A New Beginning : The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of any Grand Masonic jurisdiction or any other Masonic related body. The Keystone Reporter will also have non- masonic information as well .
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
If you want someone who will eat whatever you put in front of him and never say its not quite as good as his mothers
..then buy a dog.
If you want someone always willing to go out, at any hour, for as long and wherever you want ...
...then buy a dog.
If you want someone who will never touch the remote, doesn't care about football, and can sit next to you as you watch romantic movies
...then buy a dog.
If you want someone who is content to get on your bed just to
warm your feet and whom you can push off if he snores
...then buy a dog!
If you want someone who never criticizes what you do, doesn't care if you are pretty or ugly, fat or thin, young or old, who acts as if every word you say is especially worthy of listening to, and loves you unconditionally, perpetually .
...then buy a dog.
BUT, on the other hand, if you want someone who will never come when you call, ignores you totally when you come home, leaves hair all over the place, walks all over you, runs around all night and only comes home to eat and sleep, and acts as if your entire existence is solely to ensure his happiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...then buy a cat!
Now be honest, you thought I was gonna say... marry a man, didn't you? Send this to all the women you know to brighten their day.
Send this to all the men just to make their day.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
AKC Holiday Cards for Dog Lovers Celebrate the season and send AKC Holiday Cards! This adorable collection of cards will bring joy to everyone on your list. And, you can customize your cards by adding your personal imprint for FREE when you order 3 or more boxes. Shop now.
Put Your Paw Print on the AKC Pet Promise Sometimes, we need a reminder of everything that is required of us in return for the wonderful privilege of having a dog. Dogs bring us love, affection, comfort, security and unrivaled devotion, despite our flaws or past mistakes. So what do we owe them in return?
The American Kennel Club has created AKC Responsible Dog Ownership Day to help educate first-time dog owners about the commitment required and to help current owners enhance their relationships with their pet. Each September, all across the country, hundreds of free events are held to commemorate this day and educate people about responsible dog ownership. Read more
Saturday, October 18, 2008
A farmer had some puppies he needed to sell. He painted a sign advertising the 4 pups And set about nailing it to a post on the edge of his yard. As he was driving the last nail into the post, he felt a tug on his overalls. He looked down into the eyes of little boy 'Mister,' he said, 'I want to buy one of your puppies.'
'Well,' said the farmer,as he rubbed the sweat off the back of his neck, 'These puppies come from fine parents and cost a good deal of money.'
The boy dropped his head for a moment.Then reaching deep into his pocket,he pulled out a handful of change and held it up to the farmer.
'I've got thirty-nine cents.Is that enough to take a look?'
'Sure,' said the farmer.And with that he let out a whistle.'Here, Dolly!' he called.
Out from the doghouse and down the ramp ran
Dolly followed by four little balls of fur.
The little boy pressed his face against the chain link fence. His eyes danced with delight. As the dogs made their way to the fence,
The little boy noticed something else stirring inside the doghouse.
Slowly another little ball appeared, this one noticeably smaller. Down the ramp it slid. Then in a somewhat awkward manner, the little pup began hobbling toward the others, doing its best to catch up....
"I want that one," the little boy said, pointing to the runt. The farmer knelt down at the boy's side and said, "Son, you don't want that puppy. He will never be able to run and play with you like these other dogs would."
With that the little boy stepped back from the fence, reached down, and began rolling up one leg of his trousers.
In doing so he revealed a steel brace running down both sides of his leg attaching itself to a specially made shoe.
Looking back up at the farmer, he said, 'You see sir, I don't run too well myself,and he will need someone who understands.'
With tears in his eyes, the farmer reached down and picked up the little pup.
Holding it carefully he handed it to the little boy.
'How much?' asked the little boy. 'No charge,' answered the farmer, 'There's no charge for love.'
The world is full of people who need someone who understands .
It's National Friendship Week.
Show your friends how much you care. Send this to everyone you consider a FRIEND.
If it comes back to you, then you'll know you have a circle of friends.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
On October 25TH, the 16TH District Royal Arch Association will be hosting a State Wide Reception for the newly installed Grand High Priest . Most Excellent Companion Robert J. Draye at the Rockside Holiday Inn, located at 6001 Rockside Road, Independence, Ohio44131
The Social Hour will begin at 6:00P.M with Dinner at 7:00 P.M - Ladies Invited
Why do today's writers try to associate Sherlock Holmes and Jack the Ripper with Masonry?
From THE NORTHERN LIGHT--August 1991 by C. DeForrest Trexler
"I say, Holmes, what is this mumbo jumbo?"
This line spoken by an incredulous Dr. John Watson (played by the actor James Mason) as Sherlock Holmes (Christopher Plummer) gives Masonic signs and proceeds to engage London's Police Commissioner(Anthony Quayle) in a mysterious hand grip, which Holmes explains to be the secret mode of recognition among Masons of the 33 degree.
The scene, even more startling to real life Masons than to the play actor Dr. Watson, appears in the 1978 motion picture Murder by Decree.
It piques curiosity. What connection did the world's most famous, albeit fictional, detective have with Freemasonry?
In a later scene the question is answered for us, at least insofar as the screen drama is concerned. Holmes admits that he is not a member of the Society of Freemasons, but that he has made a study of its secret rituals as he has of many other arcane subjects, ranging from varieties of poisons to blends of tobacco.
The film progresses to a climatic scene in London's Freemason's Hall, where Holmes confronts three leading figures of the British government, who also are identified as prominent Freemasons. (The spokesman for the three, the Prime Minster, played by John Gielgud, in real life never was a Mason.) Holmes accuses the three of conspiracy in obstruction of justice. The case in point is the grisly murder of five prostitutes, crimes which actually were committed in London's ghetto-like East End during the autumn o f 1888 by an assailant known to contemporaries and posterity only by the ghoulish sobriquet "Jack the Ripper."
The theory advanced by Holmes on the cinema scene is that the infamous Jack was not simply a psychotic, as generally supposed at the time and since. He charges that the notorious killer was a confident of the Royal Family whose motive was to prevent disclosure of a scandal which he believed would endanger the British monarchy. More to the point, the killer was a Freemason. Therefore, his fellow Masons among the police and the highest levels of government "were sworn to protect him in his criminal intent." Masonic affiliation is the explanation given in Murder by Decree as to why the killer, called "Jack the Ripper," never was apprehended and why his identity has remained a mystery for more than a century.
