SEPTEMBER 1917

THE FAITH THAT IS IN THEM---A FRATERNAL FORUM

Edited by BRO. GEO. E. FRAZER, President, The Board of Stewards

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Henry R. Evans, District of Columbia. 
Harold A. Kingsbury, Connecticut. 
Dr. Wm. F. Kuhn, Missouri.
Geo. W. Baird, District of Columbia
H.D. Funk, Minnesota
Frederick W. Hamilton, Massachusetts
Dr. John Lewin McLeish, Ohio.
Joseph W. Norwood, Kentucky.
Silas H. Sheperd, Wisconsin.
Jos. W. Eggleston, Virginia
M.M. Johnson, Massachusetts
John Pickard, Missouri
Oliver D. Street, Alabama. 
S. W. Williams, Tennessee.
Joe L. Carson, Virginia
T.W. Hugo, Minnesota
F.B. Gault, Washington
C.M. Schenck, Colorado
H.L. Haywood, Iowa
Frank E. Noyes, Wisconsin
Francis W. Shepardson, Illinois
S. W. Williams, Tennessee

Contributions to this Monthly Department of Personal Opinion are
invited from each writer who has contributed one or more articles
to THE BUILDER. Subjects for discussion are selected as being alive
in the administration of Masonry today. Discussions of politics,
religious creeds or personal prejudices are avoided, the purpose of
the Department being to afford a vehicle for comparing the personal
opinions of leading Masonic students. The contributing editors
assume responsibility only for what each writes over his own
signature. Comment from our Members on the subjects discussed here
will be welcomed in the Correspondence column.

QUESTION NO. 5--
"Shall the several Grand Jurisdictions modify their rules as to
physical requirements of candidates so that, other qualifications
being satisfactory, Masons may welcome the petitions of all those
soldiers and sailors who lose arms, legs or eyes in the service of
their country? If so, shall ability to support himself and
immediate family be substituted as a requirement of each initiate?
If not, what physical requirements are reasonable?"

Mental Requirements Come First.



I should not regard it so much a "modification of their rules as to
physical requirements of candidates" as getting back to those
"first principles" which are the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry,
if the Grand Jurisdictions followed the rules and policy settled
for Kentucky 116 years ago by Grand Lodge action, namely, that the
Grand Lodge has no authority in the matter and the question of
eligibility of persons who have physical misfortunes lies entirely
with the lodge which receives his petition.

As I recall the first decision concerned the petition of John Pope
who was minus a left arm or hand. The lodge received him and he
became one of the brightest Lights of both Masonic and Civil
history in this state.  Our rule of reason is that unless the
candidate is unable to feel the grip, hear the word or see the
sign" physical misfortune is no bar, except in cases where entrance
to Masonry by such persons is made under such conditions as to lead
us to believe they might become a financial charge from the
beginning.

Without entering into a discussion of philosophy, I am satisfied
that the reason back of the original requirement that a man be
sound "in mind and member" was and still is purely spiritual and
not physical save incidentally as above set forth. A consumptive or
a man with eczema may have all his arms and legs but is undoubtedly
physically "unsound."

If I understand our rituals aright, there is an extra-physical
trend to them that can not be waved away with an idle word, and
which necessitates the student who would grasp our philosophy's
meaning, regarding his body as a machine or set of working tools
for the use of his mind. So that there may have once been more
reason than exists now, in these days of scientific surgery, for
lodges to require physical perfection.

But as I say, physical requirements in my opinion, have always been
subordinate to and dependent upon the mental or "spiritual"
requirements, with the lodge itself as the judge.

Because of the erroneous notion that "Speculative Masonry" was
merely an outgrowth of "Operative Masonry" whose symbols and
rituals were in large part adapted to the ancient wisdom we now
call "Freemasonry," a great many of our unthinking and I am sorry
to say unlearned Grand Masters have built up "precedents" in their
jurisdictions which are followed from one generation to another
somewhat as attempts used to be made to confine the "landmarks" to
a definite number, resulting in the most absurd situations.

I think a most interesting--and enlightening-- topic for research
would be a comparison of the various decisions in every
jurisdiction. I recall one jurisdiction in this country where the
Grand Master decided that a man could not become a Mason because he
had lost a certain finger on the left hand and exactly the reverse
was decided (same finger) in another jurisdiction. Such a
compilation of cold statistics would amply demonstrate the need for
reform. J. W. Norwood, Kentucky.

