WHAT MAKES YOU A MASON

-by- Wallace M. Gage

Grand Historian, Grand Lodge of Maine

Every Mason has heard that question - "What makes you

a Mason" - and had to answer it. It is, of course a part of

the catechism he has to learn, in some jurisdictions, for the

Entered Apprentice degree and others for the Master

Mason Degree.

The answer of course, is "My Obligation!"

This being the case, the Obligation is the thing that

separates the men from the boys, the wheat from the chaff,

and the Mason from the non-Mason. This being the case,

the Obligation has to be the most important part of the

conferral of the degrees, but unfortunately once it has been

given, all too often no more attention is given to it.

The purpose of this paper is to look at this Obligation of

ours that makes us Masons, and see where it came from,

trace its development, discover its meaning and its

application in present day society.

Some of our jurisdictions refer to our subject as an

"Obligation" while others call it an "Oath." Some use the

expression "Oath or Obligation." Is it one or the other, or

neither or both?

The Dictionary defines an "Oath" as a " solemn

affirmation or declaration made with an appeal to God...."

An "Obligation" is "a duty imposed, something one is bound

to do as a result of a contract, moral responsibility, promise,

etc."

All rituals use the expression "promise and swear." A

promise means to "engage in a pledge." To swear means to

"declare solemnly in the name of God."

Using these guidelines, we have to conclude that we have

an "Obligation" up to the point where "So help me, God" is

invoked.

Properly, therefore, our "Obligation" is really an "Oath."

Many of the critics of Masonry base their objections on

the "horrible oaths" they claim we require. A secondary

meaning of the word "oath" is "the irreverent or profane use

of the name of

God, a swear word, a curse." Therefore the word has

something of a negative inference, and Freemasonry has

generally chosen to refer to its vows as "Obligation," whether

correctly or not.

The root of the word "Obligation" is the same as that of

our word "ligament," meaning a cord or tendon by which

one thing is tied to another. Our Obligation is therefore a

pledge which ties a Mason to the Craft and ties himself to

the duties and responsibilities imposed by it.

Before looking into the background of the "Obligation,"

we have to touch briefly on various theories as to the origins

of the Craft.

The idea of descent of present day Freemasonry from

the operative builders of King Solomon's Temple, on which

our ritual is largely based, has long been discarded as pure

legend. The theory of evolutionary descent from the

operative stonemasons and cathedral builders of the middle

ages is the one generally accepted today, but it remains

largely unproven except in Scotland where there is evidence

to support it.

In recent years, other hypotheses have been advanced by

some Masonic scholars. One of these is that operative

masonry in England had little or no connection with the

speculative, and that the latter appeared as an entirely new

organization in the 17th century, formed by a group opposed

to the intolerance in the state politics and religion in

England, and who wanted to provide a common ground

where those of differing views might come together.

Another theory has it that our Speculative Craft is an

outgrowth of an organization created for charitable

purposes, to provide aid to sick and distressed members.

The adoption of operative builders' trappings only served as

camouflage to protect against interference by the State.

We have to emphasize that these are only theories, and

that we may never know which, if any, is the correct one.

The subject of this paper, "the Obligation," will be best

understood in relation to the operative/transition/speculative

theory, and we will therefore stick to this as the basis for

discussion.

With the formation of the first Grand Lodge in London

in 1717, it became necessary to establish a constitution and

to draft regulations for the government of the Craft, taking

into account the relationships between individual Masons

and their lodges, and the newly established Grand Lodge.

Up to this time, lodges had operated under the authority

of documents various1y called "Old Charges" "Manuscript

Constitutions" or "Gothic Constitutions." (Some 113 of these

are still in existence.) These manuscripts served as a sort of

Constitution/Charter/Ritual, evidently coming from a

common original document of unknown origin, although all

differ slightly from each other.

In order to establish guidelines for operation of a

centralized Craft, in 1721 Dr. James Anderson was directed

by the Grand Master to review these available copies of the

Charges and develop a common method of operation. The

result is "The Charges of A Freemason" found in Anderson's

Constitutions of 1723, the first and without doubt the most

influential Masonic book ever published.

As to the content of these Old Charges, they all begin

with a prayer, Christian in character, followed by a legendary

history of Masonry (and some of these were pretty far out),

then charges for moral conduct and trade practices to be

followed by Masters and Apprentices, and finally the oath to

keep them.

The oldest of these Old Charges is the Regius Manuscript

written about 1390. In it we find reference to an oath which

says:

And all these points here before

To them those must need be sworn,

And all shall swear the same oath

Of the Mason, be they leif, be they loath.

