    
                              HO, COMPANIONS! 

                       by  Stewart Wilson Miner, PGM


    In some of our Masonic bodies the members hail each other as 
    Brothers, a custom that is common in the symbolic lodge and in the 
    several lodges of the Scottish Rite.  In the Royal Arch we are 
    Companions; in the Commandery, we are Fraters; and in the Shrine, 
    Nobles.  I suppose this reflects, as much as anything else, sincere 
    and purposeful attempts to meaningfully distinguish and give 
    character to the several households making up our fraternal family. 


    So far as I can determine, the title "Companion" first comes to our 
    attention in the second section of the Master Mason's degree, when 
    a weary brother, in attempting to arise and follow two colleagues 
    who have gone on, shouts "Ho, Companions."  The trio, as we know, 
    were on a very important mission, in pursuit of ruffians who 
    committed a heinous act. 


    In reviewing those events which took place up to the point at which 
    the weary Fellowcraft made a discovery and hailed his companions, 
    it appears that the analytical work which should have preceded the 
    chase was conspicuous by its absence.  It also seems that all 
    involved, certainly the three Fellowcrafts and perhaps even King 
    Solomon himself, were so obsessed with the chase that little, if 
    any, thought was given to the possibility that those they sought 
    could be close at hand.  Circumstances pressed heavily upon all 
    concerned, of course, and in the stressful circumstances in which 
    they found themselves, rational and deliberate consideration of 
    their concerns was difficult.  At any rate they seemed certain that 
    the object of their quest lay down the road, somewhere, and they 
    appeared convinced that if they only moved fast enough and far 
    enough in and in concert, they would undoubtedly overcome their 
    prey.  Never mind that they did not have a real game plan, their 
    assignment was simply to seek, to search, and to find. 


    If the Fellowcrafts had any inclination to really examine the 
    terrain over which they passed, we are uninformed of it.  In fact, 
    fatigue was apparently the only reason they stopped when they did, 
    and their finding of the acacia, with the ramifications that took 
    place immediately thereafter, seems to have been accidental at 
    best.  It was hardly a good piece of detective work, and if remorse 
    had not overtaken the ruffians, and had they been able to muffle 
    their woes, the chances of their discovery would have been 
    considerably lessened. 


    I should not like to be unduly critical, however, for in the end, in 
    their floundering way, the Fellowcrafts did accomplish their 
    object.  Without doubt, their hearts were in the right place, and 
    they worked well together.  More importantly they knew who they 
    were searching for and they appreciated why they were involved in 
    the effort. Furthermore, the approach they made was not at all 
    unusual; in some ways, in fact, it may have been considered quite 
    normal - not only for that period but for the present time as well.  
    Thus the legend serves to exemplify an eternal truth - that man's 
    limitations are universal and timeless. 


    That brings us to today, and I, like the weary brother who was 
    slower than his colleagues to arise, greet you, one and all, with 
    the same arresting call, "Ho, Companions."  In using those words, 
    am I implying that we have ruffians among us?  No, not really.  I 
    doubt that anyone in a leadership post in the fraternity is likely 
    to be subjected to the test suffered by Hiram Abiff.  But there are 
    some things deserving of attention - some threats to the Craft, 
    if you will, and these threats, if uncontained for long, could 
    impair our institution no less effectively than any ruffian.  Let's 
    take a look. 


    The first of the threats with which I am concerned is one that is 
    the product of a thought process whose end proclaims the virtues 
    presumed to be found in a concept we call centralization. 
    "Centralization of what?", you may ask, and the answer is of 
    everything. Proponents of this concept would have you believe that 
    nothing is simple, and that nothing that is worthwhile can be 
    properly effected locally.  If anything is worth doing, adherents 
    of this view proclaim, it is worth direction, and in the process of 
    developing direction, layer upon layer of authority, needed or not, 
    is established. 


    In a practical sense the trend toward centralization, in which 
    Grand Bodies grow in authoritative stature, is at the expense of 
    those who surrender the burden.  And that is a tragedy.  Few are 
    the subordinate bodies today that have the capacity, or the will, 
    to do that which in an earlier day would have been expected of 
    them. 


    Our Masonic charity comes to mind.  And in case you might be 
    inclined to interpret my words too freely, let me assure you that I 
    am a loyal proponent of our organized charities.  But in their 
    development, something has happened to charity at the local level.  
    We simply don't do enough in our own neighborhoods for the widowed, 
    the aged, the orphaned, and for those who are otherwise in need. 