A possible Masonic connection was one of many theories explored in a six-part series, The Ripper File, which aired on BBC television in 1974. The BBC script was published in book form under the same title and is listed among the credits of Murder by Decree. As the television producer has pointed out, however, the series gave little more than a passing mention to the possibility of a Masonic conspiracy and discounted the theory for lack of evidence. There are three purported bases for the Masonic connection theory, all of them circumstantial and all of them contrived.
First, it is alleged that the Ripper's victims were killed and mutilated in such a way as to imitate the ancient penalties of the symbolic degrees. True, the throats of the victims had been cut. But this is a common and expedient method for murder, slaughter, or ritual sacrifice. Beyond that, the indescribable butchery inflicted upon the Ripper's victims reflects a bestially having no resemblance to the symbolic penalties of Masonic ritual.
Moreover, the purpose of the penalties in Masonic ritual is to bind the initiate to his obligation. The initiate affirms the seriousness of his fraternal commitments by invoking a symbolic penalty upon his own head should he betray his trust. Nowhere does the ritual of Freemasonry suggest the infliction of penalties or retribution upon non-Masons, whatever their offenses might be. Thus, the study which the Sherlock Holmes of the film claimed to have made of Masonic ritual seems to have been as superficial as his supposition of the Prime Minister's Masonic affliction was erroneous.
Secondly, a cryptic message concerning the "Juwes" was found scrawled in chalk on a wall near the scene of one of the Ripper's murders. Proponents of a Masonic connection argue that this was not an anti-Semitic slogan as commonly supposed, but a reference to the three assassins of the Hiramic legend. On the other hand, if a Mason committed the crimes, why would he leave such a clue incriminating the fraternity and why at the scene of only one of the five murders?
Thirdly, the police officials responsible for the inconclusive investigation of the Ripper murders were known to be active Freemasons. Can it be inferred from the mere fact of their Masonic association that they were unsuccessful in apprehending the murderer because they were shielding one of their own? Can a criminal conspiracy be inferred simply from a common interest and association? These questions should be rhetorical. Unfortunately, controversy in recent years over the extent of Masonic influence among the Masonic influence among the British police has led some to give credence to the possibility.
"The insidious effect of Freemasonry among the police" was a theme articulated by Stephen Knight in Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution, published in 1976. Knight began with the slender strands of supposition which The Ripper File had unraveled, but then discarded, weaving them into a conclusion that a Masonic conspiracy was not just an unsubstantiated theory, but incontrovertible fact. Fortunately, Knight's credibility is compromised by his rabid anti-Masonry. Among the "facts" to which Knight alludes gratuitously are the Masonic murders of William Morgan and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.
Subsequently, the very individual who had proposed the Masonic connection to BBC researchers confessed that the implication of Freemasonry in the Ripper murders had been a hoax. That should have ended the matter. Unfortunately, the story that the television producers had nibbled upon with a grain of salt, Knight had swallowed whole. He persisted in the delusion until 1985, when a brain tumor took him to an early grave, a victim, some said, of still another Masonic conspiracy.
Very probably the reason why Stephen Knight and others like him have seized upon the notion of Masonic conspiracy as an explanation for the crimes of Jack the Ripper is for purpose of effect. What really concerns them is not the solution of that mystery, not what may have happen today if the power of government, especially law enforcement, is concentrated in the hands of men whose personal allegiance to the bonds of a secret society may take precedence over their public duty. It was much the same apprehension on, rather than the disappearance of William Morgan, which fanned the flames of anti-Masonry in America during the last century.
But why bring Sherlock Holmes into all of this?
It is perhaps an irresistible temptation to set the most famous sleuth of all time on the trail of the most infamous criminal to have eluded justice, especially since both (one in real life, the other in fiction) frequented the streets of London during the same space in time. Murder by Decree is not the only medium to have attempted this. Nevertheless, it is significant that the creator of Sherlock Holmes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, never succumbed to this temptation. In none of Doyle's four novels and 56 short stories which recount the adventures of Sherlock Homes, including encounters with the likes of the Mafia and the Ku Klux Klan, do we find the formidable talents of the master detective applied to solve the Ripper mystery which had baffled Scotland Yard. Although the Ripper murders coincided with the earliest Holmes stories, Doyle made no attempt to use the Ripper's notoriety to gain public acceptance when the success of his venture into detective fiction was far from assured.
Moreover, there is no basis in the works of Conan Doyle for recruiting his immortal character, as did the screenwriters of Murder by Decree, to provide a vehicle for a baseless expose and diatribe against Freemasonry. To be sure, many authors, playwrights, and screenwriters over the years have taken license in exploiting to their own ends the fame of Doyle's creation, one of the most universally recognized names in fiction, by placing him in new and different circumstances which Doyle never intended or cold have imagined. Consider, for example, the popular film series of the 1940's starring Basil Rathbone, which saw Sherlock Holmes combating Nazi spies and saboteurs.
Conan Doyle was born in 1859 into a devoutly Roman Catholic family and was educated in a Jesuit school. Entering the medical profession, he turned to writing as a means of supplementing the uncertain income of his fledgling practice. In 1887 he published A Study in Scarlet, which introduced Sherlock Holmes and his inseparable companion, John Watson, like Doyle himself, a struggling physician. A second Holmes novel appeared in 1890. It was not until the following year, however, when Doyle began to write a se ries of Holmes adventures for The Strand magazine, illustrated by the drawings of Sidney Paget, that his creation became a success. Indeed, he became a sensation.
Almost overnight, the tall, gaunt figure in the deerstalker cap and caped overcoat, never without pipe and magnifying glass, became a household word. (The admiring public appeared to overlook Holmes' cocaine habit.) Eccentric as Doyle created him, many readers were convinced that Holmes was a real person and the storied flat at 221B Baker Street actually existed.
Doyle, however, did not share the enthusiasm of the reading public. He tired of Holmes, wishing to devote his literary talents to historical adventures. Thus, at the end of 1893, he rid himself of Holmes, sending him to his apparent death in the Swiss Alps at the hands of his arch-enemy, Professor Moriarity. Holmes' demise brought a public outcry. Readers vented their disapproval by canceling subscriptions to The Strand.
