Category: Uncategorized

Our Brother Johann Wolfgang Goethe was born in Frankfurt-on-Maine, Germany, on August 29, 1749. He joined Amalia Lodge in March of 1780.  Goethe is considered to be the greatest of German poets.  Here is his beautiful poem about the Mason‘s immortality, his journey through life and his freedom to choose a good life.

The Mason’s ways are

A type of Existance
And his persistance

Is as the days are
Of men in this world.

The future hides in it

Gladness and sorrow,
We press still thorow,

Naught that abides in it
Daunting us-onward.

And solemn before us

Veiled, the dark Portal,
Goal of all mortal;

Stars silent o’er us,
Graves under us silent.

While earnest thou gazest
Comes boding of terror,
Comes phantasm and error

Perplexes the bravest
With doubt and misgiving.

But heard are the Voices-
Heard are the Sages,
The Worlds and the Ages;

“Choose well; your choice is
“Brief and yet endless;

“Here eyes do regard you
“In Eternity’s stillness;
“Here is all fullness,

“Ye have, to reward you.
“Work, and dispair not.”

The growing popularity of the idea of ‘observant’ Masonry has found brethren in all corners of the Craft asking the question of what exactly an observant Lodge is, and how they might go about increasing Masonic observance in their own Lodges. This document offers eight basic measures which, if observed, should result in the development of an observant Lodge. Each of these steps is either entirely consistent with Anderson’s Constitutions of the FreeMasons [the foundational document of the Premier Grand Lodge, published in 1723 and hereafter simply referred to as the Book of Constitutions], or historical Masonic practice in North America, or both. Nothing proposed in them is alien to our Grand Lodges or their respective histories. The success or failure of these steps is entirely up to the brethren of each Lodge. First, however, it might be helpful to offer an answer to the primary question: what exactly does one mean by ‘observant’? Simply put, observant Masonry means observing the intent of the founders of speculative Masonry. That intent was not to build a mere social club or service organisation. While the Craft—like any other human organisation—has always been burdened by men in its ranks who subverted the purposes of the fraternity to a more mundane or profane enterprise, that was never the intent of the institution. That intent was to build an institution that calls men to their highest level of social being, in a state of dignity and decorum, which could serve as a place for serious, mindful discourse on the lessons and meaning of life, and search for the better development of oneself. That intent means building a space where such an experience can be created, and carrying ourselves in a manner that is consistent with our highest ideals and noblest behaviours. Observant Masons believe that by observing what the history of our Craft tells us in regard to that intent, we will find the optimal Masonic experience. We say observant, and speak of observance, because we seek to observe the blueprints of that intent to the best of our knowledge and ability. Even more simply, we want to do things right, and we don’t want to settle for less. We want to pursue excellence in all aspects of our Masonic labour. The eight steps offered here have proven to be successful in greatly increasing the experience of Freemasonry for brethren new and old alike. They serve as a quality control system for the operation of any Lodge, and when followed, result in a group of men who, regardless of the number of members in their Lodge, or the external nature of their temple, can find a sense of accomplishment and pride in what they have done, and who they have become. That too, is consistent with the intent of our founders.

1

Guarding the West Gate

This point is first among these, because we are nothing more or less than who we let in to our Fraternity. Not every man should be a Mason, and not every Continue reading SAVING FREEMASONRY

My good friend and Brother Frederic Milliken wrote an article entitled Message to the un-lodged Mason.  In the article, Fred discussed the importance of attending lodge and the advantages of having personal interaction with other Freemasons.  l generally agree with Fred’s conclusion on this subject and believe that attending lodge functions is essential to the Masonic experience, but I also can identify with the plight of what Fred calls the un-lodged Mason.

Fred correctly compares the un-lodged Mason to the Christian who does not attend church. This is a fair comparison because it is my opinion that the purpose and structure of Masonry is much more similar to that of a religious organization than that of a community organization. So why do some Christians not attend church? Many Christians do not attend church because the goals of the church may not match the goals of the worshiper. Some churches have an all or nothing approach to dogma and require that you agree with the church’s opinion on every matter. Other churches continually ask for more and more out of their volunteers which eventually sucks all of the enthusiasm out of the those in the congregation that offer their time and resources. Then, there are also those worshipers that attend service or Bible study searching for answers to their complex questions about spirituality and that constantly receive replies that are either not straightforward or that sidestep the question all together. This constant cycle of a church not aligning with the individual worshiper’s values, requiring him to over-commit to the organization and not providing him with the spiritual knowledge he seeks results in the Christian walking away from the congregation.