Let Us Make New Laws Slowly.

I believe that the several Grand Lodges have already enacted too
many regulations and that it is impossible at present to unite on
any uniform rule as to physical qualifications. If it were
possible, I doubt the wisdom of additional rules.

We have heard the charge to preserve the "ancient landmarks" and
never suffer them to be infringed, or countenance a deviation from
the established usages and customs of the fraternity given to every
Mason and have given it ourself, realizing we did not know what we
were talking about. In Mackey's enumeration of the "landmarks" he
includes physical qualification, but why did he not include the
requirement that apprentices serve seven years which was also a
regulation given in the "old charges"? Modern dentistry makes the
conformity to one of our requirements impossible in a majority of
cases, but it has never been seriously considered or its symbolic
effect lessened. Electric lights now take the place of the
time-honored candle and so we might continue if it were necessary
to show that changes have been made in our usages and customs.

Brother R. F. Gould says that "The dogmas of Perpetual
Jurisdiction, Physical Perfection, and Exclusive (or Territorial)
Jurisdiction, have been evolved since the introduction of Masonry
into what has become the United States," from England.

Before making more laws of Masonry let us get together and try and
find out what a landmark is and what constitutes ancient usages and
customs and in the interval regard the Lodge as a safe guardian of
those we now consider as such.

The student of history can not fail to see the harmful effects that
have resulted from dogmatism in politics, science, religion, and
even in social life. Let us, as Freemasons, avoid dogmas that will
weaken the foundation of our Fraternity and allow nothing to take
preference over our fundamental principle of "The Fatherhood of God
and the Brotherhood of Man." In the past 200 years many changes
have been made in Masonic ritual and jurisprudence, some of which
have been questionable, and we fear have been made without due
regard to the basic principle. Let us be slow to enact laws and
careful to make them on the basis of those things on which we all
agree. 
Silas H. Shepherd, Wisconsin.

Involves Changes in Ritual.

I should not advocate any change in the physical qualifications of
petitioners for our degrees as set forth at present in the Grand
Jurisdictions, nor even modifications to meet the hypothetical
cases covered in your inquiry. Opportunity offers the men of the
Army and Navy to seek Masonic Light, should the suggested
chartering of Military Lodges already discussed in the Forum be
approved. Any such radical modification as that embodied in your
present query would involve a complete revision of the ritual.

Viewing the subject from another angle, so long as Masonry endures
as an Institution in the United States, the Patriotism and Charity
constituting cardinal principles of the Order, will promptly
provide for such National Responsibilities as the Red Cross, the
National Soldiers' and Sailors' Homes and other obligations, an
increase of which must directly result as an aftermath of our
present Battle For Civilization. Our present high physical standard
is an old landmark of Masonry. Its abrogation, even for so laudable
a purpose as you suggest, would establish a bad precedent and
personally I am opposed to innovations which might lead to others,
so ultimately lessening the great potency for good of an ancient
and honorable Institution.

If at any time the great Government of the United States finds
itself in the least hampered in properly providing for the gallant
soldiers and sailors who have suffered physical impairment in its
service, our Blue Brotherhood will be the first to contribute to
the needs of the Fourth Great Light of American Masonry--the Flag. 
John Lewin McLeish, Ohio.

Virginia is Investigating.

Aside from the motive of opening the doors to returned veterans,
which was not mentioned, the Grand Lodge of Virginia, at its Annual
in February, placed the subject of modification of physical
requirements in the hands of the Jurisprudence Committee to be
reported on in February, 1918. My fixed idea is that the
requirement of a degree of physical perfection is but a link with
past ages of the operative branch and should be retained for that
reason alone. What that degree of perfection shall be, should be
left to the Lodges, except that all initiates should be able to
receive and comprehend our ceremonies, and should be able to make
a living for themselves and families. Prior to 1866 this was about
Virginia's position.

Grand Lodges legislate too much and leave too little to the
intelligence and Masonic zeal of the Lodges. A change is coming as
to physical requirement and it would be well but not at all
necessary that Grand Lodges should all agree. Certain it is that
they will not. 
Jos. W. Eggleston, Virginia.

* * *
Few Changes in 1861-1865.

