Square and the Compass.
No one argued with him and many in attendance including those who threw a fit agreed with him. You see, they were not angry with him for what he believed, they were angry that he was bold (read stupid) enough to put it on paper and jeopardize the reputation of the fraternity publicly as well as jeopardize the non-profit status of his Grand Lodge's foundation accounts.
As for my good friend and dear brother, he is still a Muslim, still a veteran, still a hardworking entrepreneur, still a dutiful family man, still a loyal and faithful husband. After the drama that was caused, he felt his spirit dampen. He left the fraternity and has moved on still wishing in his heart that he was a mason.
March 11, 2016
July 31, 2015
The masonic line of ascension and why it is a stupid idea
There are several lodges I have known were to become a WM, you have to go through a line of offices to eventually become a WM. I think it is a very stupid concept for one reason: it defeats the purpose of an election.
The masonic election of officers is a process by which members of a lodge typically pick and choose the members they think are competent for certain positions within the lodge. Each elected officer has a separate duty and the WM is rather than a culmination of all the duties, is simply one who delegates. You do not need to have been in a position to be able to delegate that decision especially if the duties and responsibilities are plainly spelled out in the by-laws and constitution.
Added responsibility is one thing, and preparing people for leadership is another thing, but with both, you don't need to have someone occupy different roles within a lodge to make them competent at the job of being a WM.
I have seen many brothers who were better in their warden seats than they were in the WM seat. I have seen a few who were better suited for one Warden seat vs the other (in a lot of jurisdictions I am familar with, the only requirement to be a WM is to have sat at any Warden position for one full masonic year)
But here's the point I am getting to...the WM seat is the hottest seat in the house, right under the rising scorching sun. One has to have certain qualities that don't have to be experienced or learned by sitting in EVERY seat on the so-called line. The election is an opportunity for brothers of that lodge to pick their best members for the position that best fits them and the lodge. There should be no hurry to get to the East. It should not be a factory line.
The masonic election of officers is a process by which members of a lodge typically pick and choose the members they think are competent for certain positions within the lodge. Each elected officer has a separate duty and the WM is rather than a culmination of all the duties, is simply one who delegates. You do not need to have been in a position to be able to delegate that decision especially if the duties and responsibilities are plainly spelled out in the by-laws and constitution.
Added responsibility is one thing, and preparing people for leadership is another thing, but with both, you don't need to have someone occupy different roles within a lodge to make them competent at the job of being a WM.
I have seen many brothers who were better in their warden seats than they were in the WM seat. I have seen a few who were better suited for one Warden seat vs the other (in a lot of jurisdictions I am familar with, the only requirement to be a WM is to have sat at any Warden position for one full masonic year)
But here's the point I am getting to...the WM seat is the hottest seat in the house, right under the rising scorching sun. One has to have certain qualities that don't have to be experienced or learned by sitting in EVERY seat on the so-called line. The election is an opportunity for brothers of that lodge to pick their best members for the position that best fits them and the lodge. There should be no hurry to get to the East. It should not be a factory line.
July 22, 2014
William Wirt: the (anti-)Mason
However, on his nomination, he told the convention that he would "very sincerely retire from it (nomination) with far more pleasure" than he would accept it.
He was initiated and passed to the degree of Fellowcraft but never became a Master Mason because his curiosity never led him so far (his own words). This was over 30 years before his nomination and on stating that, he also declared his slightly demeaning purview of the craft as "nothing more than a social and charitable club designed for the good feeling among its members , and for the pecuniary relief of their indigent brethren".
On being nominated, he was advised to declare his hate and dissent with the masonic organization, but he declined stating that "I did not believe that there could be anything in the institution at war with their duties as patriots men, and Christians"
He had a clear win of the nomination of Anti-Masonic party with 12 out of the 18 votes due to his charisma and his proficiency as a lawyer, reputation as an outstanding citizen and man. He went on to face Andrew Jackson (a Democrat and Mason out of TN) and Henry Clay (a Republican and Mason out of KY).
William Wirt lost the election winning only 7 electoral votes. His loss and his odds with the facade of the Anti-Masonic party effectively signaled the beginning of the ending of the party which effectively merged with the Whig Party around 1838.
July 5, 2014
Emotional Hazing
“Some people won't be happy until they've pushed you to the ground. What you have to do is have the courage to stand your ground and not give them the time of day. Hold on to your power and never give it away.”
Most Grand Lodges and indeed fraternal organizations usually have policies and make statements that state they are anti-hazing. A lot of them are particular about stomping down and restricting the scourge of physical hazing, but they usually do not bother or crack down as hard on the issue of emotional hazing.