Not surprisingly, this is exactly what occurs in our Masonic lodges as well !

Numerous individual Masons have been turned away from the lodge because he brought new ideas to the assembly and was told that “this isn’t how we have done it before.” Lodges often volunteer their young, enthusiastic members for every task  which inevitably interferes with that member’s family and vocational responsibilities. Finally, many men come to the Masonic lodge looking for a method of self-improvement and enlightenment and find an organization that neglects education almost entirely.

Freemasonry often plays a big role in the lives of un-lodged Masons.    Continue reading The un-lodged Mason

How long have we been talking about boring business meetings, poor food, and lousy fellowship and run down Masonic buildings? We don’t seem to learn from our mistakes nor do we seem capable of doing what the ancient mystery schools were most adept at doing, namely providing knowledge that lead to wisdom leading to actually making a better man. We don’t teach Masonic philosophy anymore and for that reason many Masons don’t know that we are a very special and unique society.

One of the questions that occasionally eats at me when I am driving home from a Masonic event that has been woefully mediocre is how our members can sit through such Masonic happenings month after month and still believe our fraternity is relevant and meaningful to men’s lives? How honest are we in claiming we make good men better while persistently repeating practices and behaviors which are so distinctively average, or worse?

Continue reading Mediocrity in Freemasonry

This subject comes up time and time again. It is almost as if Freemasonry is trying to find an identity that fits our modern times. So, even if  we may have touched this topic in the past I feel it is in the interest of all of us Freemasons to keep seeking for ways that will bring into the Craft,  Freemasons who do not ever regret having joined the Brotherhood.

The Reverend Maxell-Ware ‘s article is only partially shared by me so I have resumed it and taken away those parts I disagree with. But it is, nevertheless,  an interesting paper.
Have a good read!

=== *** ===

Firstly, it is important to ascertain what the definition of a successful lodge is. Has a successful lodge a large number of members, a healthy contribution to charity, excellent ritual or longevity ?

Continue reading What makes a successful Lodge?

A fortnight ago I  published the letter of a Spanish Freemason who criticized  the current state of the Grand Lodge of his Country and castigated the actions of its leader.  This time  I am  submitting  for  your reading  an article by  an anonymous English former Brother,  that The Square magazine published in its issue of September 2016.

The author of it does quite a good  self analysis of the reasons  he resigned from the Craft. He has also listed the justifications  – and there are many ! – that other brothers told him they had  for quitting Freemasonry and never return to it.

It makes an interesting reading .

Aldo Reno

Why I left Freemasonry

I met the editor of the  magazine The Square  at a formal dinner, where he learned that I had been a Freemason but had severed all ties with it and he persuaded me to write down the real reasons for leaving the Craft.

Here is my story.

l joined Freemasonry after meeting the owner of a shop in my town. We got on well together and  I bought various  books from him.  From time to time we would also talk about Freemasonry ,  provided that no one else was on the premises. He was quite a keen Brother and he wondered if I might be interested.  I had no connection at all to Freemasonry and no one in my family had ever been  a member of the Order,  but after reading about it (the good and the bad) I  decided to join and  find out for myself.

 My problems started very quickly.

At my Initiation,I could hardly stop myself from laughing aloud when the penalties were presented. What nonsense! However, after my second degree I became very involved and went into offices and visited quite a lot.  I also attended a research lodge, which was usually quite boring, and I even went to a Masonic conference.  I met some members who I got on with and whose company l enjoyed, but unfortunately none of them were in the lodge I belonged to.

I started to become bored and disenchanted with what I was experiencing and with the people I was in the lodge with. When I quietly talked with others from different lodges about it , I found that quite a few of them felt the same way.

In time I  joined another lodge and a Chapter.

The second lodge was a little better than my first  but I found  the  ritual of the Royal Arch Chapter  virtually incomprehensible. No one could explain what any of it meant.

l began to miss meetings and eventually I just resigned from all my lodges. I don’t think I was missed at all. When I left I was asked to give my reasons and  I gave a politically correct answer on the line that l did not have the time to participate properly  because my work commitments had to take priority. They accepted my excuse  because I think they were not really that bothered whether I stayed or I left.

Over the next few years, I met many men who had also left Freemasonry. Some of them had not even been asked why they were leaving,  or the question was put  to them  in a way that showed that the questioner was only going through the motions of asking.

