-
Articles/Ads
Article CLASS MASONRY. Page 1 of 2 Article CLASS MASONRY. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Class Masonry.
CLASS MASONRY .
AMONG the arguments nsed in favour of Freemasonry , both by those "who have undertaken to defend it from the attacks of its enemies , and by those who have desired to place its merits before the world at large , there is none to which greater weight has been attached than that of its Universality , It has always been argued that
men of every class , of every creed , and of every opinion ( alone excepting the Atheist ) , may claim its privileges , and that to one and all the same rights will be freely conceded . Freemasonry knows no distinction , provided a candidate comes duly recommended , and in this respect stands
almost if not quite alone among the many organizations of mankind . Not only is Freemasonry universal in theory , but we find that actual practice fully confirms the principle—men of every description have been admitted to a
participation in its mysteries , and are still to be found ranged nnder its banner , so tbat * we have the actual records both of the past and the present as witnesses that it is not universal in name alone . The term " Class
Masonry is really a misnomer , there is no snch thing as Class Masonry , nor can there be , for however much the class or character of a Lodge may be different from that of all others , the class distinction applies to the Lodge only , and not to Freemasonry as a whole , or to its members
individually . It is not necessary for ns to give a list here of a part even of the numerous Class Lodges which are to be found working under the authority of the Grand Lodge of England . Nearly every section of Modern Society has its own particular Lodge , known as such by a distinctive
name , or by the written or unwritten rules which govern its members , bnt in all of them the same system of Freemasonry is practised , the same principles are tanght , and the same Masonic rules are laid down for the guidance of the members , as is the case in Lodges which profess to be
of the most cosmopolitan character . We have Temperance Lodges , Dramatic Lodges , Jewish Lodges , and , indeed , as we have already said , every class of Lodge , but we have only one system of Freemasonry taught in them all , and that is entirely free from class distinction , no matter to
what extent the Lodge may be fettered , or what limits may be placed on its membership . Class distinction has really nothing Masonic about it , nor can it ever be introduced into true Freemasonry . Any hard and fast rules excluding" all but a certain section from any particular
Lodge , are , in our idea , unmasonic ; and we very much doubt whether they could be maintained on appeal . On the other hand there may not be anything to prevent the members of a Lodge agreeing among themselves that only a certain class of candidates shall be proposed , al
though we do not approve of even that distinction being enforced , as it not only narrows the ideas of the Lodge as a body , but also because the distinction which thus presents itself , and which really applies to the Lodge only , is very a pt to be vested with greater importance and made to appear as applying to Freemasonry at large .
We remember on the occasion of a visit to one of the socalled Jewish Lodges a remark being made by a Christian member that his friends bad told him he made a great mistake in
joining a Jewish Lodge , that he would never nae to any office in it , and that he would find himself out ot place . AH these forebodings the speaker proved to be incorrect , but the impression which resulted , not
Class Masonry.
only among many of the other members of the Lodge and the visitors , but also among the initiates of the day was anything but in accordance with the principles of the Craft . We were certainly very much surprised to hear the remarks which followed during the evening . Brethren
who had been many years members of the Order , some of whom had attained the highest rank their Lodges could bestow , failed to grasp the situation , or at least failed to express what to our mind was the only rational view of
the matter . They deprecated the remarks which had been made in the first place , they complained that anything like Jewish Freemasonry should be recognised , they considered that so unmasonic a title as " Jewish " should be at once
disassociated from Freemasonry , but not one oi them seemed to understand that the title Jewish applied to the Lodge only , and not to the Freemasonry taught ia it ; and it was not until the close of the evening , when the Treasurer was called upon to respond to the toast of his health
that anything like a correct view of the matter was given . By that time very many of those who had heard the preliminary remarks had left , and no doubt several of them went away with the idea that the Lodge they had attended was working in opposition to one of the grandest principles
of the Order . That instead of teaching universality , it was promulgating views which concerned a section of humanity only . Now what are really the facts of the case ? In England there are a few Lodges which are termed Jewish Lodges , but , as in all instances of class
nomenclature the distinction only applies to the Lodge , and not to the system of Freemasonry worked in it . Indeed , we may go further , for the distinction implied by this title does not even apply to the Lodges , bnt to the festivities which follow the several meetings . By their religious
teaching Jews are prohibited from partaking of meats killed or cooked in some of the methods customary in England , and to obviate any difficulty which might arise these Lodges have , for years past , had their banquets prepared under the direction of a Hebrew chef . The
difference at the table is so small that to the ordinary observer nothing unusual would be noticed , but to many Jews the neglect of snch an arrangement would mean their enforced absence from the periodical festivities . We believe this alone is the distinction attached to a " Jewish Lodge , " and
to shew that the distinction does not in any way affect the working of Freemasonry we believe there is not one of the so-called Jewish Lodges but has had , at one time or other , Masters who professed other than the Hebrew faith , and who have been recognised as in every respect
equal to those who did profess it . Thus then are we able to dispose of the distinctiveness of one of the sections of Class Masonry , and it wonld be equally easy to show how little other class titles have to do with the general plan of
Freemasonry were it not that we considered we have said enough on the subject to enable our readers to argue for themselves and decide how inconsistent it is to associate the distinctive features of Class Lodges with Masonry at large .
Having said thns much , to shew the error of the term " Class Masonry , " we shall conclude the subject with a few words as regards Class Lodges . We have written on this subject from time to time , as new Lodges have been formed
which at their start have laid down rules of exclusiveness or distinction which are uncommon , and , however much may be said in favour of this distinctiveness we think it is always best to let the rules which enforce it take the
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Class Masonry.
