Posts
The new issue of Philalethes (Vol. 78, No. 2 for those keeping count) is reaching mailboxes. It’s a good one! The three feature articles cover architecture, philosophy, and the term “free-born,” respectively.
I began my reading with that last one. W. Bro. Matthew Parker, of Craftsmen Lodge 314 in Nebraska, does us the service of clarifying a modern misconception concerning what it means to be “free-born.” Perhaps it’s a moot point now that nearly all of the fifty-one grand lodges (fifty states plus the District of Columbia) have established relations with Prince Hall Affiliated Masonry but, in the not distant past, a dishonest notion of being free-born kept black men from our lodges. The gist of it was neither a slave nor a descendant of a slave is free-born, and therefore is incapable of coming of his own free will, and ultimately is ineligible for the mysteries of Freemasonry. That actually persisted until recent decades.
Bro. Parker begins at the beginning, noting how the Halliwell (a.k.a. Regius) Manuscript from the 1400s introduces to the Masonic mind the condition of being free-born. It’s not philosophical, but is more of a practical way to run your business. That is, don’t apprentice someone who isn’t free because his owner might turn up at any time and drag him home. The idea was preserved in Anderson’s Constitutions, at which time the Trans-Atlantic slave trade thrived, and it lives in the verbiage we use in our lodges today.
But what is its value in these modern times? Parker says:
Why is it that the initiate (and indeed then the Apprentice and Fellow Craft as well) are esoterically asked as to their qualifications and birth status at each step, but are only exoterically asked once whether they’re doing so to gain anything? A man may become less worthy and well qualified as time passes, and his motives may certainly change, yet the answer to the question of being free-born is the only one that presumably cannot change between the degrees. We must consider that what we are asking—what we have always been asking—when we are asking if someone is free-born in our ritual is whether or not their motives remain pure. Our degrees are an initiatory experience, understood to philosophically reflect upon a man’s journey from life to death. We ask them before they are reborn not as a candidate but as a brother both esoterically and exoterically if they are seeking this rebirth for the correct reasons—whether they are controlled by another or are seeking only the mundane gains of the physical world.
W. Bro. Patrick Dey, of Nevada Lodge 4 in Colorado, looks into “The Primitive Hut: Architectural Theory in the Masonic Lectures.” In this essay, Bro. Dey quotes that line from the Middle Chamber Lecture (sorry, Pennsylvanians, but you’re not acquainted with this) about man first contriving shelter from inclemencies. This rude habitat sparked what became architecture. Dey’s point is this idea from the lecture originates in Marc-Antoine Laugier’s Essay on Architecture from 1753. Excerpted:
He begins [the Essay] with a romance on how all arts, and in particular architecture, are originally inspired by nature, and the original precedent always dictates what is good and right. He then examines a primitive man “without any aid or guidance other than his natural instincts” — a character that resembled Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Émile, which is a clear opposition to the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes. (In general, the primitive hut as thought experiment is in opposition to Hobbesian philosophy). This “noble savage” first rests on a grassy bank beside a stream, which is at first comfortable until the noonday sun becomes too hot for him and he seeks shelter from the sun. He then finds shelter in the shade of a nearby forest and is then content until it begins to rain. Next, he seeks refuge from the storm in a cave, but this too proves uncomfortable owing to its darkness and foul air. Now fed up: “He . . . is resolved to make good by his ingenuity the careless neglect of nature. He wants to make himself a dwelling that protects but does not bury him. Some fallen branches in the forest are right material for his purpose; he chooses four of the strongest, raises them upright and arranged them in a square; across their top he lays four other branches; on these he hoists from two sides yet another row of branches which, inclining towards each other, meet at the highest point. He then covers this kind of roof with leaves so closely packed that neither sun nor rain can penetrate. Thus man is housed. [...] Such is the course of simple nature; by imitating the natural process, art was born. All the splendors of architecture ever conceived have been modeled on the little rustic hut I have just described.”
In conclusion, Dey says: “Though Masonry takes ‘first principle’ architecture from the Bible as its forms for the Lodge (the Temple or Tabernacle), the adoption of Laugier’s narrative in the Masonic lecture system endows the primitive hut as another form of ‘first principles’ in Masonry.”
Bro. Kyle Gamache, of Harmony Lodge 9 in Rhode Island, gives us “The Unity of Knowledge: Exploring Consilience in the Context of Masonic Philosophy.” He, inspired by Edward O. Wilson’s The Unity of Knowledge, a treatise that “describes consilience as the synthesis of knowledge,” wants us to see how Masonic thought is one system of organizing human knowledge “to connect with a universal truth about our world.” The Liberal Arts and Sciences are our guide into this process. Maybe you, like me, see it similarly, but didn’t know it had a name.
There is more to this issue of Philalethes, of course. A fitting tribute to the late Dick Fletcher, a review of Chris Ruli’s Brother Lafayette, and a notice encouraging us to seek the Early Texts of Freemasonry Seminar Series flesh out these pages.
In local matters, I remain interested in reviving Knickerbocker Chapter, the Philalethes Society’s New York City guild that went dormant years ago. Sorry to say I have been unsuccessful in finding another Mason who thinks this is a good idea, but a new opportunity has come up: Grand Lodge is compiling a directory of Masonic clubs.
 |
| Grand Lodge of New York |
Although Knickerbocker is theoretical, I’ll submit an entry with the hope that others will see it and want to be involved. It is not necessary to be a member of the Philalethes Society to take part in this chapter. We’ll see how it goes.
