THE BUILDER August, 1929

Masonic Teachings and Modern Problems

By BRO. HERBERT HUNGERFORD

Help to Make These Pages a Real Forum for Discussion

All brothers interested in any phase of Masonic Education,
especially those who believe in fostering the Masonic Study Club
movement, are invited to send criticism, comments and,
particularly, practical suggestions for furthering this movement.
Those who are willing to help organize Round Table Discussion
Groups or other Masonic Study Clubs in their Lodges or their
districts are invited to send for Membership Blanks, etc., which
will be supplied free of cost.

Address:
HERBERT HUNGERFORD

General Campaign Manager, The Masonic Study Club Campaign
Harrisburg, Virginia.

BEAR in mind the warning given with the first announcement of our
Seven Keypoint Introductory Programs arranged for Round Table
Discussion Groups in which we emphasized the fact that we were
simply offering tentative suggestions which might be modified any
way through the experience or advice offered by well-informed
brethren. Thus far, but few suggestions have been received but one
of them seems to be quite pertinent and suggestive of immediate
action. Bro. Ernst W. Gruss, of Houston, Texas, in a very able and
illuminating letter advises a change in the arrangement and names
of the courses, thus:

1. Masonic Symbolism.
2. Masonic Symbolism Applied.
3. Ancient Landmarks and Teachings of Masonry.
4. History of Masonry. 
a Abroad 
b North America 
c. United States 
d. Home State; 
e. Home County, City, and Town

With the exception of item e, the student can get his history by
just reading a good work on the subject. By "History" I suppose you
mean the past of the organization as we now have it and those
organizations we claim to be the forerunners of our organizations.

Now, I hold a somewhat different idea of the history of Masonry.
Briefly it amounts to this: Since the hour or day when man felt the
desire to improve himself both mentally, intellectually,
spiritually, and physically, he was engaged in Masonic Work. Thus
Masonry, according to my opinion, is synonymous with Civilization.
On this basis, all those beings who have done aught for the
betterment of mankind have been Masons regardless of whether not
they were members of any organization. And again, all lose ancient
organizations, whose object of their labors was the betterment of
mankind, were Builders in the truest sense of the word, hence
masons, though not called so. I do not accept the old trade guilds
as the forerunners of Masonry. Just think that I should consider
organizations of beer-guzzlers, rum fiends, and gluttons my Masonic
ancestors, men who destroyed, but did not build the human mind,
when I can follow the leadership of all those great master minds
who sought to improve mankind since the beginning of human
improvement. I consider it puerile to emphasize the rather far-
fetched theory that the trade guilds were our Masonic ancestors. To
me it shows that our Masonic Students are themselves not clear just
what Masonry really is. My Masonry is a direct descendant of those
ancient leaders who, tens of thousands of years ago, sought to
raise their fellowmen to higher level of life. Nor do we have to
borrow the symbols of the bricklayers and stonemasons for our own
use. The fundamental symbols of Masonry are ages-old and date back
to the time when man first began to think. This is incontrovertibly
proven by the findings of archaeologists and anthropologists. No,
the equilateral triangle, the square, the circle, the cross, the
apron, the East, the West, the South, and others were established
tens of thousands of years before guilds of bricklayers and
stonemasons were thought of.

It seems to me that the points raised in this letter are well taken
and, mainly, deserving of our emulation. While I do not altogether
agree with the viewpoint expressed by Bro. Gruss, I can fully
appreciate his point that it will be far more interesting to the
newly-made Mason if we start with lessons more definitely
supplementing the points that we have tried to impress in the
ceremonials of our different degrees.

I am quite willing, in fact, to concede that Masonic history should
be made the last, rather than the first, of our introductory round
table discussions.

I am inclined, however, to believe that our first course of study
in discussion groups, composed chiefly newly-made masons, should be
on "The Fundamental Teachings of the Fraternity."

The causes which have brought about this conclusion on my part have
been not only my personal observation of the activity of Study Club
Groups but, particularly, the reaction or response to my series of
articles on "Our Ancient Fraternity and Present Day Problems" which
have been running during the past year in the columns of THE
BUILDER. It seems to me that the considerable interest manifested
by our brethren everywhere in this series of critical articles
indicates that there is a definite value in tieing-up or comparing
the problems of modern life with the teachings of our ancient
Fraternity.

It seems to me, likewise, that this particular plan of beginning
Masonic Study discussions with a brief course on "Masonic Teachings
and Modern Problems" is right along the line and fully in harmony
with the plan of our ritual.

It is presumed that every candidate applies for admission to a
lodge because he hopes thereby to learn how to improve himself in
Freemasonry. In other words, it seems to me that it is a natural
and justifiable expectation of every newly-made Mason that he will
find in the Fraternity practical assistance in solving his personal
or life-problems. If the objective of Fraternity is not precisely
this, I confess that I have failed to understand what it is.