In time Doyle relented. The best known adventure of Sherlock Holmes, The Hound of the Baskervilles, appeared in 1901. Then, late in 1903, Holmes was resurrected in the pages of The Strand.
Despite his Catholic upbringing, or perhaps because of it, Doyle early in life rejected organized religion. He was repelled by what he saw as rigid dogmatism and divisiveness. He professed belief in a universal and beneficent God, who revealed himself to man through nature rather than through the church. Perhaps it was these beliefs and a desire to redefine his religious faith which led to Conan Doyle to become a Freemason. He was initiated in Phoenix Lodge No. 257 at Portsmouth in 1893. The Masonic experience does not seem entirely to have answered the need. Later in life he described himself as a "respectful agnostic" and experimented with spiritualism.
Five of Doyle's Sherlock Holmes works contain Masonic references. In no instance, however, is the fraternity a subject of the plot.
A Scandal in Bohemia, the first of the Holes stories to be published in The Strand, is reminiscent of Edgar Allan Poe's The Purloined Letter, just as Poe's detective hero, Dupin, often has been considered the literary precursor of Doyle's character. (Holmes typically, referred to Dupin as a "very inferior fellow.") Disguising himself as a groom to obtain information, Holmes explains to Watson that there is a "freemasonry among horsy men." The reference is not to Masonry as an organization, but employs the name as a common noun meaning fellowship, a recognized characteristic of the fraternity.
There are four occasions on which Holmes takes notice of an item of jewellry which identifies the wearer as a Freemason. Once noted, no further mention is made of the fact. This does not mean, however, that the Masonic reference is trivial and of no account. Doyle invariably devoted much attention to Holmes' initial observations of a person's physical appearance, the detective is able to make an assessment of background, character, motivation, and veracity, which carries him a long way toward solution of t he mystery before he stirs from 221B Baker Street.
Enoch Drebber, the murder victim in A Study in Scarlet, is described as having a "low forehead, blunt nose, and prognathous jaw...a singularly sinuous and ape-like appearance." He also is wearing a ring with a Masonic device. As the story unfolds, we find that Drebber was killed in revenge, meeting his just deserts for past misdeeds which matched his sinister appearance. Much of A Study in Scarlet consists of a narrative of events during the early days of the Mormon settlement of Utah. Doyle obviously was u sing the excesses of Mormon theocracy to paint a melodramatic indictment of religious dogmatism. Writing six years before he became a Mason, was Doyle equating Freemasonry with the evils he perceived to exist in organized religion or with Drebber's clandestine villainies?
In The Red-Headed League, the second Holmes story to appear in The Strand, Jabez Wilson has been duped by a transparent scheme to leave his pawnshop each day so that criminals are free to use the premises to stage a robbery of a nearby bank. Wilson is described as being "obese, pompous, and slow," his clothing as frayed, ill-fitting, and "not over clean." He also is identified as a Freemason by a gaudy square and compasses pin. Again writing before his initiation into the craft, Doyle does not leave us with a very high opinion of the fraternity.
Quite a different image of Freemasonry is projected in The Adventure of the Norwood Builder. A young lawyer of modest circumstances, John Hector McFarlane, is charged with the murder of a wealthy client. Holmes finds his deductive powers taxed to the limit.
Ultimately, however, he discloses an ingenious scheme whereby the supposed victim has staged his own death and implicated McFarlane as an act of revenge against the lawyer's mother, who many years before had rejected him as a suitor. What made Holmes so convinced of McFarlane's innocence when the evidence seemed to convict him? Could it have been the fact that at their first meeting Holmes had noticed the young man's Masonic watch fob?
Lastly, in The Adventure of the Retired Colourman Holmes pays rare, if not unique, tribute to another detective by the name of Barker, going so far as to acknowledge him as a rival. Just incidentally, Barker's tie pin identifies him as a Freemason.
Doyle never tells the reader whether his detective hero is a Freemason. Nor are we told whether Holmes has made a study of Masonic ritual as is alleged somewhat unconvincingly in Murder by Decree. A Mason himself, Doyle may have been reluctant to reveal secrets of the Order or use his knowledge of Masonry for personal pecuniary gain. Nevertheless, by application of Holmes' own technique of deductive reasoning we can be reasonably certain that the master detective was not a member of the Masonic fraternity. Doyle did not intend for his creation to be the admirable image which most people associate with Sherlock Holmes. He thought Paget's drawings were too idealized. The public reaction always perplexed him. Holmes' life-style was reclusive, his habits eccentric, his manner brusque and often patronizing, his attitude haughty and conceited, if not supercilious, and his interests obsessively preoccupied with but one field of endeavour-criminal investigation. No, it is unlikely that a man who shuns society, the day-to-day concerns of his fellows, and the wider interests of mankind will be found upon the rolls of a Masonic lodge.
When, in the predawn hours, the timeless and tireless Sherlock Holmes routs the hapless Watson from his sleep and on to the fogbound streets of London with the familiar cry "The game's afoot," every widow's son can remain at heart's rest with the assurance that there is no Masonic connection.
As your representative from the Grand Council R&SM to the Board of the Ohio Masonic Home, I bring you news and information from my perspective. You may have heard these things before or maybe not. I ask you to consider them in view of your role as a Mason, and as within the Cryptic rite.
We have pledged to offer assistance to worthy distressed Master Masons, their widows and orphans. These are some of the efforts of the Senior Services available by the OMH. The Companions with their Councils and/or Lodges can participate in the I-Care program to help some of the Companions or their families in need.
The Home Health Services program (Masonic Helping Hands) is growing in availability to offer Masons and their families the opportunity to stay in their homes and still receive the coordination of assistance to do the things they cannot do themselves. The OMH is working on the expansion of this program across the state.
There are several OMH facilities and campuses across the state with different settings and opportunities. They stand ready to serve our Companions and their families in need. Look to them for respite, recovery, and rehabilitation. Support for the OMH and its philanthropy is an ongoing need.
Consideration of the services available when we or our Companions are in need is an idea which should be shared.
In the summer of 2000, at the Imperial Grand Sessions of the Shrine,the Shrine, by majority vote of all delegates present, changed the qualifications required for entrance to the Shrine, an action that was well within their power and prerogative. The earliest mention of the Shrine comes in 1870, when two prominent New York Freemasons started thinking about organizing a new "Order" for a group of friends who were all senior Masons. The first Shrine Temple was organized in 1872.From the earliest days of the Shrine, the requirement for admission to the Shrine was that a man must hold either the degrees and orders of the Royal Arch Chapter and the Christian Orders of the Preceptories or Commanderies of the Knights Templar, or that he must hold the 32° of the Scottish Rite. The requirements for entry to the Shrine are now only that a man be a Master Mason in good standing in his Grand Lodge.