I  enquiried  those former brothers  for  the real reason(s)  they had  left the Craft and I have reported them at the end of this article. Most of what I have listed , however, is drawn from the  memory I have retained  of the conversations held because I obviously did not keep notes or write down what the brothers were saying.

My recollections are that there were those who had enjoyed Freemasonry but whose  circumstance had caused them to fall away. For example, they  had moved to another locality where it was more difficult to get to a lodge; they had become  ill and thus did  not attend  for quite a while and just got  out of the habit;  they had  a wife to care for; had changed their job or the membership of their lodge had changed and their mates were no longer attending.  I could not talk with the dead but some commented that with the death of some of  their brother(s)  their interest had declined. Many had reached a point where they were paying subscriptions and never attending and since in many cases the subscriptions included the cost of  a meal – their financial loss was high. There were some younger men who really did have to put work before Freemasonry because the lodge meeting times and places were such that they could not get there.  For someone who worked 9-5 in an office, it would be very difficult to get leave earlier.

But I also heard of many other reasons and some of them  were similar to my own thoughts. Perhaps it is  best if I just list them , but please bear in mind that these  are not exact quotes.

• The membership is too old and stuck in its ways. I don’t want to spend my evenings with pedantic old men.
• The whole thing is too pompous – all that bowing and scraping to people who are nobody.
• It is too hierarchic. Decisions are just made and imposed – yet I pay to belong to this.
• There are too many pontificating hypocrites. Senior people are shown to be very questionable – but they really do not like to be questioned.
• There is so much politicking and back-biting going on.
• The ritual is too old fashioned and frankly often stupid. Many say it but do not believe it. I know plenty that do not believe in God, for example.
• It is far too religious – if I want the Bible and prayers, I can go to church.
• We do the same thing over and over again (usually badly). Does anybody ever talk about it?
• The whole thing is far too time-consuming. It can take over your life.
• The meals are poor, the speeches are worse and we have to do the same thing over again every time.
• The members are not important in the community. Most are really nobody. Some are worse – we had two alcoholics in my lodge and one member committed suicide. So much for love and support!
• I can use my time in other ways and  much better. They got really upset when I did not want to spend months learning ritual – yet we never had a candidate.  What is the point?
• I am tired of always being asked for more charity – where does it really go ?
• All those ranks and titles for people who have never done anything.
• Some can’t even open and close a lodge. The intellectual level is very poor.
• The same people seem to have been running it for years – are they ever asked to take responsibility for problems?
• The sucking up to get higher rank is very sad and shameful.
  
• What is the point of Freemasonry? What is it really trying to provide? It seems to be wanting to be all things to all people and it finishes up doing much of it badly.
• It had no relevance in my life especially as it largely does not involve my wife or family. It brings no benefits.
• It seems to be living  in the past. They are always talking about the great Masons who lived centuries ago.
• Our Hall is of poor quality. I am not happy taking my wife and friends there.
• My friends just laughed when they knew I was a Freemason; it is seen as ridiculous by quite a few and others have such wild ideas about it. I tried to tell them we were not Satanists or esoteric nutters but then you read books written by Freemasons themselves which are ludicrous.

 (…)This is the reality of what ex-Freemasons confided  to me. I realise that some may have had isolated experiences and their dissatisfaction was not  ‘all or nothing”.  However, these are the issues that were raised and the end result had been in all cases that those Freemasons had eventually left. Not one of them ever said to me that they missed it and wished they had stayed.   I did learn very quickly that large numbers do leave and that there is a steady decline every year.

I was also asked by the magazine’s editor what would have kept me in Freemasonry, as he, like many others, seems to be happy and very involved in it. The answer to that is that I am not sure. l think that at the core, my membership was not leading to anything that had any value or meaning for me. It did not help me spiritually. Socially I did meet some new people but I only ever invited one to my home and this is the only person I have kept as a friend. The lodge rhetoric did not seem to be translated into real action. When I left, there were members of the lodge I had never met.  I suppose I expected Freemasonry to benefit me in some way and as it never did , I became frustrated.

I think that change, if it ever happens, will have to come at the lodge level with every member committed to being part of a supportive brotherhood, which must continue outside  the lodge. This is not easy when you do not choose the members of the lodge you join. There are enough problems in families to show how similar problems can arise.  Maybe I joined the wrong lodge – but there were plenty of other brothers who seemed to have joined the wrong lodges too.

I think I expected that Freemasonry  wanted much more of me and  that it  would have  provided  the proper support. What ,instead , I found was that I was on my own !  and so I met with strangers every so often and met them again some time later to go through the same routines.