The basic laws of Freemasonry are the "Ancient

Landmarks", those fundamental principles which make

Masonry what it is. They are not subject to change, but are

very difficult to codify. As Bro. Robert Freke Gould wrote

facetiously, "Nobody knows what they comprise or omit;

They are of no earthly authority, because everything is a

Landmark when an opponent desires to silence you, but

nothing is a Landmark that stands in his own way."

Back in 1858, Bro, Albert G. Mackey undertook to draw

up a list of 25 Landmarks. Some Grand Lodges have

adopted Mackey's list, others have drawn up their own, and

others have steered clear of the matter altogether. A

definition of "Landmarks" which seems to be as satisfactory

as any, states that they are "Those time honored customs of

Freemasonry which have been the fundamental law of the

Fraternity from a period so remote that their origin cannot

be traced, and so essential that they cannot be modified

without changing the character of the Fraternity.

Most of the generally accepted "Landmarks" are included

in the Old Charges, either directly or indirectly, and the

~obligations in our rituals are taken almost entirely from

them as we'll see.

Speculative Masonry came to America from England,

Ireland and Scotland by way of settlers emigrating to this

country. When a number of these transplanted Masons got

together and decided to form a lodge, they had to rely on

their memories for the ritual used in their home lodges

which they might not have visited in many years. Nothing of

a ritualistic nature was ever written down in those days. It

isn't surprising that the rituals they came up with often bore

little resemblance to any of those used in the "Old Country."

The eventual result was that each of our 51 American

Grand Lodges now has its own standard ritual, nearly all

differing from each other.

Each of these Grand Lodges had a hard time

standardizing the ritual even in their own jurisdictions. At

one time a serious effort was made to develop and adopt a

common ritual to be used throughout the United States. The

so-called "Baltimore Convention" held in 1843 for this and

other purposes eventually broke up in bickering and

disagreement, although many of its recommendations on

other matters were eventually adopted by individual Grand

Lodges. Bro. Allen Roberts is the author of an interesting

Short Talk Bulletin published by the Masonic Service

Association in October 1986, describing the work of the

Convention.

We should note in passing that the obsession with letter

perfect delivery of a standard ritual is mainly found in

America. In England and Scotland there are many approved

workings, and each lodge is free to chose whichever one it

prefers to use.

For the purposes of this paper, we've chosen to use as

a base for consideration the ritual Obligation used in Maine,

a part of the "Norton" ritual adopted by the Grand Lodge in

1894. For comparison, we have taken the rituals of New

York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Scottish

"Standard" and English "Emulation" rituals. The review has

been restricted to the Master Mason's Obligation, as it is the

most important and comprehensive of the three.

This Obligation to be examined consists of ten sections -

an opening clause which we've called the "Preamble," eight

"Furthermores," of which four are positive and four negative,

and ending up with a concluding clause containing the

penalties and the oath.

Let's look at the "Preamble."

The first thing we find is the expression "free will and

accord." Just when this first came into use isn't known, but

it is obviously a product of Speculative rather than operative

masonry. In it we discover the origin of the practice followed

in varying degrees, of prohibiting solicitation of candidates.

The reference to "Almighty God" reflects the

requirement for a belief in a Supreme Being on the part of

the candidate. The Regius Manuscript of 1390 says: "That

who will know this craft and come to estate / He must love

well God and Holy Church always."

There are a good many thoughts as to the place of the

Saints John in Masonic ritual. The Saints are, of course,

Saint John the Baptist and Saint John the Evangelist. The

old operative gilds customarily adopted patron saints, and

Masons chose the Sts. John. This incidentally, is one of the

few Christian aspects remaining in our ritual after the

transition to a nondenominational basis was made in 1723.

The balance of the Preamble is a somewhat wordy

promise by the candidate not to reveal any of the secrets of

the degree to any one not entitled to them. Just what these

secrets are is subject to a wide variety of interpretations.

Secrecy was much overdone in earlier times. Today it's

generally considered to be the means of recognition, parts

of the ritualistic work, and matters that are just no one's

business but our own.

It seems to be human nature in our present day to

assume that anything kept secret must be sinister and that

it poses some kind of threat to those not in the know.

Because of it, Masonry has been accused of plotting world

domination, seeking to overthrow the church, of trying to

gain political or business advantages for its members and all

sorts of evil designs against the welfare of society.