There has been much negative discussion on the effect this move will have upon the memberships of the Knights Templar and the Holy Royal Arch. Across North America, Brethren of good conscience have been questioning the propriety of the move by the Shrine, and also,prophesying the death of the "Concordant Bodies".
While I think it is perhaps hyperbolic to speak of the change by the Shrine as "ushering in the death of the Concordant Bodies", I do think it is time for all of the Concordants to take a serious look at themselves, to see if they are meeting the needs of their members, or indeed, if they are meeting the needs of Freemasonry.
I believe it is important to recognize two things in regard to this matter. First, the Holy Royal Arch was a popular and well-known part of Masonry long before the Shrine was conceived. Secondly, the Shrine will continue to raise money to fund their 22 hospitals, regardless of the degree of Masonic affiliation they require. That being the case,let's take a look at the Holy Royal Arch, and think for a bit about what it means, and teaches.
Freemasonry has been facing a worldwide decline in membership for the past forty years. Our numbers peaked, here in Nova Scotia, in the late1940's, and we have been in decline since then. Our experience mirrors the results seen in jurisdiction after jurisdiction, around the world.The "good men" of today have much more choice in terms of what they can do with their spare time than was the case 50 or 100 years ago. Infact, the amount of "spare time" is not greater than it was in the past. There are more and more demands on the time and resources of people, and there are more and more places to spend that time and those resources. Churches have also been affected by declining numbers. We are not alone in our concern over membership.
Let's take a very quick look at some very rough statistics. Out of one hundred petitioners to Freemasonry, we seldom see more than twenty of those Brethren, on any kind of basis, following the Degrees. Of that twenty percent, we are usually looking at an average of half of themas being "regular attenders", the backbone of Freemasonry. That is only ten percent, Companions, of all the Petitioners we bring in to the Lodge; is it any wonder that numbers are dropping? Extend that trend to the Concordant Bodies, Companions. How does it fit?
With the pace of modern society, with the wealth of "other attractions" available, with the increasing demands of family and employment and society, I think it is inevitable that overall numbers will decline. Chapters will return Charters. Preceptories will close.Lodges will surrender their Warrants. There is no question it willh appen. The only question is how long will it go on. I have seen predictions that we will no longer exist within twenty years.
My feeling, Companions, is that we will exist in twenty years; we will continue to seek out good men who can benefit from our teachings; we will continue to teach our lessons, and people will continue to learn from us. But things will be different.
The earliest mention of the Royal Arch as a separate ceremony is recorded in a newspaper clipping from about 1740. The Sublime Order of the Holy Royal Arch has been conferred on qualified Brethren here in Nova Scotia since at least 1780. The earliest record of the Mark Master Mason Degree is in 1756, in a set of By-Laws found attached to a copy of Anderson's Constitutions of 1723, in the Library of the Provincial Grand Lodge of Durham, and the Degree has been performed here in Nova Scotia since 1782.
The traditional history of the Royal Arch suggests a French origin for the degree. In its earliest versions, the Arch in question was the Arch of Enoch, taking the Degree to a much older Biblical period. The Royal Arch in Ireland is still based on the Enochian story. Our Archis in the Second Temple, the one built by the Jews returning from the Babylonian Captivity. This Temple is the one that existed when the Romans occupied Judea.
The story of the Royal Arch is sometimes believed to have been imported from the Middle East by the Knights Templar (the original ones, not the Masonic Knights Templar of today), and sometimes it is told that it stems from the sixteenth century, although still associated with Templar Masonry. Dr. George Oliver, the Masonic writer, wrote "There exists sufficient evidence to fix the era of its introduction to a period which is coeval with the memorable English Masons about the middle of the eighteenth century".The late Bro. D. Murray Lyon was of the opinion that the Degree was fabricated on the Continent between 1735 and 1740. Bro. Robert F. Gould says that, in England, "the Degree was certainly worked from about the year 1740, and presumably from an earlier date".
It is spoken of, at this date, as being a Degree which was restricted to Past Masters; that ancient provision eventually having given rise to the Degree which we now know in the Chapter as "Past Master,Virtual" to mark it from the "Installed Master" ceremonial. From its earliest time, the Holy Royal Arch was considered something that had to be achieved, not just given to all and sundry. It is often statedthat the Degree is the "completion of the Master Mason Degree",because it is in this Degree that the Lost Secrets of Freemasonry are again discovered.
The Royal Arch Chapter thus has its own reasons for existence, reasons that have little if anything to do with the membership requirements of another Concordant Body.
Has the structure of the Degree changed in significant detail from the form conferred in the late eighteenth century? Certainly, in someplaces it has changed. Yet, the Degree still teaches the same lessons,of humility, of continuity, of struggle, and of eventual victory inthe struggle. Those lessons remain as valuable today as they were in the 1700's.
Once, being a Mason was a very special thing. Only special men, who looked on our teachings as valuable in their daily lives, were accepted through our doors. Over a long period of time, we tried to expand the influence of Masonic teachings, to spread our ways wider and wider, and we eventually began to accept petitions from men who had no intention of working in the Lodge, or the Chapter, or Preceptory. We all know at least one "ring knocker", a man who has taken the Degrees, but never attends Lodge, the fellow who always has an excuse for not attending, but always wears his ring anyway. I do not suggest that we did anything improper, Companions; that is not my point. But, such men are included in the numbers that are now declining. It is unfortunate that we are unable to always reach the hearts of the Petitioners to Masonry; the hearts we DO reach are the important ones.
The change in membership requirement for the Shrine will have an effect on the Concordant Bodies. If we are watchful, we will see some of the ninety percent who never intended to work in the Chapter,becoming aware of the fact that their Masonic Educations are not complete. Some of those will come to the Chapter, later. This is aproven effect, Companions, as seen by several of the Shrine Temples that had been doing the same thing by dispensation for years. In theme an time, the Chapters have an opportunity, and that opportunity is to take the ten percent and educate them, work with them so that their understanding of the lessons of the Royal Arch will sustain them, keep them interested, and encourage them to continue working to improve themselves. We have an opportunity to prove that the Chapter is needed in modern Freemasonry. We have a chance to show that we, here, are the ten percent who can always be counted upon.