My opinion is that none of the Grand Jurisdictions should in any
way modify their present requirements as to physical
qualifications, because of military conditions. As I understand it,
there was very little modification of these requirements made by
the Grand Bodies because of conditions arising from the Civil War
of 1861-1865 and in my judgment the present war does not present
any reasons for such modification any stronger than were presented
at the time of the Civil War.

Masonry is a fraternal and charitable institution but not an
eleemosynary one. Whatever charity the order dispenses outside of
its own membership should be given freely and in lump sums to
worthy objects, but the order ought not to invite into its ranks
those who would become burdens upon it and cause it to levy
burdensome taxes upon its members. The ability of one to support
himself and immediate family ought by no means to be substituted as
a requirement for physical perfection. This would in a majority of
cases be strained to take care of what might be deemed individual
worthy cases and thus in the course of time the order would be
burdened with charitable distribution to many who, while deemed
able to support themselves and families at the time of their
petition, would, due to military injuries, afterwards find
themselves unable to render such support.

Wisconsin has always been very strict in applying the ancient
landmark of physical perfection and I am not one of those who
believe that the bars should be let down at this or at any other
time. Frank E. Noyes, Wisconsin.

* * *

Protests Innovations.

I beg leave to invite attention to the installation ceremonies of
a W. M., which makes it clear that we deny the right of any man or
body of men to make innovations in the body of Masonry.

My belief is that tampering with the Landmarks and with the
Constitutions is like driving nails into the coffin of Freemasonry.
Too much liberty has, I think, been taken with the original plan of
Masonry, and I would therefore advise protecting the Landmarks and
Constitutions rather than changing them. 
Geo. W. Baird, Washington, D. C.

An American Anachronism.

There is an ever-growing opinion amongst thinking Freemasons, that
the Mental Qualification, not the Physical, should be the test for
membership in our Order.

This physical qualification is an anachronism--a form that has
remained with us centuries after the substance has gone--and
strange to say remained only in the minds of American Masons. This
has been the cause of more worry to our Grand Lodge, more rulings,
more disappointment than almost any other single subject, all
because we insist in dragging this ancient Fetish into our
assemblies.

The laws of Physical Perfection died with the Operative Lodge. We
apply these rules to our moral and mental qualifications rather
than to our physical today, or we should do so. Ability to support
himself so he may not become a charge on the Order, a further
ability to make himself known to, or as a Brother, by sight, sound
or touch, should govern all future initiations, and thus give our
brave maimed boys a chance to receive all the "comfort of the
craft" when they return. 
J. L. Carson, Virginia.

* *

The Missouri "Cripple" Law.

My views on the Physical Perfection idea have, in the past, been
considered very radical. About fifteen years ago I introduced,
advocated, and the Grand Lodge of Missouri adopted, the following
law:

"It is incompetent for any Lodge in this Jurisdiction to confer
either of the three Degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry on any person
whose physical defects are such as to prevent his receiving and
imparting the ceremonies of the several degrees; provided, that
nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to render any one
ineligible to the privileges of Masonry, who can by the aid of
artificial appliances conform to the necessary ceremonies."

This law met with furious criticism by some correspondents and
editors of Masonic papers, and I was dubbed an iconoclast, a
destroyer of the "Ancient Landmarks," and one, after denouncing me,
said, "That charges should be preferred against me and expelled."
But this was fifteen years ago and the Missouri "Cripple Law" or
some modification of it, has been adopted in many Grand Lodges.

Freemasonry is a progressive science and a new light and age has
dawned. The Physical Perfection notion became obsolete when
operative Masonry became speculative. We recognize today that a
wooden leg is better than a wooden head, and a few fingers missing
is far better than a heart of stone. We believe today, (not merely
mouthing the Ritual), "that it is the internal qualification and
not the external that qualifies a man to be made a Mason."

The "Perfect Youth" doctrine has become so absurd and ridiculous
among thinking Masons, that it is no longer necessary to even argue
the question. It lives in some Grand Lodges purely as a
reminiscence of a past age, and like all obsolete notions, it dies
hard. "Shall Masonry welcome the petitions of all those soldiers
and sailors who have lost arms or eyes in the service of their
country?" Yes, or any other good man similarly afflicted.

There is only one point that should be considered and that is the
question of becoming dependent. Freemasonry is a luxury and not an
eleemosynary institution; pecuniary and material benefits must not
be the motive for gaining admission. No man should be admitted, or
he knowingly apply for admission, when inability to support himself
is self evident. The physical condition, as to loss of legs, arms,
eyes, fingers, toes, bow legs or baldhead, is of no importance, but
the question of ability to support himself is the only question
involved. 
Wm. F. Kuhn, Missouri.