In any family, business and other organization there are

private matters of no one else's concern. It's ironic that the

Roman Catholic Church, one of Masonry's severest critics,

has many secrets which are not divulged to the outside

world, including those of its many Orders and the Knights of

Columbus.

One of the crosses we have to bear today is the term

"secret society" formerly accepted as describing the Craft. In

earlier times it was a fairly innocuous expression seldom

arousing the suspicions we encounter today. Today's proper

term would be "a society with secrets" which better describes

the Craft.

It's interesting to recall the detailed prohibitions in the

Entered Apprentice degree - not to "write, print, paint, cut,

etc." The earliest reference to this is found in the Edinburgh

Manuscript of 1696 in which it says: "...you shall not reveal

any pairt of what you shall hear or see at this time whether

by word or write nor put it in write at any time nor draw it

with the point of a sword, or any other instrument upon the

snow or sand...."

We now come to the first of the "Furthermores" as it

appears in the Maine and Massachusetts rituals. [Portions

were not written, but were covered verbally briefly.]

The sources of Masonic laws are:

1. The Ancient Landmarks

2. The Old Charges

3. Constitutions

4, Regulations

5. Edicts

6. Customs and Usages

and of course, the by-laws of individual lodges which are a

part of Masonic law to its own members. These are the

"laws, rules and regulations" referred to in the Obligation.

Some other Grand Lodges have chosen to elaborate a bit

by adding references to Grand Lodge Constitutions, Laws

and Regulations, and one specifically mentions the by-laws

of any lodge of which the candidate may hereafter become

a member.

With regard to lodge by-laws, we might suggest in

passing that it wouldn't be a bad idea to remind our newly

raised Brethren to observe that part of the by-laws that

specify the dues and time of payment. This might possibly

reduce the number of suspensions for non-payment of dues.

All of the rituals consulted end with the spoiler "so far as

the same shall come to my knowledge." In our system of civil

law, ignorance of the law is no excuse for its violation. Try

explaining to the traffic officer that you didn't know the

speed limit in the location where you were pulled over and

see how far you get.

This particular escape clause certainly takes away a good

deal of the incentive for learning anything much about

Masonic law, and serves as a ready excuse for violation of

almost any of them. At his installation in office, the Master

of a lodge is presented with the Book of Constitutions and

told to "cause it to be read in your lodge that none may

pretend ignorance if its requirements." In practice, however,

this is seldom done. The result is that very few Masons know

much about Masonic law, and fewer put it into practice.

Bro. Wallace McLeod in his Prestonian Lecture for 1986,

"The Old Charges," has reconstructed and homogenized the

many existing variations of these Old Charges and arrived at

a reconstructed "Standard Original" with an assumed date

somewhere between 1470 and 1560. In it we see the origin

of this "Furthermore" appearing in our present day ritual.

With the candidate's hand on the "Book" (Bible) the charges

are then read to him: "These be the charges in general that

every Mason should hold, both Masters and Fellows..."

(Some 19 charges are then read to him, some having to

do with operative working conditions and others with morals

and conduct.)

And after this, the Oath:

These charges that we have rehearsed, and

all other that belong to Masonry ye shall

keep, so help you God and Haledom [Holy

doom] and by this Book to your power.

Amen

The second "Furthermore" has to do with the definition

of "signs and summonses" and the meaning of "cabletow."

The trestleboard or newsletter is a good example of a

"sign" in the present day meaning of the term - a notice or

report of lodge meetings and programs sent out for the

information of its members. Presumably it also includes the

so-called Grand Hailing Sign of Distress.

On the other hand, a "summons" is of more importance

than the lodge bulletin, and is used where matters of

urgency are involved. The Grand Lodge of Maine defines a

"summons" as "An imperative injunction to appear at a

communication of the lodge or to attend the Grand Lodge

or Grand Master." It is a request for your presence issued

only on occasions of great importance.

This emphasis on attendance goes back to the Regius

Manuscript of 1390, which says:

...that every Master that is a mason

Must be the general congregation,

So that he it reasonably be told

Where that the assembly shall be held,

And to that assembly he must needs go,

Unless he have a reasonable excuse.

In present day use, the wording in the Scottish ritual is

more descriptive, reading:--

to answer and obey all lawful signs and

summonses sent to me from a MMs lodge

if within the length of my c...t... and to

plead no excuse save that of sickness or the

pressing emergency of my own public or

private avocations.