The Holy Royal Arch occupies a special position in Masonry,Companions. Only in the Degrees of the Chapter are we given the responsibility to teach, by example, the lessons of life that we learn as Masons. It is our Obligation to ensure those lessons are not lost to future generations, as the "Genuine Secrets of a Master Mason" are lost to the Brethren in the Craft Lodges. Be a "Ten Percenter".
J. Douglas Welsh, PHPGrand Historian District Grand Lecturer
Note: Anyone wishing to use this lecture has the permission ofR.Ex.Comp. J. Douglas Welsh to use it but credit must be given to The Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons of Nova Scotia for it's use.
This Short Talk is an address given by Worshipful Brother C. C. (Buddy) Faulkner to more than a thousand Masons assembled in Murat Temple, Indianapolis, Indiana, for the January 12, 1974 Founders' Day Communication of the Grand Lodge of Indiana. Brother Faulkner is a Past Master of Mystic Tie Lodge No. 398, Indianapolis, and is well known as the former Executive Secretary of the Indiana DeMolay Foundation and former Assistant Grand Secretary of Indiana. His gracious permission to publish his address in this form is sincerely appreciated.
The subject of my remarks today--"Our Relations with the Knights of Columbus"-- was assigned to me some months ago by Right Worshipful Brother Frank J. Krug, Deputy Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Indiana. Although his letter of invitation to me to accept the responsibility for presenting this subject to you contained no guidelines, the fact that the topic is being discussed during this mid-year meeting of the members of the Grand Lodge is significant.
Significant in that it means to us that the former relationship that existed for many years --nearly a century--now is evolving into one that is new and different and exciting, and that the leadership of our Fraternity in Indiana considers that new relationship to be not only note-worthy, but important.
By comparison with Freemasonry, the Knights of Columbus as an organization is, relatively speaking, a "youngster," only 92 years of age. When it was founded in 1882 by Michael J. McGivney, a Roman Catholic Priest, one of its principal purposes was that of providing insurance benefits to Catholic families. The organization has enjoyed an increasing membership through the years, and today the Knights of Columbus is international in scope, numerically about 1,200,000 members strong, with local groups called "Councils" in the United States, Canada, Mexico, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Panama Canal Zone, Guam and Guatemala. To my knowledge, the organization is not in existence on the European continent, nor in Asia, Africa, Australia or Greenland.
The mission and purposes of the Knights of Columbus are to provide financial aid to members and their beneficiaries; to help its disabled and sick members; and to foster participation by its members in religious, social welfare, and charitable projects.
Membership in the Order is limited strictly to practicing Roman Catholics 18 years of age and older. Solicitation of new members among the eligible not only is permissible, but is encouraged. A unanimous ballot is not required.
Displaying an awareness of the importance of training young people, the Knights of Columbus sponsors and operates, as a part of its permanent and on-going program, the "Columbian Squires," an organization for Roman Catholic boys between the ages of 13 and 18 years.
Each local K. of C. Council is governed by its chosen officers. The presiding officer is known as the Grand Knight, who is assisted and supported by a corps of officers in a progressive line. This state organization is known as a State Council, presided over by a State Deputy. Internationally, the Knights of Columbus is governed by a Supreme Council, presided over by the Supreme Knight.
Through the years since the Knights of Columbus was formed in New Haven, Connecticut (the International Headquarters is located there), its relationship with Freemasonry has paralleled the Roman Catholic Church's relationship with Freemasonry, for reasons that are obvious.
Therein lies at least a part of the background against which we view the contrasting and refreshing changes that began recently to occur. And so, for the purposes of better understanding where we are now, and why the changing relationship between the Knights of Columbus and Freemasonry is something to talk about, let us consider the following facts on a purely historical basis and for no other purpose.
The Roman Catholic Church many, many centuries ago patterned its form of Church government after the form of government of the Roman Empire. For nearly a thousand years before its first pronouncement against Freemasonry, the Church had disapproved of the various trades and professions and guilds that were organized outside the framework of the Roman Church. Such groups (and among them were the operative Masons) were organized for their own purposes and without control from the outside, but their members were members of the Roman Church.
In April, 1738, Pope Clement XII issued a prohibition against Freemasonry. He placed on the document the customary seal composed of a blob of lead, called a "bulla," which explains the origin of the term "Bull," by which the prohibitions have been called. From 1738 until several years ago, the Roman Church prohibited its members from belonging to organizations considered by the Church to be secret societies or free associations. That prohibition extended to include a number of organizations, and specifically included Freemasonry. Indeed, there have been no less than eight Papal "Bulls" issued against Freemasonry, together with nine Papal Encyclicals on the same subject. The most recent "Bull" was proclaimed in 1884, two years after the founding of the Knights of Columbus in the United States. Four of the Encyclicals were issued during and after 1882, the most recent being in 1890. Those pronouncements from the seat of power in the Roman Church had a long-term influence over relationships between the Knights of Columbus and Freemasonry. lt is significant--and every Mason ought to know this--that in spite of the outright tension that existed during those years of separation, there has never been, and there is not now, in the philosophy and attitude, or in the ritual of Symbolic Freemasonry, even the slightest hostility toward the Catholic Church or to any of its members, or to any of its organizations, including the Knights of Columbus. From its beginnings in the Middle Ages, it has been a landmark of Ancient Craft Masonry to forbid Lodges and Masons from interfering with churches, governments, and other organizations and societies, to discuss their affairs, or to act officially concerning them. Freemasonry for that reason never has been in controversy with the Roman Church, nor has the Craft taken official recognition of any of the pronouncements against it by any Church or anyone else.
Up to the time of the Protestant Reformation, which had its beginnings in 1517, Operative Masons in Europe were under the patronage of the Church and State, and were of the Roman Catholic religion. And so, prominent in the mosaic of our fraternity's beginnings, the Craft has had many ancient ties with the Roman Church. In our Ancient Charges, under the first general heading, "Concerning God and Religion," we read: ". . . in ancient times Masons were charged in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was...."