Just like physical hazing, emotional hazing is just as distressing. I won't deny that i have not been a victim of such a treatment as a candidate. Been shouted on, constantly teased and ridiculed, humiliated to the furthest extent were just as hurtful on my experience as someone swinging a paddle on me.
What is the reason for this one asks? The two reasons that the proponents are quick to point out: Humility and Manliness.
I will tell you from my personal experience that a process of 3 months is never going to turn a proud man humble or teach anything about humility except it's a lesson the man is willing to learn himself. I've had experiences with candidates who are so meek and zen during their degree-work and when they are raised, turn into complete pompous and proud pigs. There's absolutely no humility that can be taught to a man by humiliating him.
That being said, we expect every candidate who comes into the temple to be first and foremost a man. If so, why test such manliness? If his manhood is in question, why recommend him? Why pass him through the investigation committee just to torment him during the degreework or in the ante-room? Why do we go through the lengths of such abusive methods to "prove" such manhood? Is there a way to prove such in the first place? How are we certain that the people proving the so-called manhood are truly men themselves if they are not prepared to take the same steps when the candidate/petitioner is not in a subversive state as he is in the lodge?
We have no excuse for maltreatment of our candidates in our lodges either physically, mentally or emotionally. Grand Lodges should be much stiffer on the education and enforcement of these forms of hazing.
Some members will then complain that the new masons are soft or not as tough as the "old-school", but it's been my experience that when the foolishness and foul play is put aside and freemasonry itself is being practiced in our lodges, those who talk the loudest sort of disappear. Reminds me of three guys I met during my third degree...they were pretty rough and I'm sure masons everywhere remember their fate.
Most Grand Lodges and indeed fraternal organizations usually have policies and make statements that state they are anti-hazing. A lot of them are particular about stomping down and restricting the scourge of physical hazing, but they usually do not bother or crack down as hard on the issue of emotional hazing.
Just like physical hazing, emotional hazing is just as distressing. I won't deny that i have not been a victim of such a treatment as a candidate. Been shouted on, constantly teased and ridiculed, humiliated to the furthest extent were just as hurtful on my experience as someone swinging a paddle on me.
What is the reason for this one asks? The two reasons that the proponents are quick to point out: Humility and Manliness.
I will tell you from my personal experience that a process of 3 months is never going to turn a proud man humble or teach anything about humility except it's a lesson the man is willing to learn himself. I've had experiences with candidates who are so meek and zen during their degree-work and when they are raised, turn into complete pompous and proud pigs. There's absolutely no humility that can be taught to a man by humiliating him.
That being said, we expect every candidate who comes into the temple to be first and foremost a man. If so, why test such manliness? If his manhood is in question, why recommend him? Why pass him through the investigation committee just to torment him during the degreework or in the ante-room? Why do we go through the lengths of such abusive methods to "prove" such manhood? Is there a way to prove such in the first place? How are we certain that the people proving the so-called manhood are truly men themselves if they are not prepared to take the same steps when the candidate/petitioner is not in a subversive state as he is in the lodge?
We have no excuse for maltreatment of our candidates in our lodges either physically, mentally or emotionally. Grand Lodges should be much stiffer on the education and enforcement of these forms of hazing.
Some members will then complain that the new masons are soft or not as tough as the "old-school", but it's been my experience that when the foolishness and foul play is put aside and freemasonry itself is being practiced in our lodges, those who talk the loudest sort of disappear. Reminds me of three guys I met during my third degree...they were pretty rough and I'm sure masons everywhere remember their fate.
Suitability
In most jurisdictions, a candidate of freemasonry has to prove suitable proficiency to be moved on to the next degree. The definition of suitable in the English dictionary is: "right or appropriate for a particular person, purpose, or situation". That applies very much to the instance of proving proficiency in lodges as conditions may vary per candidate or per jurisdiction on how to assess proficiency at that time.
That being said, as a candidate moves from degree to degree, his horizon on what freemasonry is should increase so should his perspective on the craft. It should behoove the candidate after reaching the sublime degree to go back and reflect on the teachings of previous degrees being that he no longer needs to prove any kind of proficiency to anyone anymore and he's ascended the stairs of the craft and now has the complete picture of what was going on step by step.
In most instances, this doesn't happen.
What you might find rather is a mason who abandons all he has learned in the previous degrees and just enjoys the benefit of his full membership without realising at the time that the standard by which he was tested was much lower than what is expected of him as a master mason. He is expected at this stage, to be the master of his craft, so why wouldn't it behoove him to be master what he learned as an apprentice and so on?