The word "cable" is a marine term referring to a ship's

hawser. It is also a measure of length, being 100 fathoms

(600 feet). A hawser being often used for towing, evidently

coined the phrase "Cabletow." An expos‚ published in

England in 1762 carries a footnote which says: "A cabletow

is three miles in length, so that if a Fellowcraft is that

distance from his lodge, he is not culpable on account of

non-attendance." In other Old Charges the distance is given

as 50 miles.

The present day meaning of the term is given by Coil in

his Masonic Encyclopedia: "In Masonry it is purely symbolic

and means the scope of a man's reasonable ability, as

decided by the Baltimore Convention of 1843."

And now for "Furthermore" Number three:- Help, aid

and assist are references to "Relief," one of the tenets of

Freemasonry along with Brotherly Love and Truth, which go

back to the earliest records, the Regius Manuscript, where we

find an admonition to the operative mason to help a Brother

who is doing his work improperly:-

A mason if he this craft well know

That seeth his fellow hew-on a stone

And is in point to spoil that stone

Amend it soon if that thou can

And teach him it to amend

That the lord's work be not spoiled.~ ~

In many places in the Old Charges we find references to

extending help to the needy operative Brother. In McLeod's

reconstructed Standard Original, it notes:-

...every mason shall receive and cherish

strange fellows when they come over the

country, and set them to work.;.and give

him his pay, and if he have no stone (work

for him, he shall refresh him with money to

the next lodge.

An additional reference to relief to a distressed Brother

is found in Three Distinct Knocks an expos‚ published in

1769. The obligation of a Master Mason stating:-

"I will also serve a Brother as far as lies in

my power without being detrimental to

myself and family.

What about the present day interpretation of this

section? One of the main criticisms directed at Freemasonry

is that it supposedly teaches that Masons are to favor each

other over non-Masons in business, politics and other

situations. Stephen Knight in his book The Brotherhood,

which recently stirred up some latent hostility toward

Masonry in England, makes a great to-do about favoritism

in the British police, especially Scotland Yard. He infers, as

do many of those opposed to Masonry, that whenever

management includes Masons, promotions from below are

almost invariably made because of Masonic membership

rather than by reason of ability.

It can't be denied that favoritism does occur occasionally,

but it isn't the intention that it be so. It is intended to apply

to those in distress, whether Masons or not. This is

emphasized in the Charge at the closing of a lodge (not used

often enough today), which says:- "Every human being has

a claim on your kind offices. Do good unto all...." (Taken

from Galatians 6:10)

Just a word before moving along. In earlier days, there

used to be frequent reports of "mendicants" claiming to be

Masons without funds or otherwise in distress and seeking

money. Once again in the last several months we've received

notices from our Grand Lodge warning that this is

happening again and cautioning Masons to be on guard lest

they be taken in - hence the need for "finding them worthy"

before giving aid.

Now the last of the positive "Furthermores," and one

poorly worded and often misunderstood. This brief section

does not mean what it says, nor did it ever, although similar

wording is found as far back as 1760 where it appears in

Three Distinct Knocks a British expos‚.

It has given rise to another criticism of Freemasonry, that

Masons consider themselves above the law, and are bound

to protect each other under all circumstances except in those

specified. Again, going back to the 1390 Regius Manuscript:-

He must steadfast be and true also

To all this ordinances wheresoever he go,

And to his leige lord the king,

To be true to him over all things.

The same idea is expressed in many of the Old Charges,

and as Josiah H. Drummond, a noted Masonic jurist put it:

"The laws of Masonry are subordinate to the civil law.

Whenever one's duties as a Mason conflict with his duties as

a citizen, the-latter are paramount and the former must

yield."

The Scottish "Standard" and English "Emulation" rituals

are much clearer in presenting the point when they state

"...murder, treason, felony and all other offenses contrary to

the laws of God and the ordinances of the realm being at all

times excepted..." And finally, the Old Charges emphasize

that "A Mason is to be a peaceable subject to the civil

powers wherever he resides or works, and is never to be

concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and

welfare of the nation..."

This fifth of the "Furthermores" is the first of the

negatives - the "Thou shalt not's:" This is one of the most

non-controversial of the candidate's obligations. It goes back

to the Regius Manuscript's admonition: "There shall no

master supplant another, and The Master Mason must be

full securely... and pay thy fellows.... And pay them truly

what they may deserve."

In another of the Old Charges we find a form of the

Golden Rule: "And also ye shall be true one to another, that

is to say, to every Master and Fellow of the Craft of

Masonry that be Masons allowed, ye shall do to them as ye

would they should do to you."