CLASS MASONRY .
AMONG the arguments nsed in favour of Freemasonry , both by those "who have undertaken to defend it from the attacks of its enemies , and by those who have desired to place its merits before the world at large , there is none to which greater weight has been attached than that of its Universality , It has always been argued that
men of every class , of every creed , and of every opinion ( alone excepting the Atheist ) , may claim its privileges , and that to one and all the same rights will be freely conceded . Freemasonry knows no distinction , provided a candidate comes duly recommended , and in this respect stands
almost if not quite alone among the many organizations of mankind . Not only is Freemasonry universal in theory , but we find that actual practice fully confirms the principle—men of every description have been admitted to a
participation in its mysteries , and are still to be found ranged nnder its banner , so tbat * we have the actual records both of the past and the present as witnesses that it is not universal in name alone . The term " Class
Masonry is really a misnomer , there is no snch thing as Class Masonry , nor can there be , for however much the class or character of a Lodge may be different from that of all others , the class distinction applies to the Lodge only , and not to Freemasonry as a whole , or to its members
individually . It is not necessary for ns to give a list here of a part even of the numerous Class Lodges which are to be found working under the authority of the Grand Lodge of England . Nearly every section of Modern Society has its own particular Lodge , known as such by a distinctive
name , or by the written or unwritten rules which govern its members , bnt in all of them the same system of Freemasonry is practised , the same principles are tanght , and the same Masonic rules are laid down for the guidance of the members , as is the case in Lodges which profess to be
of the most cosmopolitan character . We have Temperance Lodges , Dramatic Lodges , Jewish Lodges , and , indeed , as we have already said , every class of Lodge , but we have only one system of Freemasonry taught in them all , and that is entirely free from class distinction , no matter to
what extent the Lodge may be fettered , or what limits may be placed on its membership . Class distinction has really nothing Masonic about it , nor can it ever be introduced into true Freemasonry . Any hard and fast rules excluding" all but a certain section from any particular
Lodge , are , in our idea , unmasonic ; and we very much doubt whether they could be maintained on appeal . On the other hand there may not be anything to prevent the members of a Lodge agreeing among themselves that only a certain class of candidates shall be proposed , al
though we do not approve of even that distinction being enforced , as it not only narrows the ideas of the Lodge as a body , but also because the distinction which thus presents itself , and which really applies to the Lodge only , is very a pt to be vested with greater importance and made to appear as applying to Freemasonry at large .
We remember on the occasion of a visit to one of the socalled Jewish Lodges a remark being made by a Christian member that his friends bad told him he made a great mistake in
joining a Jewish Lodge , that he would never nae to any office in it , and that he would find himself out ot place . AH these forebodings the speaker proved to be incorrect , but the impression which resulted , not
Class Masonry.
only among many of the other members of the Lodge and the visitors , but also among the initiates of the day was anything but in accordance with the principles of the Craft . We were certainly very much surprised to hear the remarks which followed during the evening . Brethren
who had been many years members of the Order , some of whom had attained the highest rank their Lodges could bestow , failed to grasp the situation , or at least failed to express what to our mind was the only rational view of
the matter . They deprecated the remarks which had been made in the first place , they complained that anything like Jewish Freemasonry should be recognised , they considered that so unmasonic a title as " Jewish " should be at once
disassociated from Freemasonry , but not one oi them seemed to understand that the title Jewish applied to the Lodge only , and not to the Freemasonry taught ia it ; and it was not until the close of the evening , when the Treasurer was called upon to respond to the toast of his health
that anything like a correct view of the matter was given . By that time very many of those who had heard the preliminary remarks had left , and no doubt several of them went away with the idea that the Lodge they had attended was working in opposition to one of the grandest principles
of the Order . That instead of teaching universality , it was promulgating views which concerned a section of humanity only . Now what are really the facts of the case ? In England there are a few Lodges which are termed Jewish Lodges , but , as in all instances of class
nomenclature the distinction only applies to the Lodge , and not to the system of Freemasonry worked in it . Indeed , we may go further , for the distinction implied by this title does not even apply to the Lodges , bnt to the festivities which follow the several meetings . By their religious
teaching Jews are prohibited from partaking of meats killed or cooked in some of the methods customary in England , and to obviate any difficulty which might arise these Lodges have , for years past , had their banquets prepared under the direction of a Hebrew chef . The
difference at the table is so small that to the ordinary observer nothing unusual would be noticed , but to many Jews the neglect of snch an arrangement would mean their enforced absence from the periodical festivities . We believe this alone is the distinction attached to a " Jewish Lodge , " and
to shew that the distinction does not in any way affect the working of Freemasonry we believe there is not one of the so-called Jewish Lodges but has had , at one time or other , Masters who professed other than the Hebrew faith , and who have been recognised as in every respect
equal to those who did profess it . Thus then are we able to dispose of the distinctiveness of one of the sections of Class Masonry , and it wonld be equally easy to show how little other class titles have to do with the general plan of
Freemasonry were it not that we considered we have said enough on the subject to enable our readers to argue for themselves and decide how inconsistent it is to associate the distinctive features of Class Lodges with Masonry at large .
Having said thns much , to shew the error of the term " Class Masonry , " we shall conclude the subject with a few words as regards Class Lodges . We have written on this subject from time to time , as new Lodges have been formed
which at their start have laid down rules of exclusiveness or distinction which are uncommon , and , however much may be said in favour of this distinctiveness we think it is always best to let the rules which enforce it take the