I just got bored with it all.

How can the lodge and the officers live  with this?  Perhaps one starts  by admitting the problems and then admitting that most are caused by the members and the rulers themselves. I suspect that some simple things could be done immediately like, for example,  let  everybody wear a simple white apron – no decorations.  It would be a lot cheaper for many but I think it would also send out a clear message that we are all equal brothers.

I also would remove all the religious trappings and present  Freemasonry  simply as a moral organisation.

I think lodges need to carry out  projects in the community ; doing  good would unite its members.  I would also involve wives and families far more than they are now.  But most of all you need to have the courage to jump on any member who is strayìng from the Masonic principles – for example  anyone who is backstabbing, is being derogatory, is  finding faults in everything and every brother. Freemasons, therefore, need to be very careful in who becomes a member.  Frankly, for me  I think it is too late and I am sorry to say that, whatever the Freemasons  do, it will never include me again.

On March 15^th CY, the English language weekly newspaper for British expats who live on the Costa Blanca – appropriately called Costa News –   published a letter to the Editor that has captivated me.  Its contents is harshly critical of the situation of Freemasonry in Spain and it must have taken a large measure of courage for the author to have exposed himself and for  being so disapproving of the GLE.

The letter in question is titled Freemasonry: The Grand Lodge of Spain. It is likely to  have been originally written in Spanish by a Spanish Brother but then translated into English language using a free translator software.

Having adjusted the grammar form and condensed the letter,   I am now re-proposing its contents for your consideration. But let me inform the readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text  of the letter belong solely to its author and that the publication of such letter on this website does not necessarily imply  that Tetraktys endorses the opinions expressed therein .

Have a good reading!

Aldo Reno

***

Finestrat, March 12

We are living moments of increasing internal tension in the Grand Lodge of Espana (GLE) as it is moving towards self-destruction.

Of its three Past Grand Masters, two are no longer members of the GLE and all of them are in total disagreement with the current Grand Master.

There are two fundamental problems that need to be resolved, of which the first is the GLE’s current leadership. Continue reading THE TROUBLE WITH THE GRAND LODGE OF SPAIN AND THE ENGLISH FACTOR

In an article that Freemasonry.com published last month , a Brother from the United States of America  writes about the issue of  diminishing masonic membership in his Country. Why should we in England  be concerned ? Because unless measures are taken that go beyond a soft recruitment campaign , even Freemasonry on this side of the Atlantic Ocean will experience a similar crisis.

It is not that  Freemasonry isn’t pure in its aims, its values and beliefs ; just that  those assemblies of good men who meet on the square  , resemble more and        more social clubs rather than  Masonic lodges.

Recently – says Bro. Milliken – Freemasons are dismayed at all the talks of membership, lodge dues, dress, Grand edicts and other issues that they believe bring (…) undue debates and divisions in the Craft.

For them the symbolism, the virtues, morality and the positive effect that all of these things have on our soul, are the only things that should be talked about within the Masonic community.

They are the Philosophical or Intellectual Masons.

Who cares where we meet, they say, or what we look like and how many of us are present at our meetings (…). They see Freemasonry as a philosophy that can exists regardless of its structure because a philosophy requires no administration or infrastructure. It requires thought, enlightenment and personal practice   without incumbencies. It does not need a building or a leader or any authority imposed on it. Freemasonry is indestructible; it is a personal journey (…) that only requires a personal commitment to its ideals and life changing message.

On the other side of the divide we have the Structural & Administrative Freemasons, who tell us that (…) a Society, a Brotherhood without structure is anarchy. Indeed it ceases to be a Brotherhood because what is lost is the interpersonal relationship, the personal contact, the camaderie.

(…) But if you are going to have infrastructure like a temple, a ritual, a dogma, a catechism, a leadership, then – say those Masons – you are going to have rules and enforcement. Membership dues, budgets, dress, qualifications, etc. thus become justifiable issues.

Continue reading Freemasonry and membership retention

For well over a century the larger part of Freemasonry in the French republic has not been recognised as regular by the United Grand Lodge of England, and by most other adherents to what has been described as “the American-English” style of Freemasonry. The reasons for this are largely well-known, and are chiefly connected with the abandoning, in 1870, by The Grand National Orient de France, the oldest and largest masonic group in France, of a requirement to believe in a Supreme Being as a prerequisite for Initiation into the Order. Further problems of recognition have continued to crop up in more recent times, right up to 2007.