Some Grand Lodges have today expanded the wording

of their rituals to include the duty of preventing harm to

come to a Brother, if in the candidate's power to prevent it,

and to refrain from speaking evil behind his back. This is

also found in the Old Charges stated: "And also that no

fellow slander another behind his back to make him lose his

good name or his worldly goods."

While the meaning of this "Furthermore" is straight

forward and clear, the next one has a number of obscure

points.

The sixth "Furthermore": In the operative stages of the

Craft we find a lack of references to women, although we do

hear of a few women being members of the London

Company of Freemasons as early as 1663, although this was

a guild rather than a working lodge. We also find that a

woman was apprenticed to a Master Mason from about

1713-14. In general though, this didn't present a problem in

the operative days as few had the desire or the upper body

strength to do the hard, physical labor of a stonemason.

By the time speculative masonry had taken over,

however, we find in Anderson's Constitutions one of the

Charges stating that "The persons admitted members of a

lodge must be good and true, free born, and of mature and

discreet age, no bondsmen, no women, no immoral or

scandelous men, but of good report."

The American courts have always upheld the right of

private associations to prescribe their own rules regarding

membership as a fundamental Constitutional right. In recent

years, however, they have narrowed the type of Organization

given that right. Private clubs have been allowed to set these

qualifications, but for example, the Jaycees were recently

ordered by the courts to accept women members as the

Jaycees didn't qualify as a private club. Other similar groups

have recently received the same treatment.

Masonry has been permitted to follow its traditional laws

and regulations in this regard, but there is no assurance it

won't have to defend itself in the future against attacks from

the radical wing of the women's rights movement. In

addition to membership questions, those organizations

excluding women could possibly lose tax exemptions.

Obviously should the courts ever require Freemasonry to

admit women, it would require Masons to either violate their

solemn obligations or terminate their membership, thus

bringing an end to Freemasonry.

Others disqualified are those who from age or mental

condition or lack of good morals would neither benefit from

nor contribute to the Craft, and, of course an atheist.

Seldom heard today but formerly emphasized when the craft

was in its operative phase, was the attention placed on

physical fitness and the ban on those with deformities or

disabilities.

The Regius Manuscript notes:

...to the Craft it were great shame

To make a halt man and a lame,

For an imperfect man of much blood

Should do the Craft but little good

A maimed man he hath no might.

Up until fairly recent times, one having lost an arm or

leg or otherwise disabled would have been barred from

membership under what was then called the "Doctrine of

the Perfect Youth." One Grand Lodge at least has even now

a ban in its Obligation on those who are "unable to earn a

livelihood or do the work of a Mason." This is now generally

interpreted to mean the work of a Speculative Mason where

the necessary qualifications are mental and moral, rather

than physical, as was the case with the operative.

Another subject not even covered specifically in the

Obligation is the matter of race. This is apparently under

control at present, and many American Grand Lodges have

declared that race is not a bar to membership. It is possible,

however, that action by individuals could cause trouble in

the future.

We understand that the Grand Master of Virginia

recently overruled a ballot involving racial discrimination.

And the Grand Lodge of New Jersey and a Shrine Temple

there are involved in counter law Suits over the refusal of

the Shrine Temple to accept black members of a New

Jersey lodge to membership or accept their petitions. The

recent recognition of Prince Hall Grand Lodge by the Grand

Lodge of Connecticut is also a case which bears watching.

The Grand Lodge of Louisiana has severed relations with

Connecticut because of it.

The next-to-last "Furthermore" is one that seems to be

bucking a head tide in our American society. To show the

antiquity of this subject, the following is quoted from the

Regius Manuscript:

Thou shalt not by thy Master's wife lie,

Nor by thy fellow's in no manner wise,

Lest the Craft would thee despise

Nor by thy fellow's concubine

No more thou wouldst he did by thine.

Of course this first part of this section of the Obligation

is an adaptation of one of the Ten Commandments, "Thou

shalt not commit Adultery," which is about as basic as we

can get for authority. The Old Charges generally contain a

clause on this general subject, with the wording varying

somewhat. For example: the Harleian Manuscript puts it as

noted:

You shall not take your neighbor's wife

villainously, Nor his daughter nor his maid

to use ungodly, and you shall not carnally lie

with any woman belonging to the house

wherein you are at table.

This latter evidently refers to the custom where the

apprentices often boarded at the house of their master and

lived in close proximity with his family.

The addition of "Mother" seems to have been of more

recent origin as it doesn't appear in any of the Old Charges

nor in the English or Scottish present day rituals.