* * *

A Survival from Operative Masonry.

It was inevitable that the Operative Masons should insist that
their apprentices be sound in limb and in good health, seeing that
their trade was dangerous, onerous and difficult, and that a sick
man had to be supported out of the common purse. Also was it
inevitable that this ancient custom be carried over into
Speculative Masonry at the Revival in 1717, for it had come to be
considered an Ancient Landmark, and we all know how careful the
Early Speculatives were to adhere to these. But in spite of the
sanctions of antiquity the premier Grand Lodge gradually modified
its rules as to qualifications, learning that what had been
necessary among the Operatives was no longer essential to
Speculative Masonry. Even Oliver, with all his loyalty to the past,
was driven to see this, as witness this paragraph found in his
"Treasury":

"It would indeed be a solecism in terms to contend that a loss or
partial deprivation of a physical organ of the body could, by any
possibility, disqualify a man from studying the sciences, or being
made a Mason in our times, while in possession of sound judgment,
and the healthy exercises of his intellectual powers."

In 1875 the Board of General Purposes of the Grand Lodge of England
issued a circular in which the writer said:

"I am directed to say that the general rule in this country is to
consider a candidate eligible for election who although not perfect
in his limbs is sufficiently so to go through the various
ceremonies required in the different degrees." As to whether the
candidate was able "to go through the various ceremonies" was, it
goes without saying, left to the judgment of the ballot.

In an essay included in one of the early volumes of the Iowa Grand
Lodge Proceedings, T. S. Parvin takes the same position:

"It is the SOLE RIGHT of each and every LODGE to act upon these
physical qualifications, as it is universally conceded that they
are the sole judges of the moral qualifications of all candidates."

This, it seems to me, is good sense. If a candidate is able to pay
his dues, is in reasonable good health, of average intelligence and
has a good reputation, we need ask no more, unless his physical
defects may incapacitate him from performing the ceremonies. I,
myself, pray that the day may come when the chief qualification
demanded of a candidate will be the evidence of a sincere
determination TO TAKE MASONRY SERIOUSLY. We need more Masons and
fewer members. 
H. L. Haywood, Iowa.

* * *

Manhood, Duty and Valor.

Eligibility to the Masonic orders should not be denied any soldier
or sailor of the United States because of physical disabilities
caused by such service, when such candidate has the other essential
moral and mental qualifications, it being granted of course that
physical impairment is properly authenticated as due to exposure in
the line of duty as such soldier or sailor. Masonry is not an
eleemosynary institution and every candidate for membership should
be capable of supporting himself and family, or least he should not
become an immediate charge upon the Order. A spasm of patriotic
fervor or sympathy should not be permitted to vote a man into
membership in Masonry simply because he bore in his person the
evidence of military heroism. But being a man and having done a
man's full duty and is maimed thereby, such physical disability
ought not to deny him a place in our noble Order that in all its
teachings places a premium upon manhood, duty and valor. Franklin
B. Gault, Washington.

* * *

The Massachusetts Rule.

I do not think that I can better reply to your question for
September than by quoting a provision of the Grand Constitutions of
Massachusetts which is as follows:

"If the physical deformity of any applicant for the degrees does
not amount to an inability to meet the requirements of the Ritual,
and honestly to acquire the means of subsistence, it shall
constitute no hindrance to his initiation."

The Grand Masters of Massachusetts have never been willing to rule
on particular cases but have ruled in a general way that an awkward
compliance might be accepted.

The Worshipful Master of a Lodge is required to pass on cases as it
appears best. There was a vote of the Grand Lodge something over a
hundred years ago to the effect that a blind man might not be given
the degrees, but that would appear to be unnecessary as a blind man
clearly could not comply with the regulations of the ritual.
Frederick W. Hamilton, Massachusetts.

Symbolism of The Perfect Man.

I fear that I could not bring myself to consent to the initiation
of any man into the body of Freemasonry who was not possessed of
all of his physical members whole and complete. And I believe that
this is in accord with the very genius of the Order.