I recall looking at the rituals of the 1st degree as a newly initiated apprentice, then as a newly raised master mason. Year after year with each new degree class, I have looked at the degree work of the entered apprentice and have learned something that might have a new meaning to me and how I should apply it to my life.
This should be reminded to all our candidates who make it through the degrees and decide to run off or seek the other degrees freemasonry is so full of. It is important to understand the elastic of our masonic knowledge expands as much as we travel and as much as we are willing to stretch it and only remains the same size or even shrinking if we choose to do otherwise.
That being said, as a candidate moves from degree to degree, his horizon on what freemasonry is should increase so should his perspective on the craft. It should behoove the candidate after reaching the sublime degree to go back and reflect on the teachings of previous degrees being that he no longer needs to prove any kind of proficiency to anyone anymore and he's ascended the stairs of the craft and now has the complete picture of what was going on step by step.
In most instances, this doesn't happen.
What you might find rather is a mason who abandons all he has learned in the previous degrees and just enjoys the benefit of his full membership without realising at the time that the standard by which he was tested was much lower than what is expected of him as a master mason. He is expected at this stage, to be the master of his craft, so why wouldn't it behoove him to be master what he learned as an apprentice and so on?
I recall looking at the rituals of the 1st degree as a newly initiated apprentice, then as a newly raised master mason. Year after year with each new degree class, I have looked at the degree work of the entered apprentice and have learned something that might have a new meaning to me and how I should apply it to my life.
This should be reminded to all our candidates who make it through the degrees and decide to run off or seek the other degrees freemasonry is so full of. It is important to understand the elastic of our masonic knowledge expands as much as we travel and as much as we are willing to stretch it and only remains the same size or even shrinking if we choose to do otherwise.
April 22, 2014
Lux E Tenebris (Light Out Of Darkness)
When I created this image for my now defunct lodge facebook page, I thought the quote itself was profound. However the more you think about a few wise words, the more they sink to you and deeper the meaning becomes.
It was a quote by this Grand Master in 1893 at a congress of masons in Chicago. In order to understand the real meaning of the quote, one has to understand the context by which a man who considered being a Prince Hall mason in Alabama in 1893 faced when it came to being educated.
He was determined to seek such enlightenment he had no idea of. Usually having parents and people around him who never understood the real value of education, he sought far and wide for a means and a way to educate himself so he could eventually improve himself, his family and his community as a whole.
Juxtaposed with today's society, the term educated may not necessarily mean such a man who is formally educated. Although he has the basic means to read and write, in today's society, it means a man who is willing to go above and beyond to explore and broaden his mind and his intellectual periscope. It may not neccessarily have to come from a formal education institution, it may be just be by self-study, travelling and being under the guidance and fellowship of well-read mentors.
Freemasonry offers this to all its members who seek it. It gives an opportunity for members to study the rituals and associated literature, it allows its members to "foreign lands" to explore different cultures with the knowledge that wherever that brother travels, he is safe with a fellow who wears an apron with the Square & Compass. It allows brothers sit alongside men who have gone in the same path and can teach them some things not only about freemasonry but about life as well.
However, the issue is if our lodges and grand lodges are offering it to its members. Education in lodges and grand lodges is mostly ritualistic, if dare some be esoteric. But what how do these teachings positively improve our members who don't understand or can even apply these teachings? Where have we gone wrong in this respect?
First of all, we have to recognize and accept that in most cases, our lodges are open to all those who seek entrance to it who for the most part have clean records. We don't inquire onto their ability to be open minded and willing to educate themselves on what they are being taught and take in the lessons to be learned and have the capacity to apply it. Just come with your petition and your money and spend 3 months indulging us and you'll be a member. Whatever happens after that? What happens with the person who indeed has a capacity to learn after he goes through the degrees? Nothing.
Our lodges mostly don't have room for continuous education. While we see it set in some grand lodges as part of their operations, some members don't impart the real lessons of freemasonry during the degree process. As one proceeds through the degrees, is the candidate really understanding this enlightenment he seeks more and more of? Or is he in the dark throughout the processes and has no idea what he's seeking and even worse, goes ahead to seek more degrees that end up being fluff because of his lack of a firm foundation?
We owe it to our craft and fraternity to open the door of enlightenment to only those who have the capacity and desire not only to learn, but understand and apply whatever information we give them in the hopes of becoming better men. We owe it to them to begin the process and give them the best education we can while they are going through the degrees and understanding that proficiency is not a matter of just spitting back words, but more than that it's evidence that the brother is prepared to apply the lessons to his person and we can see such lessons making his rough ashlar a little smoother. Finally, we owe ourselves to keep being educated, to read more, to explore more than ritual and bring whatever education we can back to our fraternity to better enable our brethren (both candidates and master masons) to be worthy and support to themselves, their families and society as a whole.