Looking down the road, we expect our Obligations to be

taken seriously by the candidate, and for him to consider it

to be binding on him. Yet aside from the reference to the

first of those listed, this "Furthermore" is coming more and

more in conflict with the direction our society is traveling.

Since the advent of the "pill" and the resultant sexual

revolution, the rules of the game have changed radically.

Most of us grew up in times when the male was supposed to

be the aggressor and the female the passive party. Studies

published in recent years have indicated that this was pretty

much what society expected, but that actually the female

drive is likely to be as strong as the male's. In present day

encounters she is often the aggressor.

It's quite common today for men and women to live

together without benefit of clergy, pre-marital sex seems to

be the norm, illegitimate births to teen-age mothers are

increasing; single parent families are common, and public

figures seem to have little regard for the examples they set

for the young. These, together with television's obsession

with sexual themes, the young candidate for Masonry will

have acquired entirely different values than the older

generation.

It seems quite likely even today, that anyone trying to

exercise his "power to prevent" would be told in no

uncertain terms by both parties involved to "butt out and

mind your own business."

Freemasonry already shows the effects of these changing

values. Checking over the list of trials conducted for un-

Masonic conduct in one Grand Lodge jurisdiction there was

one expulsion in 1981 for drug trafficking. In 1982 there was

one for a sexual offense, and by 1987 there were thirteen

expulsions, nine for sexual crimes.

The situation is obviously beyond our ability to do much

about, but it's not going away soon, and we have to face up

to the Obligations we impose if they aren't going to be

ignored altogether.

The final "Furthermore" is another in which the origin is

somewhat obscure, but references to it are quite common in

the later versions of the Old Charges.

The earliest mention of the "Mason's Word" indicates a

Scottish origin, and goes back to 1638. It was obviously

connected with operative masonry. A letter written from

Scotland describes it as "A secret signal masons have

throughout the world to know one another by."

The Edinburgh House Register Manuscript of 1696 tells

how the "Word" is communicated and describes the five

points as "foot to foot, knee to knee, heart to heart, hand to

hand and ear to ear."

The Sloane Manuscript of about 1700 is an English copy

of the Old Charges has another version of the mason's oath,

giving the word which goes with the Five Points of

Fellowship. Harry Carr in his Six Hundred Years of Craft

Ritual gives it as quite similar to the one we're familiar with

today.

It's interesting to find that in the Scottish and English

rituals reviewed the FPOF have a major part in the

Obligation. They include: "I furthermore solemnly pledge

myself to maintain and uphold the FPOF in act as well as in

word, etc, etc."

And now we come to the wrap-up, the concluding

paragraph in which the candidate binds himself to uphold

everything preceding it, under penalties which have become

a principal target of Freemasonry's critics. So much has been

said on the subject in recent years that it's not necessary to

go into any great detail here.

-CONCLUSIONIn

the earliest of the Old Charges there were no physical

penalties for violation of the oath, but one of 1696 has a

theme of secrecy "By God Himself and you shall answer to

God when you shall stand naked before Him at the great

day, you shall not reveal any part,... and ends with "So help

me God."

The first of the physical penalties appearing in the Old

Charges will be familiar, "Under no less pain than having my

tongue cut out under my chin and of being buried within the

flood mark where no man shall know...."

The penalties and the Obligations were increased over

the years as the second and third degrees were added to the

ceremonies of the Craft, and the ritual expanded

accordingly.

The penalties as they exist now are actually meaningless

for all practical purposes. Bro. Henry Coil in his Masonic

Encyclopedia expresses it quite well when he writes:

The penalties enacted by any Masonic

body or authority or under Masonic law are

reprimand, suspension or expulsion. Why

then do Grand Lodges continue to use the

forms which have given the enemies of

Freemasonry such excellent grounds for

denunciation? The excuse is generally given

that the penalties have always existed and

no change can be made to them.

There appeared in the 1964 Ars Quatuor Coronatum a

paper by Bro. J.R.Rylands entitled "The Masonic Penalties,"

in which he propounded the theory that the physical

penalties were a product of Speculative Masonry, and that

they were made especially severe to protect the charity

funds. His point was that one who could prove himself a

Mason had a claim on the charity of private lodges and on

the Grand Lodge. The problem was with the large number

of impostors draining the resources of the lodges and Grand

Lodge. It's an interesting theory!