    An incident that occurred a year or so ago is illustrative of the 
    point I wish to make.  A brother had fallen on hard times and 
    illness and the Supreme Architect saw fit to call him home.  At the 
    time of his death his family was virtually penniless; there was 
    little food in the home, and certainly there were no resources 
    available to provide a minimally acceptable burial.  An appeal was 
    made to his lodge, but the members there felt they could not handle 
    the burden alone. Hence, they turned to the District to meet what 
    was essentially their own obligation. A collection was taken, and 
    the crisis was overcome.  But in the process, caring and sharing, 
    which is the heart and soul of brotherhood, was institutionalized.  
    And that is a great pity. 


    So too are many other aspects of our fraternal life.  I refer 
    specifically to programs involving our Masonic youth, including our 
    scholarship efforts, and as well as all of our programs in Masonic 
    education.  Without disparaging any of the efforts that are 
    generated at the top, and there are many, I would nevertheless 
    maintain that their achievements, if any, have been at the expense 
    of programs that could be and should be developed and exploited 
    more fully at the local level. Ho, Companions, what say you about 
    over centralization?  Is it a threat?  Can we contain it? 


    A second concern to me is one that I shall term legalization.  It is 
    a direct descendant of centralization.  The mentality responsible 
    for its generation evolves out of a presumed need and a 
    well-developed demand for the centralization of authority in the 
    Craft. And this malady, it seems, is catching.  At any rate, if 
    recent years are in any way indicative, it would seem that there 
    are amongst us those who would like to have a rule, numbered and 
    included in our digests, to cover every situation that the mind of 
    man may contrive.  But, it simply can't be done! 


    I personally find this tendency to over-legalize the management and 
    government of the Craft through the multiplication of legislation 
    to be a bit offensive, if for no other reason than the fact that 
    already existing law appears to be neither fully understood nor 
    universally accepted.  Here is a real weakness with which almost 
    every occupant of the Grand East has to grapple at one time or 
    another.  Always there are those who will opt for the selective 
    application of the Code, for such parts thereof as they may deem 
    necessary for a particular occasion or circumstance.  To such 
    individuals the finding of a loophole that will permit the 
    imaginative application of existing law is an eternal challenge.  A 
    fitting last word on this matter concerns the legislative burden 
    placed on our Grand Bodies.  It is so large that it can no longer 
    be handled efficiently or expeditiously.  Furthermore, experience 
    suggests that in the judgement of the delegates, most of the 
    proposals advanced are for the most part unnecessary.  If this be 
    so, and voting records indicate that it is, isn't it time that we 
    make some effort to curb what would appear to be a procedure whose 
    overhaul is long overdue?  Ho, Companions, what say you about our 
    tendency to over-legislate?  Isn't it a threat?  How can we contain 
    it? 


    A third danger of significance to the ordered well being of the 
    Craft, at least from my point of view, is one that I have 
    designated idolization.  While it takes a number of shapes and 
    forms, I think you all to what I refer - that is to the 
    glorification of the individual, through title, honor, or position.  
    Let me be perfectly clear on this:  I am not opposed to the 
    recognition of service.  But I am opposed to the relative position 
    that recognition, per se, now occupies in the workings of the 
    fraternity. 


    I recognize that my opinions on this matter may not be widely 
    accepted. But that does not make them any less valid.  In fact, 
    from what I hear from the rank and file, most Masons would be happy 
    to see a bit more attention paid to file and a little less 
    attention paid to rank at our affairs.  After all, most of our 
    Brethren and our Companions come to enjoy an evening, to share some 
    inspiring thoughts, and to partake of some wholesome refreshment 
    before retiring to their homes.  They could care less about the 
    distinctions that separate brother from brother. 


    Still, the tradition persists, and there are many among us who take 
    delight in the promotion of personal esteem.  All too many have not 
    heeded the lesson taught in the Royal Arch Chapter, wherein the 
    newly exalted is informed that "Men in all ages have sought to 
    perpetuate their own greatness, but as yet in vain.  They have 
    daubed with untempered mortar and admitted to their structures the 
    base and discordant materials of pride and ambition."  They have 
    also failed to appreciate that in consequence of the faulty 
    placement of values, the edifices of the unwise "have toppled from 
    their foundations or been torn asunder by internal violence." 


    These are words of wisdom, I believe, and they are also words of 
    warning that we might well heed.  For the time is coming, and it 
    may not be far off, when the working Craft will tire of those whose 
    vanity drives them to seek self gratification.  Our need is for men 
    to build temples to God, not monuments to themselves or to their 
    own special interests.  Ho, Companions, what say you about this?  
    How dangerous is the threat? Are we willing, in the interest of the 
    Craft, to try to contain our preoccupation with self? 
    