Lux E Tenebris.
February 16, 2014
External, not internal.
George Washington, Harry Truman, Thurgood Marshall, Booker T Washington, etc.
These were famous men who also happened to be masons.
None of these men influenced my decision to become a mason.
However, in these latter days, we find a lot of masons almost digging very deep to find out if any of their favorite personalities were freemasons; some even resorting to lies and deception i.e the case of Martin Luther King Jr (he was not a mason but several people have tied a dedication service by the Grand Lodge of Georgia a few years back to a "posthumous making on sight" which the Grand Master has flatly denied)
That being said, there has also been a case where famous men have been made masons at sight by Grand Masters in recent times. Nelson Mandela, Lionel Richie, Isiah Thomas, Shaquille O'Neal are some of the celebrities made masons instantly by virtue of their celebrity status. The argument of some in support of these things is that it brings attention to our craft and I wonder: is that really what we want? To bring attention of the bright stars to our craft that allegedly espouses its membership qualifications determined by the internal qualities of a man, not vice versa. What do these men really bring into the craft apart from a fat check?
With regards to the constant search and bother to identify some famous men as masons, one could directly relate it to the dearth of characters worth following within the current membership. There is a wide generational gap within the fraternity and within that is a problem with an older generation focused on the financial and political facets of the fraternity leaving the younger ones to finagle through or just sit in desolation as they observe the constant hankering over collars and titles by what are supposed to be their mentors. This results in an ignorant and otherwise uneducated brotherhood whose new members are therefore trying to find role models in the characters of famous men they most identify with, rather than the men in their very own lodge who may or may not possess the same characteristics.
The problem with the quality of membership is not a new one. It has always existed as long as our fraternity. However, the problem now is there is almost a negligence with the concern about not only bringing in quality members but also developing the ones already in it. There should be a concern about bringing in members who a younger generation will look up to and allowing the older generation of masons to develop the characters of said new members. But this seems to be all lost in the constant bickering and in-fighting by those members who have in ego what they lack in character ergo causing members to look elsewhere or look for rejuvenation in shooting stars within our fraternity they can not reach to.
I personally found a few people within my life who I am thankful for their inspiration. Coincidentally they were masons and made me even more interested. Do we still have such influential characters in our fraternity? Are you one of them?
These were famous men who also happened to be masons.
None of these men influenced my decision to become a mason.
However, in these latter days, we find a lot of masons almost digging very deep to find out if any of their favorite personalities were freemasons; some even resorting to lies and deception i.e the case of Martin Luther King Jr (he was not a mason but several people have tied a dedication service by the Grand Lodge of Georgia a few years back to a "posthumous making on sight" which the Grand Master has flatly denied)
That being said, there has also been a case where famous men have been made masons at sight by Grand Masters in recent times. Nelson Mandela, Lionel Richie, Isiah Thomas, Shaquille O'Neal are some of the celebrities made masons instantly by virtue of their celebrity status. The argument of some in support of these things is that it brings attention to our craft and I wonder: is that really what we want? To bring attention of the bright stars to our craft that allegedly espouses its membership qualifications determined by the internal qualities of a man, not vice versa. What do these men really bring into the craft apart from a fat check?
With regards to the constant search and bother to identify some famous men as masons, one could directly relate it to the dearth of characters worth following within the current membership. There is a wide generational gap within the fraternity and within that is a problem with an older generation focused on the financial and political facets of the fraternity leaving the younger ones to finagle through or just sit in desolation as they observe the constant hankering over collars and titles by what are supposed to be their mentors. This results in an ignorant and otherwise uneducated brotherhood whose new members are therefore trying to find role models in the characters of famous men they most identify with, rather than the men in their very own lodge who may or may not possess the same characteristics.
The problem with the quality of membership is not a new one. It has always existed as long as our fraternity. However, the problem now is there is almost a negligence with the concern about not only bringing in quality members but also developing the ones already in it. There should be a concern about bringing in members who a younger generation will look up to and allowing the older generation of masons to develop the characters of said new members. But this seems to be all lost in the constant bickering and in-fighting by those members who have in ego what they lack in character ergo causing members to look elsewhere or look for rejuvenation in shooting stars within our fraternity they can not reach to.
I personally found a few people within my life who I am thankful for their inspiration. Coincidentally they were masons and made me even more interested. Do we still have such influential characters in our fraternity? Are you one of them?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)