Related to this is the fact that whereas our institution has sedulously ensured its apolitical nature over the past three centuries – we can all recollect being adjured in the Charge After Initiation to “refrain from all political and religious discussion” – French Freemasonry has been characterised by a readiness to express, as a body, official lines on all manner of political, social and cultural issues. This preparedness to put their heads above the parapet in such an open way has, I fear, led to a feeling in some quarters that the persecution of such a conspicuous organisation was inevitable under a totalitarian dictatorship, and almost courted.

I hope that the present paper will redress some of that neglect, and I would like to think that it may serve Freemasons of whatever background two useful functions: firstly, it will preserve the memory of the many thousands of French Freemasons who were brutally persecuted during the German occupation of France and secondly it will provide us with a picture of what would have happened had our island been invaded by Nazi Germany, a picture which is an extension of the fate of Freemasonry in the Channel Islands which has previously been  described eloquently in this lodge.

Background: the Fall of France

France declared war on Germany on 3rd September 1939, at the same time as Britain, in accordance with the terms of the Franco-Polish Military Alliance of 1921, which, like the Anglo-Polish Alliance, required French support against the invasion of Poland by Germany on 1st September.

There followed some eight months of what is now referred to as the “Phoney War”, (Drole de Guerre or Sitzkrieg) during which neither Britain nor France launched any significant land offensives against German forces.

This ended on 10th May 1940, with the invasion by Germany of the Low Countries, drawing in the British Expeditionary Force which had been stationed on the French side of the border of neutral Belgium since October 1939. Over the next few days, German armour and troops poured into France on two main fronts, supported by the Luftwaffe, and in spite of initial stiff resistance by some French divisions, they easily overwhelmed the less well-equipped and trained French. The B.E.F. retreated to Dunkirk, and was of course evacuated in Operation Dynamo between 27’” May and 4^th  June.

The French government was in a crisis of indecision: Prime Minister Paul Reynaud wanted the government to flee abroad, to French North Africa, and to continue the war from there, supported by the formidable French Navy.

He was opposed by the Commander in Chief of French forces, General Weygand, and the Deputy Prime Minister Marshall Philippe Petain. Churchill flew to France on 11th June to meet Reynaud, Petain and Weygand; he discussed with them the defence of Paris by guerrilla warfare and house-to-house fighting, not knowing that Weygand had already ordered that Paris, which by now was almost deserted, be surrendered to the Germans. Petain and Weygand, who shared right-wing, anti-republican authoritarian and vehemently anti-communist views, were concerned that if the government went abroad the country would be broken up and easy prey for German and Italian colonisation. They wanted the French forces to retain enough power to repel communist overthrow. When Churchill returned to England that evening, it was clear that France was about to fall. He returned to Tours on 13th June, and Reynaud asked for a release from a previous agreement that he would not seek an armistice with the Germans without Britain’s consent.

German troops entered Paris unopposed on 14th June. Reynaud was in Bordeaux with the rest of the fleeing government, and resigned as Prime Minister. On 16th June, President Albert Lebrun appointed Marshal Pertain as his successor.

On 22nd June an Armistice, the Second Compiegne Agreement, was signed with Germany. The Northern and Western parts of France, constituting about 60% of the country, were occupied by Germany. The remainder was under the direct French control of a new government based in the town of Vichy. Both the Zone Libre (Vichy) and the Zone Occupee (North and West) were nominally under the control of the Vichy government. One of the conditions of reaching the armistice was that France would not have its territory divided up between Germany and Italy. The demarcation lines existed until the invasion of North Africa by the Allies in Operation Torch on 8th November 1942, when Germany took control of the whole of France.

On the 10th July the government in Vichy voted Marshal Petain “extraordinary powers” effectively making him President and an absolute ruler. Petain appointed Pierre Laval as his Prime Minister.

The Germans in many ways “left the French to it”. Much of the Vichy administration comprised of men like Petain, who were reactionary, anti-republican, anti-democratic, and vehemently anti-Semitic, and favoured an authoritarian and Draconian regime. Without specific instructions from the Germans, they instituted policies of persecution, internment and deportation of Jews, Gypsies, Protestants, homosexuals and Freemasons.

Persecution of Freemasons

The Third Reich already had a long history of anti-Masonic activity, and this was quickly expoused by the Vichy government. In addition to the belief that Freemason and Jews were involved in plots for world domination, there was also a conviction that lodges were the owners of untold treasures, which would be confiscated by the Reich.

Continue reading Freemasonry under the Vichy Regime (1940-44)