Bro. Harry Mendoza writes in the 1987 AQC a review of

the subject of penalties. In 1964, the matter was brought

before the United Grand Lodge of England, and it was

pointed out that the candidate was assured before taking the

Obligation, that there was nothing incompatible with his

civil, moral or religious duties. He is then asked to repeat an

Obligation which contains statements about physical

penalties which would seem to be incompatible with those

duties. All this while his hand is on the Volume of Sacred

Law. He has no prior knowledge of what he would be asked

to say, phrases that never have been and which never could

be enforced, and to make matters worse, he is asked to

invoke the help of God!

After much discussion, an amended section to the ritual

involving the penalties was drafted, to be used at the option

of the individual lodges.

It seems to be natural for Masons to be averse to any

change in anything, and there was widespread reluctance on

the part of many Lodges to adopt the optional clause, so in

1986 it was made mandatory. The change involved removing

the penalties from the Obligation and placing them

elsewhere in the ritual. Retention of the penalties was, of

course, necessary due to their relation to the signs. Scotland,

Ireland and the Supreme Royal Arch Chapter have made

similar moves, and a number of American Grand Lodges are

reviewing the matter and are considering removing the

penalties from the Obligation or adding explanatory wording

to indicate they are symbolic only. Maine is to vote on an

explanatory section to be given by the Junior Deacon in the

Preparation Room before the candidate is received into the

Lodge.

Bro. Mendoza in his article summarizes the objections

raised to any change. They are, briefly:

ANTIQUITY: The "We've always done it this way - what

was good enough for my grandfather is good enough for

me!"

CONSTITUTIONALITY: Innovations can't be made.

(See Charge to the Master at his installation.)

GENERAL: Not many find the penalties objectionable -

Once we start, there'll be no end to changes - Why should

we make changes simply because of outsiders?

As commentary, we'd like to add our own thoughts to

the foregoing:

ANTIQUITY: We hope this paper has disproved that

"we've always done it this way." There were no penalties at

all up until fairly recently.

The changes do not do away with anything, but merely

move the penalties from the Obligation to another section

of the ritual.

CONSTITUTIONALITY: To the statement that

innovations can't be made in the ritual, changes have been

made frequently. The ritual for Maine wasn't adopted until

1894, and several changes have been made since that time.

GENERAL: To answer those who say that not many find

them objectionable, we might ask how many of the

numerous EAs who never advance may be doing so for this

reason.

Changes are considered only for good and sufficient

reasons.

Changes are not considered just because someone else

does something differently, or because outsiders criticize us

for something or other.

Masonry doesn't claim to have a monopoly on wisdom.

It's possible that our critics just might have a valid point. It's

certainly worth examining. If it isn't well taken, then we

reject it.

As a final thought, we should care what outsiders think

of Freemasonry! Every one of our future candidates is now

an outsider. If the Craft acquires a bad name in society,

these potential candidates will stay away in droves and it will

be only a matter of time until we go the way of the many

fraternal organizations that are now long forgotten.

So, I hope this will help a bit to add some insight into

the background, application and importance of the answer

to that question -

What Makes You a Mason? - Your Obligation, that's

what!

BIBLIOGRAPHY

VIBERT, Lionel; DEVELOPMENT OF THE

TRIGRADAL SYSTEM, Prestonian Lecture - 1925

POOLE, Rev. H.; THE OLD CHARGES - 18th

CENTURY MASONRY, Prestonian Lecture - 1933

KNOOP, Douglas; THE MASON WORD, Prestonian

Lecture -1938

HAUNCH, T. 0.; IT IS NOT IN THE POWER OF ANY

MASON, Prestonian Lecture - 1972

UYER, C.F.W.; IN SEARCH OF RITUAL UNIFORMITY,

Prestonian Lecture - 1973

McLEOD, WALLACE; THE OLD CHARGES, Prestonian

Lecture - 1986

JACKSON, A.C.F.; OUR PREDECESSORS, THE

MEDIEVAL MASONS OF THE REGIUS MANUSCRIPT,

AQC - 1975

JACKSON, A.C.F.; OUR PREDECESSORS, THE

ENGLISH NON-OPERATIVE MASONS OF THE MID

17th CENTURY, AQC - 1976

RYLANDS, J, R.; THE MASONIC PENALTIES, AQC -

1964

CARR, HARRY; THE OBLIGATION AND ITS PLACE

IN THE RITUAL, AQC - 1961

MENDOZA, HARRY; THE TRANSFER OF THE

PHYSICAL PENALTIES FROM THE OBLIGATION,

AQC - 1987

DRAFFEN, GEORGE; OUR RITUAL, A STUDY IN ITS

DEVELOPMENT, "MASONS AND MASONRY"

CARR, HARRY; HARRY CARR'S WORLD OF

FREEMASONRY

CONDER, EDWARD; RECORDS OF THE HOLE

CRAFT AND FELLOWSHIP OF MASONS, Masonic Book

Club No. 19

WELLS, ROY; THE RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF

ORGANIZED FREEMASONRY, Masonic Book Club No.