Notwithstanding the events that I have just recalled for you from the pages of history, there are now, and there have been through the years, members of the Roman Church who have been raised to Freemasonry's Sublime Degree, both in Indiana and in other jurisdictions in this nation and around the world. The late Rudyard Kipling, Freemason, reminiscing about the brotherhood and fellowship in his Mother Lodge in India, poetized one such reference:
"We'd Bola Nath, accountant An' Saul the Aden Jew, An Din Mahammed, draughtsman of the Survey Office, too: There was Babu Chuckerbutty, An' Arnir Singh the Sikh,
An' Castro from the fittin'-sheds, The Roman Catholik."
Freemasonry never brands or compliments (and never will) a man for his sectarian religious views. It has insisted that a man have a firm belief and trust in a Supreme Being; and it has established certain criteria for membership in the Fraternity, including age, residence, being freeborn, and of good character. And that is all. Coming thus "well qualified," any man, including members of the Knights of Columbus, have been free to seek a relationship with us, within our fraternity.
Does it not logically follow, then, that if we can be friends with a man once he has become a part of our mystic circle, we should be able to become friends with him outside our fellowship?
In recent years, both in Indiana and in other parts of the nation, we have been pleased to see a relaxing of the Roman Church's restraint, and a ripening friendship between our Craft and the Knights of Columbus. Lodges have entertained Knights and their ladies; Knights and their ladies have reciprocated, and in many instances have been the ones to make the first gesture of friendship. The resulting gatherings have been aimed toward havingpleasant associations socially, concentrating on the similarities between the two organizations, forgetting about matters on which we do not agree.
And there are indeed many similarities: in our system of three degrees; in our efforts to help, aid, and assist our less fortunate members; in our aims to improve the community through the improvement of the individual member; in our active sponsorship of well-rounded and wholesome activities for the youth who come under the sphere of our influence. All those things are points of agreement on which we place emphasis during our social gatherings with our K. of C. friends.
Even the official publication of our Grand Lodge, The Indiana Freemason, has, on occasion, published articles written by leaders and spokesmen of the Roman Catholic Church and the Knights of Columbus. Always, those articles have been not only complimentary to Freemasonry, but have expressed pleasure at the bridge of friendship that is being built so carefully between our two organizations.
Several times each year, officers and leaders of our Grand Lodge meet together with leaders and representatives of the Indiana State Council of the Knights of Columbus, for an evening of social fellowship, and to explore new avenues of cooperation in our mutual interests and pursuits. As a token of friendship, each organization has contributed modestly to the other's foremost charity, they to our Indiana Masonic Home at Franklin, and we to their Gibault Home for Boys near Terre Haute.
Across the length and breadth of our state, and at many intermediate points in between, Lodges and Councils have extended to each other the arm of friendship in many ways. Hopefully, this new friendship and relationship will grow deeper and more meaningful to all of us in the months and years to come.
Let it be said emphatically that our joint meetings contain no effort or attempt, overt or otherwise, to solicit members or to have any joint venture but those of purely social intent, whereby we become better acquainted with each other's philosophies and views, aims, and purposes.
And so I am pleased to report to you that the status of our relations with the Knights of Columbus is good. Notwithstanding the events of history, there is no reason for our relationship to be other than good, or less than good. If you and your Lodge have not experienced the pleasure that comes from making new friends in your community, then perhaps you will want to give that ecumenical spirit a try, provided the members of your respective Lodges will give you their unqualified and enthusiastic support. I caution you that the support of your Lodge is important. If, after discreet exploration you find that kind of support, extend the invitation for a friendly relationship, or respond favorably to an invitation if it is extended to you and your Lodge.
In closing, let me say that as a man and a Freemason, I claim no credit for the achievements of my forebears, nor any blame for their failures and defeats. I claim them all as a part of my heritage, and accept my obligation and responsibility to meet, as best I know how, the challenges that are mine today. The victories and failures of past generations give me insight and inspiration, and help me to chart my course. I believe that ought to be the dominating philosophy of all well-intentioned Knights and Masons as they seek to foster a friendship with each other.
I want to leave with you these thoughts about the refreshing but gentle ecumenical breezes that move about us today. One thought is about the value of our Craft's firm stand not to become embroiled in controversy. You will recall an admonition in our ceremonies, "Neither are you to suffer your zeal for the Institution to lead you into argument with those who may ridicule it." The blows of many sledge hammers have beat upon the anvil of Freemasonry in the centuries that have gone. The anvil is unharmed. The hammers have worn. Our ancient charges, like gold, have withstood the acid of time.
I believe too that the new friendship that we find among our brethren of the Knights of Columbus is a culmination or fruition of Freemasonry's firm and time-tested belief in the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man--the brotherhood of ALL men.
During the last decade, man has extended his reach and has touched the very surface of the Moon. If men can do that, then I believe that men ought to be able and willing to extend the arm of brotherhood to a neighbor. If men cannot do that, then we might well be parties to the greatest tragedy in the history of the human race.
So, if Freemasonry is something that you and I are serious about, if it is inextricably a part of our personal character and life-style, and not merely words on our lips, then these new changes and friendships bode well for the cause of peace and brotherhood among men of good will.
Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!
A man is getting into the shower just as his wife is finishing up her shower, when the doorbell rings. The wife quickly wraps herself in a towel and runs downstairs. When she opens the door, there stands Bob, the next-door neighbor. Before she says a word, Bob says, 'I'll give you $800 to drop that towel.'After thinking for a moment, the woman drops her towel and stands naked in front of Bob.After a few seconds, Bob hands her $800 and leaves.The woman wraps back up in the towel and goes back upstairs. When she gets to the bathroom, her husband asks, 'Who was that?' 'It was Bob, the next-door neighbor,' she replies.'Great!' the husband says. 'Did he say anything about the $800 he owes me?' Moral of the story: If you share critical information pertaining to credit and risk with your shareholders in time, you may be in a position to prevent avoidable exposure.
Lesson 2:
A priest offered a nun a lift. She got in and crossed her legs, forcing her gown to reveal a leg. The priest nearly had an accident. After controlling the car, he stealthily slid his hand up her leg. The nun said, 'Father, remember Psalm 129?'The priest removed his hand. But, changing gears, he let his hand slide up her leg again.The nun once again said, 'Father, remember Psalm 129?'The priest apologized, 'Sorry, Sister, but the flesh is weak.'Arriving at the convent, the nun sighed heavily and went on her way.On his arrival at the church, the priest rushed to look up Psalm 129. It said, 'Go forth and seek, further up, you will find glory.' Moral of the story: If you are not well informed in your job, opportunities for advancement will pass right by you.