It is absurd for any one to assume that the sole objective of
Fraternity is self-improvement for its members, yet, I doubt if any
one will deny that this is one of its foremost aims. This being the
case, it seems a





common sense proposition that each Study Club group for newly-made
brethren should first be concerned with discussing the principles
and practices of fraternity which ought to help every member of any
lodge to live more happily, and a more serviceable and, therefore,
a more successful life.

A Challenge to Inside Critics of Freemasonry

YOUR attitude in accepting or rejecting this challenge should
determine whether you are a sincere, constructive critic of your
Fraternity, or merely an ordinary fault-finder. My claim to the
privilege of presenting the challenge is derived from the fact that
my recent series of articles in THE BUILDER, on "Our Ancient
Fraternity and Present Day Problems," brought me considerable
commendation as well as some rebukes for being, as one writer puts
it, "a bold and plain-spoken critic of our ancient and honorable
institution."

I make no denial of the fact that I have endeavored to criticize
our Fraternity fearlessly, but I do insist that I have always been,
likewise, a friendly critic. Whenever I have pointed out what I
considered an unwise or unwholesome tendency, or a serious
shortcoming in the programs and activities of present-day Masonry,
I have endeavored invariably to suggest changes or recommend
remedies, which, I believe, would correct the conditions of which
I have complained.

I object most vigorously to any implication that every critic of
our Fraternity must be regarded as a "calamity howler." The
Fraternity certainly is a human institution and the weakness and
frailty of all mortal beings is a clearly recognized factor of our
ritual. So, the ostrich-minded objectors to any criticism of our
Fraternity do not disturb me in the least.

On the other hand, it is a matter of serious concern when we find
so many members who do not hesitate to criticize the Craft, but
appear to be unwilling or at least inactive either in putting forth
any effort of their own or participating in a constructive program
for changing and improving the conditions which are the cause of
their complaints.

The challenge I issue, therefore, is that every critic who
sincerely believes that some of the activities we emphasize in our
lodge programs today are not the best and most desirable features
to be put foremost; also that some of the tendencies and trends of
modern Masonry do not seem to be in the right direction, is not
acting in accord with the true Masonic spirit when he merely gives
voice to his objections, yet fails to do his part to bring about
the changes necessary to correct the conditions which he believes
should be modified.

According to my observation in our lodges today, we have too many
fault-finders and too few constructive critics. In nearly every
lodge you will find members who are regarded more or less as
"pests" because they are always raising objections, finding fault
and scolding about this, that or the other activity of the lodge;
yet these fault-finders seldom can be induced to assume the
leadership of any activity or even take part in any program that is
designed to correct the conditions which they complain about.

I admit that this is a perfectly natural human trait, nevertheless,
it is not in accord with the high ideals of Freemasonry. A person
who professes to be a good man and a Mason should always be willing
to back up his words with his deeds.

In my own criticisms of modern Masonic activities and tendencies,
I have pointed out why I believe that the average lodge today has
made a mistake by shifting too much emphasis upon the purely social
and entertaining features of its program with a corresponding
decrease in the emphasis upon the educational features of
Freemasonry. As result of this shifting of our emphasis, it is my
contention that the present tendencies are away from the ancient
fundamental ideals of the Fraternity and that modern Masonry is in
danger of a decline because it is failing to impress upon every
newly-made brother the true teachings of the Institution. This is
due mainly to the fact that the distracting social, commercial and
recreational activities of everyday life have so influenced Masonic
programs that we push our candidates through the "degree mills" so
rapidly that we fail fully to impress upon their minds the
important educational and moral lessons upon which our great
Fraternity has been established.

In my series of articles criticizing these modern Masonic
tendencies, I believe that I presented ample evidence to justify
every criticism. I have since received considerable testimony from
brethren from all parts of the country whose observations and
opinions fully bore out my contentions.

Likewise, I maintain that I have not rested content with merely
pointing out some of the faults and mistaken efforts in modern
Masonry, but I have sincerely endeavored to devise a constructive
program that will provide the things that I believe are needed to
supply these shortcomings to which I have called attention. In
other words, I regard the activities to supplement every lodge
program with some sort of definite Masonic study as being, by all
means, the best possible way to remedy the defects brought about by
the overemphasis upon speed with its consequent superficiality.

I was gratified by the numerous letters of comment which my series
of critical articles provoked; but I confess that I have been
somewhat disappointed at the response to my appeal for cooperation
in helping to devise and develop popular programs for the extension
of the Masonic Study Club campaign and the introduction of some
form of Masonic education into every lodge possible.

If you agree with the writer's contention that some of the
activities of modern Masonry have gotten off the main track, you
certainly owe it to yourself, as well as to your brethren, to do
your part in helping to switch your lodge programs back to the
right track.