                                                                
    In contrast to the danger that idolization presents to the Craft is 
    another threat that is of equal significance.  It pertains to the 
    depersonalization of the membership as a whole.  This, my brethren, 
    may be the most serious threat of all.  And it may have its origin, 
    at least in part, in the overemphasis of the few to the detriment 
    of the many.  But for whatever reason that may be advanced, the 
    truth of the matter is that the vast majority of our Masons are 
    totally inactive and generally unresponsive to Masonry's works and 
    programs. 
    
                                                                
    Can it be that this is an outgrowth of our inattention to 
    obligation?  It may well be, and I speak from the perspective of 
    one who served several years as the secretary of a lodge of some 
    300 members.  While I had correspondence with each of those members 
    over the years, usually in connection with the collection of dues, 
    I must confess that I did not know, nor would I have been able to 
    recognize the vast majority of them. Why?  Simply because our paths 
    never crossed.  We had not had the opportunity to meet, face to 
    face, to break bread together, nor to share in life's joys and 
    sorrows as Masons should.  And both they and I were to a degree 
    both responsible.  Ho, Companions, what say you to 
    depersonalization?  Isn't it an ideological ruffian?  But can we 
    cope with it?  And can we contain it? 


    Thus far in this discourse I have identified four threats that are 
    lurking about the fraternity, and it is likely that are others of 
    no less significance.  But the important thing is not so much the 
    number or the extent of the threats we face, but rather the 
    response that we make to them.  We must therefore ask ourselves if 
    we are according our problems the attention they are due, or are 
    we, like the Fellowcrafts of legend, simply forging ahead blindly, 
    in the notion that somewhere and sometime, solutions will surface?  
    Can we afford to procrastinate indefinitely, hopeful that sooner or 
    later we will find another sprig of acacia, or a substitute 
    therefor, that will miraculously enable us to overcome adversity?  
    I would venture that we shouldn't.  Furthermore, we are under no 
    obligation to do so. 


    The best defense against the dangers inherent in the 
    centralization, legalization, idolization, and depersonalization of 
    the Craft, of course, is the time-tested antidote of 
    fraternalization, offered without restriction or reservation.  It 
    is a powerful force, one with the capability to create and sustain 
    unity and harmony, even in the face of stress and strain.  It 
    performs best in a favorable environment, preferably one that is 
    characterized by the fulfillment of purpose and the achievement of 
    promise. 


    It ought to be evident that no organization, especially one such as 
    ours, can long endure in the absence of a general understanding of 
    its fundamental purposes, particularly by those who presume to lead 
    or serve it.  Thus it is imperative that we be agreed on what we 
    want to do.  Frankly this is a matter that has for too long been 
    neglected, and as a consequence, our conceptions of what is to be 
    done and who should do it are primarily the products of subjective 
    reasoning, an evaluative process in which the concept of service is 
    subordinated to self interest.  If fraternalization is to thrive, 
    this trend must be arrested. 


    It ought to be equally evident that the acceptance of fraternal 
    purpose is absolutely essential to the achievement of fraternal 
    promise, an objective whose attractiveness is often tarnished by 
    the passage of time.  Think if you will of the promise which 
    attracted you to Freemasonry in the first place.  I wonder if in 
    your mind's eye you can recall the night you were initiated?  If 
    your experience on that occasion was anything like mine, you 
    probably went home filled with altruistic resolve.  I am persuaded 
    that you probably felt, and with considerable passion, a need to 
    participate in an effort to establish a true brotherhood of man 
    under the Fatherhood of God.  Now let me ask you some bottom line 
    questions. 


    After your many years in the fraternity, what progress has been made 
    in the fulfillment of the promise that you then envisioned?  Are 
    you and we closing in on it?  Or does that promise remain in the 
    distance, beyond reach, an illusive goal that seemingly defies 
    approach? 


    If your answers to these queries are as I suspect they must be, I 
    would think that we ought to look seriously at ourselves, examine 
    our purposes, cultivate our interests in the mainsprings of life's 
    worthwhiles, and get about the work of fulfilling the promise that 
    we made so long ago - to ourselves and to mankind as a whole.  Look 
    about you pray.  There is much work to be done, right here, and 
    there is only you and me to do it.  Won't you lend a helping hand, 
    by purposefully resolving to let your work become your mark?  The 
    fortunes of the Craft await your response! 