Lesson 3:
A sales rep, an administration clerk, and the manager are walking to lunch when they find an antique oil lamp. They rub it and a Genie comes out. The Genie says, 'I'll give each of you just one wish.''Me first! Me first!' says the Admin clerk. 'I want to be in the Bahamas , driving a speedboat, without a care in the world.' Puff! She's gone. 'Me next! Me next!' says the sales rep. 'I want to be in Hawaii , relaxing on the beach with my personal masseuse, an endless supply of Pina Coladas and the love of my life.' Puff! He's gone. 'OK, you're up,' the Genie says to the manager.The manager says, 'I want those two back in the office after lunch.'Moral of the story: Always let your boss have the first say.
Lesson 4:
An eagle was sitting on a tree resting, doing nothing. A small rabbit saw the eagle and asked him, 'Can I also sit like you and do nothing?' The eagle answered, 'Sure , why not.'So, the rabbit sat on the ground below the eagle and rested. All of a sudden, a fox appeared, jumped on the rabbit and ate it.Moral of the story: To be sitting and doing nothing, you must be sitting very, very high up.
Lesson 5:
A turkey was chatting with a bull. 'I would love to be able to get to the top of that tree,' sighed the turkey, 'but I haven't got the energy.' 'Well, why don't you nibble on some of my droppings?' replied the bull. 'They're packed with nutrients.' The turkey pecked at a lump of dung, and found it actually gave him enough strength to reach the lowest branch of the tree. The next day, after eating some more dung, he reached the second branch. Finally after a fourth night, the turkey was proudly perched at the top of the tree. He was promptly spotted by a farmer, who shot him out of the tree. Moral of the story: Bull shit might get you to the top, but it won't keep you there.
Lesson 6:
A little bird was flying south for the Winter. It was so cold the bird froze and fell to the ground into a large field. While he was lying there, a cow came by and shit on him. As the frozen bird lay there in the pile of cow dung, he began to realize how warm he was. The dung was actually thawing him out! He lay there all warm and happy, and soon began to sing for joy. A passing cat heard the bird singing and came to investigate. Following the sound, the cat discovered the bird under the pile of cow dung, and promptly dug him out and ate him.
Morals of the story: (1) Not everyone who shits on you is your enemy. (2) Not everyone who gets you out of shit is your friend. (3) And when you're in deep shit, it's best to keep your mouth shut!
Why did Jesus fold the linen burial cloth after His resurrection?
The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes. The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded and was placed at the head of that stony coffin. Early Sunday morning, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and found that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance. She ran and found Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved. She said, 'They have taken the Lord's body out of the tomb, and I don't know where they have put him!' Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb to see. The other disciple out ran Peter and got there first. He stooped and looked in and saw the linen cloth lying there, but he didn't go in. Then Simon Peter arrived and went inside. He also noticed the linen wrappings lying there, while the cloth that had covered Jesus' head was folded up and lying to the side. Is that important? Absolutely! Is it really significant? Yes! In order to understand the significance of the folded napkin, you have to understand a little bit about Hebrew tradition of that day.
The folded napkin had to do with the Master and Servant, and every Jewish boy knew this tradition. When the servant set the dinner table for the master, he made sure that it was exactly the way the master wanted it. The table was furnished perfectly, and then the servant would wait, just out of sight, until the master had finished eating, and the servant would not dare touch that table until the master was finished.
Now if the master was done eating, he would rise from the table wipe his fingers and mouth with that napkin and toss it on to the table. The servant would then know to clear the table. For in those days, the wadded napkin meant, 'I'm done.' But if the master got up from the table, and folded his napkin, and laid it beside his plate, the servant knew that the folded napkin meant, 'I'm not finished yet.' The folded napkin meant, 'I'm coming back!'
IF YOU BELEIVE HE IS COMING BACK - PASS IT ON, I DID!
"Recieved by a E-mail"
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
LODGE COURTESIES
by: Unknown
Conventions are the rules which society makes for itself, without the force of law, by which its members live together with the least friction. It is not a sin to eat with one's knife or to keep one's hat on in the house; but these are "Not" good form, or good manners.
Masonry has developed its own conventions, by which its members act in Lodge and the Anteroom. Not to proceed according to their dictates is not a Masonic offense; it is merely a lack of Masonic manners.
As you Passed through the Third Degree you received instructions in the Ritual and the obligation. You were carefully taught those essential things which a man must know in order to be a Mason. But unless you belong to a most unusual Lodge, or had a most wise Brother for a mentor, it is doubtful if you were told much about these little niceties of Lodge conduct. You are supposed to attend your Lodge and learn by observation. Not all Brethren are observing, however. It is not uncommon to see some brother, old enough in Masonry to know better, crossing the lodge room between the Alter and the East (when lodge is open). He might have observed that his Brethren did not do it; but it is much more difficult to note the absence of an act than to take cognizance of something done.
Brethren do not pass between the Altar and the east in a Lodge that is open. It is a convention and there is no penalty for the infraction. It is a courtesy offered the Master. It is rooted in the theory that, as the Great Lights are necessary to shed their eternal light and wisdom upon the Master to govern the lodge with wisdom, this light should never be interrupted at any time; except, during the processions of an initiation and degree work; even for an instant.
Well informed Brethren do not take a seat in the East without an invitation. All Brethren within a tiled room are equal; and the officers are the servants of the Brethren, and not their superiors. All seats, then, might be considered "Open" to all. But Masonry exacts long services of her officers; Past Masters have worked hard and long for the Lodge they love. The Master recognizes their devotion and their loyalty with a special word of welcome, and an invitation to a "Seat in the East" to any distinguished visitor, or some member the Master wishes especially to honor. If all in the Lodge helped themselves to seats in the East there would be no opportunity for the Master to offer that courtesy.
Brethren who respect the formalities of their Lodge will not enter it undressed; that is, without their apron, or while putting that apron on. The spectacle of a brother walking up to the Altar, tying the strings and adjusting his apron while the Master waits for his salute, is not a pretty one. A man who entered church putting on his collar and tying his necktie could hardly be arrested, but he would surely receive unflattering comment. The strangeness of the new badge of a Mason and unfamiliarity with its meaning cause many to forget that it is as important to a Mason in lodge as clean clothing, properly adjusted is to a man in the street.