17

ANDERSON, JAMES; ANDERSON'S CONSTlTUTIONS,

1723 and 1738, Facsimile Edition, Quatuor Coronati Lodge

PRITCHARD, SAMUEL; MASONRY DISSECTED,

Masonic Book Club, No. 8

CARR, HARRY; 600 YEARS OF CRAFT RITUAL,

Grand Lodge of Missouri

ROBERTS, ALLEN E.; THE CONVENTION THAT

CHANGED THE FACE OF FREEMASONRY, Masonic

Service Assoc., STB

ALDRIDGE K.W.; ANCIENT SYMBOLIC PENALTIES,

Masonic Service Association, Short Talk Bulletin

PICK AND KNIGHT; THE POCKET HISTORY OF

FREEMASONRY

KNOOP AND JONES; AN INTRODUCTION TO

FREEMASONRY

CLAUDY, CARL H.; INTRODUCTION TO

FREEMASONRY

MacBRIDE, A.S.; SPECULATIVE FREEMASONRY

KNOOP AND JONES; A SHORT HISTORY OF

FREEMASONRY TO 1730

HIGHAM, M.B.S.; FREEMASONRY - FROM CRAFT

TO TOLERANCE, Grand Lodge of Scotland Year Book

1987

DRAFFEN, GEORGE; THE MAKING OF A MASON

CERZA, ALPHONSE; THE COURTS AND

FREEMASOkRY

HAMILL, JOHN; THE CRAFT - A HISTORY OF

ENGLISH FREEMASONRY

CARR, HARRY; THE FREEMASON AT WORK

JONES, BERNARD E.; FREEMASON'S GUIDE AND

COMPENDIUM

SHEPARD, SILAS H.; THE LANDMARKS OF

FREEMASONRY, Little Masonic Library Vol. 1

DRUMMOND, JOSIAH H.; SOURCES OF MASONIC

LAW, Maine Masonic Text Book

CARR, HARRY; THE EARLY FRENCH EXPOSURES

JACKSON, A.C.F.; EARLY ENGLISH EXBOSURES

1760-1769

KNOOP AND JONES; THE GENESIS OF

FREEMASONRY

KNOOP, JONES AND HAMER; THE EARLY MASONIC

CATECHISMS

COIL, HENRY W.; COIL'S MASONIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

HARRIS, RAY B.; THE WILLIAM L. BOYDEN

MANUSCRIPT, Masonic Service Association

LOCKWOOD, LUKE A.; MASONIC LAW AND

PRACTICE

KNIGHT, STEPHEN; THE BROTHERHOOD

CARTWRIGHT, E.H.; A COMMENTARY ON THE

FREEMASONIC RITUAL

COIL, HENRY W.; FREEMASONRY THROUGH SIX

CENTURIES Vol. 1

BATHAM, CYRIL H.; THE BIRTH OF SPECULATIVE

FREEMASONRY, The Maine Lodge of Research 1986-7

GOULD, ROBERT F.; THE OLD CHARGES OF

BRITISH FREEMASONS, Gould's History Of Freemasonry

Vol. I

GOULD, ROBERT F.; THE STATUTES RELATING TO

THE FREEMASONS, Gould's History of Freemasonry Vol.

I

MACKEY, ALBERT G.; JURISPRUDENCE OF

FREEMASONRY

THE REGIUS POEM, Masonic Book Club Vol. 1

TRESTLEBOARD Masonic Book Club Vol. 8

THREE DISTINCT KNOCKS AND JACHIN AND

BOAZ Masonic Book Club Vol. 12

DUNCAN's RITUAL OF FREEMASONRY

OFFICIAL CYPHER Grand Lodge of Maine

ANCIENT CRAFT MASONRY, Grand Lodge of New

York Standard Work and Lectures

MNEMONICS, Grand Lodge of Connecticut

RITUAL CIPHER, Grand Lodge of New Jersey

THE STANDARD RITUAL OF SCOTTISH

FREEMASONRY, Grand Lodge of Scotland

OFFICIAL CIPHER, Grand Lodge of Masons in