For Men's Only

by RmOlano

1Mar08

In 1888 response to Albert Mackey's Landmarks, Albert Pike wrote that Freemasonry's "true definition is that it is a system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols." Like defining beauty, Freemasonry can be seen, and interpreted in many ways limited only to the eyes of beholders. Some it can be a social or fraternal group, for others it can be a way of life. If we subscribed to the notion that this Craft is about social interaction then there is a merit in grouping the members according to gender. Specific or mixed does makes sense as long as nobody is forced to join a group, be it may specific or combination thereof. If men can form our own group then women should have all the rights to form their own. While “mixed company” has its merits and roadblocks, in my own myopic view, it will take time for the mainstream Freemasons to accept this format. We don’t have to look far to see the present issues the Fraternity is dealing with all-male Fraternity let alone all-female Masonic Lodges.

Although we are witnessing some progress or at least not outright refusal to acknowledge the existence of the regularity of all-female Freemasonry, it is amazing to be an eyewitness of some Brethren who albeit their position and stature within the Fraternity continue to defy the very same Tenets of the Craft. In our lecture, we are reminded that Justice is “that standard or boundary of right which enables us to render unto every man his just due, without distinction.” Without understanding justice how can we find Truth, which brings to the dilemma of the kind of Brotherly Love we practice if we are hoodwinked from the Truth?

Freemasonry does change. It was said to evolve from operative to speculative. Operative, from actual builders of magnificent edifices to memorialize human offerings to Deity to speculative---we are now erecting “temples not made by hands.” The Fraternity was also postulated to originate from all male warrior-monks---Templar nevertheless, in our contemporary times; defending ones faith is not a gender selective domain. The Degree of Master Mason was relatively “new” addition. The institution of Grand Lodge is also a change. Even the popular square and compass as Masonic emblem was a result of change. As to our Obligation, it seems strange to hold ourselves only to selected part because we abhorred a portion thereof. We all know that like all other corporeal part of the Craft, the Obligation which some of us hold so dearly is also but a symbol of the Freemasonry. Something not to be taken literally but to interpret and study it as one of the Mysteries/Lessons of the Craft.

If we see the Craft through Albert Pikes vision in 1888 that the ideal is about "building a temple not made by hands, but eternal in heaven," who in this world can claim that the notion of practicing morality and improving oneself through Freemasonry is only reserved for male gender? Who can rightfully claim that the slogan "making good men to a better man" only applies to human being classified as male? What can be used as a reference or justification that only man is allowed, "to improve himself in Masonry?"

Ms Laurel Bergren recently inquired what makes her gender be not worthy to learn the “secret” of subduing passion and improving oneself through Masonry. Is there any Justice and Truth that only male can practice the “system of morality veiled in allegories and illustrated by symbols?” Like Ms Bergren, I am waiting for someone to answer her question, “Are women any less deserving of God’s Grace?”

I commend the Brother from GLNY for a very nice exposition of the fallacy of self-induce masculine superiority complex. Having acknowledged the intrinsic advantage of women with “far greater extent than men of our species ever will have,” then in a round-about way the answer to Ms. Bergren question is obviously "No, women are not less deserving of God's Grace." Having that issue settled, we then can continue to discuss Bro/Doc Paul original article of "Why Masonry should remain a men’s club." As WB Ken noted, the crux of the dialogue is not about women joining male Masonic Lodges but facing the inquiry of why it seems strange to many Brethren to allow the opposite gender to practice a “system of morality veiled with allegories and illustrated by symbols?”To non-Masons especially to women who are reading this exchange of opinions, the hollowness of speaking about men’s task to protect and nurture that “God gift” to humanity is undeniably transparent. Anyone who views Freemasonry as a way of life will be hard pressed to defend this issue unless one would take a myopic view that Freemasonry is nothing but a “good old boy” network masquerading as fraternity.

Let us not kid ourselves that even with long years of the Craft existence, there are still members of the Craft who don’t recognize other duly made Masons because the colors of the skin, religious belief, jurisdiction territorial jealousy, and other petty excuses. Before we really start tooting our own horn, let us look deeply into our heart and ask the question---what are we really in search of? And maybe in the bowels of darkness buried deep within the crypt of cold calculating human emotion, we can find a flicker of light just enough to understand what the word “tolerance” really meant.

...

Not 4 Everybody

Letters and Figures
By RmOlano
21Jan06

More often than not, success is always measured in numbers. In the context of declining membership, most of the letters or articles I have seen and read were the expressions of concern of a “dying Fraternity.” Because the Order loses X number due to passing away or disinterest compared to X number of raised to Master Mason degree with its collateral result of amount of paid membership dues. This writer tends to lean in favor of the camp of those who believe in quality rather than quantity. Like many of the current members, this humble traveler will be extremely glad if more good men flock to join our Fraternity in a hope of making themselves a better man. However, reality dictates that the Craft is not the only group that offers that notion. Freemasonry does not have the monopoly of self improvement while respecting other beliefs. Our Craft will always have “competition” to the pool of good men and to dream of taking them all is just like that word---dream.

An argument could be advanced that the Fraternity was never conceived to be a large group. All the indications to limit the membership were still being practiced and observed despite of the attempt of those craved for change to adapt to modern times. It seems that adaptation means a way to reverse the downward slope of membership issue and the mathematical answer to the problem is to increase the production. Many ideas that floated around and some were actually implemented were designed to bring more individual “to participate in our privileges” as in one-day conferrals and ease off usual requirements such as writing an essay instead of “committing to memories certain parts of the lecture.” How many of us do not even pause to discard something we consider cheap, easy to replace and of little value if not outright worthless?

Men used to flock in our Fraternity because they expect that the Craft were “above” or rather, not like other organizations. The Order used to attract men who are not “ordinary” people; they may be living better than familiar folks, possess skills that are not common or engaged in a profession that pays a notch or two higher than average. The fact was that during the Golden Years of Freemasonry, members of the Fraternity were not your everyday “ordinary” men. One could ask why does “exclusive” country clubs have a year-long waiting list for membership. Despite of expensive membership fees, men who can barely play golf lined up to get in? Why? Because they expect quality; be it may in service, using real glass instead of Styrofoam cup, real sit down dinner instead of being catered by amateurs or kids, or maybe the need to be associated with people and environment that is not “ordinary.” An assembly with room full of attendees wearing open neck shirt and jeans feels different than with a gathering of people wearing coat and tie and/or tuxedo. Men who understand quality dressed up for important events, they “adorn great and important undertakings.”

This humble writer submits that our Fraternity is not for everybody and limited only to those who qualifies. Just like military or religious vocation, our Craft is NOT for general population. Not everybody can get in; there are requirements to be met such as capability to meet financial obligations, mental aptitude to tackle what are needed for the rituals, availability of time for the Craft without concern for second job, etc. The lowering of standards such as requirements to be more financially “affordable,” and taking anyone who ask without regard to the issue of “bringing honor to our ancient institution” are some of the reasons why members dropped off and some of unintended consequences of quantity approach and not to mention an unpleasant result in the coffers of those who depend on it. A Master once said that he rather have a membership roll with nine names of brothers who regularly shows up in meetings and conferrals listed than one hundred names on the roster including names of those regular nine. People showed up because they like to and not because they have to. Numbers seems irrelevant in the context of maintaining “those truly Masonic ornaments, Brotherly Love, Relief and Truth.”

...

Printed in Ventura County York Rite Bulletin May-June 2007