The Worshipful Master in the East occupies the most exalted position within the gift of the lodge. A lodge which does not honor its Master, not because of what he himself may be, but on account of the honor given him, is lacking in Masonic courtesy. The position he occupies, not the man, must be given the utmost respect, if the traditions of the Fraternity are to be observed.
It is, therefore, to the Master, not to John Smith who happens to be the Master, that you offer a salute when you enter or retire from your lodge, or any lodge. Like any other salute, this may be done courteously and as if you meant it, or perfunctorily as if you did not care. The man who puts one finger to his hat brim when he speaks to a woman on the street compares poorly with his well brought up neighbor who lifts his hat. Taking the hat off is the modern remains of the ancient custom of knights who removed their helmets in the presence of those they felt their friends, and thus, before those they wished to honor by showing that they trusted them. A man removes his hat before a woman to show his respect. Touching the brim is aperfunctory salute. Similarly, the salute to the Master is your renewed pledge of fealty and service, your public recognition before all men, or your obligation. It is performed before the Master and the Altar to show him your veneration for his authority, your respect for all that for which he stands. To offer your salute as if you were in hurry, too lazy to properly make it, or bored with its offering, is to be, Masonically, a boor.
A man in lodge is the servant of his Brethren, if he engages in any lodge activity. Servants stand in the presence of their superiors. therefore, no Mason sits while speaking, whether he addresses an officer or another brother. This does not refer to conversation on the benches duringrefreshment, but to discussion on the floor during a business meeting.
During the refreshment the Master relinquishes the gavel to the Junior Warden in the South, which becomes, for the time being, constructively the East. All that has been said about the respect due the Master in the East applies now to the Junior Warden in the South.
It is illegal to enter or leave the room during a ballot; it is discourteous to leave during a speech, or during a degree, except at the several natural periods which end one section and begin another.
Smoking is permitted in some lodge rooms during the business meeting. Alas, there are some which do not interdict it during a degree! You will, or course, be governed here by the custom of your own lodge, although it is to be hoped you will never lend the weight of your opinion toward establishing the custom of smoking during the solemn ceremonies of a degree. unless, indeed, you would like to smoke in church!
A courteous brother does not refuse a request made in the name of the lodge. There are three duties which devolve upon the membership which are too often "the other fellow's business." Every lodge at some time has a knock upon the door from some visiting brother. This requires the services of two brethren from the lodge in the examination committee. Some one has to do that work. To decline it, on any ground whatever, is discourteous to the Master, to whom you have said, in effect, "I don't want to do my share; let George do it. I just want to sit here and enjoy myself while other fellows do the work."
A degree cannot properly be put on without the services of conductors. When you are assigned such a piece of work, it is not Masonic courtesy to refuse, for the same reasons given above. And if you are selected as a member of the Fellowcraft Team in the Master Mason degree, the only excuse for not accepting is that of physical disability. Like other matters herein spoken of, refusal here is not a Masonic offense. Neither is it a legal offense to drink from a finger bowl, seat yourself at the table before your hostess, or spit on your host's parlor floor! But the convention of good manners is what makes society pleasant, and Masonic good manners make lodge meetings pleasant.
One does not talk in church. God's House is not for social conversation; it is for worship and the learning of the lesson of the day. A good Mason does not talk during the conferring of a degree. The lodge room is then a Temple of the Great Architect of the Universe, with the brethren working therein doing their humble best to make better stones for His spiritual Temple. Good manners as well as reverence dictate silence and attention during the work; officers and degree workers cannot do their best if distracted by conversation, and the irreverence cannot help but be distressing to the candidates.
There is a special lodge courtesy to be observed in all debates to any motion. One speaks to the Master; the Master is the lodge. One does not turn one's back on him to address the lodge without permission from him. One stands to order when addressing the chair; customs differ in various jurisdictions as to the method of salute, but some salute should always be given when addressing the Master. The spectacle of two brethren on their feet at the same time, arguing over a motion, facing each other and ignoring the Master, is not one which any Master should permit. But it is also one which no Master should have to prevent!
Failure to obey the gavel at once is a grave discourtesy.
The Master is all powerful in the lodge. He can put or refuse to put any motion. He can rule any brother out of order on any subject at any time. He can say what he will, and what he will not, permit to be discussed. Brethren who think him unfair, arbitrary, unjust, or acting illegally have redress; the Grand Lodge can be appealed to on any such matter. But, in the lodge, the gavel, the emblem of authority, is supreme. When a brother is rapped down, he "Should" obey at once, without further discussion. It is very bad manners to do otherwise; indeed, it is close to the line between bad manners and a Masonic offense.
Failure to vote on a petition is so common in many jurisdictions that it may be considered stretching the list to include it under a heading of lodge discourtesies. In smaller lodges the Master probably requires the satisfaction of the law which provides that all brethren present vote. In larger ones, where there is much business, and many petitions, he may, and often does, declare the ballot closed after having asked, "Have all Brethren voted?" Even though he knows quite well that some may not have voted. This is not the place to discuss whether the Master is right or wrong in such an action. But the brother who does not vote, because he is too lazy, or too indifferent or for any other reason; is discourteous because he injures the ballot, its secrecy, its importance, and its value. Few brethren would be so thoughtless as to remain seated, or stand by their chairs, when a candidate is brought to light. Yet, indifference to one's part in this solemn ceremony is less bad manners than indifference to the ballot; the former injures only a ceremony; but the latter may injure the lodge, and by that injury, the fraternity!
It is a courtesy to the Master to advise him beforehand that you intend to offer thus and such a motion, or wish to offer thus and such a matter for discussion. You have the right to do it without apprising him in advance, just as he has the right to rule you out of order. But the Master may have plans of his own for that meeting, into which your proposed motion or discourse does not fit in. Therefore, it is a courtesy to him, to ask him privately if you may be recognized for your purpose, and thus save him the disagreeable necessity of seeming arbitrary in a public refusal.
Lodge courtesies, like those of the profane world, are founded wholly in the Golden Rule. They oil the Masonic wheels and enable them to revolve without creaking. They smooth the path of all in the lodge, and prove to all and sundry the truth of the ritualistic explanation of that "More Noble and Glorious Purpose" to which we are taught to put the trowel!