But first of all, however, I must recognize and agree to the
dictum, "It is the internal, and not the external, qualifications
that recommend a man to be a Mason," (Mackey, Book of the Chapter,
p. 41), and I fully realize how it may be drawn therefrom that a
man, having great internal qualifications, should not be debarred
from the privileges and duties of Freemasonry because he has lost
perhaps the little finger of his left hand. This is further
complicated by a parallel which I seem always able to find from the
early Church. A candidate for Holy Orders must come freeborn, of
lawful age, under the tongue of good report, and also sound of limb
and unmutilated; but a man whose blood had been shed as a martyr--
and who was possibly mutilated--had the priestly right of
absolution, and without further ordination. (Smith and Cheetham,
Dict. Xn. Antiq., pp. 1118 and 1481-2.) So it could be argued that
a man who had lost a limb in the highly Masonic duty of the defense
of his country, should, if otherwise worthy, be admitted into the
mysteries of Freemasonry.

Now all ceremonial, whether of the Lodge or of the Church, has a
materialistic, and a spiritual, or symbolic interpretation--and
either is as true as the other. Now, our ancient operative brethren
could not admit a maimed man to their Gild because he could not
perform the functions of the Craft; but this, it might seem, could
be waived when we enter the realm of the speculative. In other
words, inability to display the various external signs and tokens
does not necessarily keep a man from being internally what it is to
be a Mason.

But even with these considerations, I cannot bring myself to
believe that a maimed man should be admitted to initiation.
Symbolism is the life of Freemasonry, and to such a degree that
frequently what is presented to our attention is but the symbol of
a symbol. And therefore, let us go to the Temple quarries. The
Giblim have hewn out of the living rock a stone that shows a flaw,
although but slight. This they drag with their strong cables before
the Master and his wardens. Should they accept it? We know what the
overseers would have done. But should this imperfect stone be
placed in the North-east Corner, or even cemented by the stronger
tie to the other stones of the Temple ?

The candidate symbolizes, in his physical being, the perfect man,
who alone is fit to enter into the composition of "that spiritual
building, that house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens."
I say symbolize rather than be, for none of us has yet arrived at
that perfection to which the whole of Freemasonry aspires, and
there may actually be, in many of us, hidden flaws that tend to
weaken the great Edifice. But still we must scrupulously preserve
the symbol of what we would be; we must continue to teach that we
seek the perfect in body, mind and spirit, that is, in the man, and
that we cannot therefore admit an imperfect man to initiation.

Let us remember, moreover, that the Great Initiate was not maimed
even in death (Ps. xxxiv., St. Jno. xix., 36), and that He is the
head-stone of the corner (Ps. cxviii., 22), the model from which
the whole structure and every part thereof may be taken. 
H. W. Ticknor, Maryland.

* * *

Note by the Editor of This Department.

The purpose of this department is to show the faith that is in
Masons in order that there may be more light (and less dogmatism)
in Masonry. The editor of this department believes that Masonry is
a philosophy, indeed that it is the philosophy that has come down
to us through the ages. Now a philosophy is a system of thought, a
system of living thought. Real Masonry forces real thinking. If
this department stimulates you to think, my Brother, will you not
give THE BUILDER the benefit of your serious thought by
contribution of articles or by letters addressed to the Editor? The
opinions given above as to physical requirements are worthy of the
serious thought of thinking Masons. You can not agree with all of
these opinions--some of them are opposed to each other both in
letter and in spirit. If you have Masonic opinion on Masonic
subjects (not political opinion; not religious opinion), then THE
BUILDER welcomes you to the forum of its columns. George E. Frazer,
Department Editor.


TRUE HEROISM

Let others write of battles fought,
Of bloody, ghastly fields,
Where honor greets the man who wins,
And death the man who yields;
But I will write of him who fights
And vanquishes his sins,
Who struggles on through weary years
Against himself and wins.

He is a hero staunch and brave,
Who fights an unseen foe,
And puts at last beneath his feet
His passions base and low;
Who stands erect in manhood's might,
Undaunted, undismayed--
The bravest man who e'er drew sword
In foray or in raid.

It calls for something more than brawn
Or muscle to o'ercome
An enemy that marcheth not
With banner, plume or drum--
A foe forever lurking nigh,
With silent, steady tread;
Forever near your board by day
At night beside your bed.

All honor, then, to that brave heart
Though rich or poor he be
Who struggles with his baser part--
Who conquers and is free!
He may not wear a hero's crown,
Or fill a hero's grave;
Yet truth will place his name amongst
The bravest of the brave.

--Anon.
