The old Stone Store at Kerikeri, at which Lodge Kerikeri, No. 402, now meets.
THE OLD STONE STORE, KERIKERI
The "Stone Store", Kerikeri, was erected in 1833 as part of the Mission Station. The "Stone Store" was built
of Sydney sandstone to withstand fire and hostile attack.
In the troubled days of the 1840's, Bishop Selwyn kept his library in an upstairs room for safety and quite
cheerfully walked the 10 miles from his Waimate residence to consult it. Today the upstairs room is used as
a lodge-room by Lodge Kerikeri, No. 402.
Lodge Kerikeri, was constituted and dedicated on Monday, 28th October, 1957, at the Memorial Hall,
Kerikeri, by the late M.W. Bro. E. 0. Faber, G.M., with 27 attendant Grand Lodge Officers.
The first Master, Alexander Riddell, P.M., was installed and the officers of the Lodge appointed and
invested, the Senior Warden being Bro. N. R. Brady and the Junior Warden, Bro. W. T. Gravenson. There
were 30 founder members.
The occasion provided the largest Masonic meeting ever held in Northland, there being more than 200
brethren present.
Today Lodge Kerikeri has a membership of 63.
THE
NEW ZEALAND FREEMASON
Official Organ of
The Grand Lodge of Antient, Free and Accepted Masons of New Zealand, Vol. 1, No, 2. May, 1973.
THE VALUE OF FREEMASONRY
Some thirty years ago 1 remember a discussion in the refectory that arose from a question by a brother of
some years' standing but who was not a very regular attendee at Lodge. He asked, "Why doesn't
Freemasonry get stuck into some active charitable work or work with a public purpose in the way that the
Rotary movement does?" It became obvious then that he had missed the whole function of the Craft although
he had been a member for some years and was a man who occupied a fairly responsible position in business.
He was answered by R.W. Bro. Professor Barney Murphy who, of course, was always a delight to listen to
and moreover was a great Masonic scholar. Bro. Murphy pointed out what nearly all Masons of any
experience know that the type of activity suggested while it might be admirable per se was not likely to do
good and might even do harm. Barney said, "I hear brothers sometimes say 'I am not a churchman. Masonry
is my religion', which, of course, is quite wrong. The great thing about Freemasonry is that it is not a
religion. In its ranks are to be found all manner of people with widely differing beliefs. In a Lodge in India it
is not uncommon to find half a dozen pedestals open to display the Volumes of the Sacred Law of the
different sects represented in the Lodge. This underlines one of the great teachings of the Craft — tolerance.
There is always a temptation for organisations which adopt a cause to become more or less intolerant or
partial. The point about our teachings is that they should lead us of our own initiative to support worthy
causes. The Professor pointed out that when he was younger there was no such thing as a Public Questions
Committee of a church. The Christian belief at that time was that it was the job of the church to make its
members better people and they in turn would take action as private citizens to assist worthy causes. That
really is the aim of Freemasonry: to make us as individuals better citizens — to make us aware of high
standards of thought and deed and to help us achieve them.
If each of us were actively to carry out the teachings of the Order, Freemasonry would become a tremendous
power in the land working unseen and unknown to the people as a whole and even to Freemasons
themselves. But the result would be apparent in better standards of behaviour arising from positive action
and participation in community affairs by each of us as an individual. We can take our Order into the life of
the country very easily — if we try. You agree to promote the general good of society, to cultivate the social
virtues and to propogate the knowledge of the mystic art as far as your influence and ability can extend.
"Propagate the knowledge" can be read two ways. I have always interpreted this as the propagation of the
Masonic attitude of life. It is useful when one is viewing "public questions".
The Charge after Initiation and the Working Tools of the Second Degree are the two passages of our ritual
that really convey the message of the Craft. I sometimes wish that in the refectory after each Degree, some
senior member of the Lodge were called upon to draw the attention of the candidate to the importance of the
charge in each case. In fact it might not be a bad idea for the ritual to provide that when the W.M. addresses
the candidate at the completion of the ceremony he say something like this:
"The teachings of this Degree are—
(1) Your duties towards attaining a high standard of citizenship.
(2) The importance of rectitude and moderation.
(3) Fidelity".
It is my belief that we should work out a method of conveying to the candidate the essence of the teaching of
each Degree. if we did this we would have no misunderstandings on the value of the Order.
A.P.O'S.
THE CALLIOPE STORY
By A Visiting P.M.
The story begins in 1889 when the British warship Calliope was one of seven such ships visiting Apia,
Western Samoa, at a time when a violent storm was approaching. Calliope was the only ship able to avoid
destruction, and she later sought the comparative safety of the open sea, the remaining six vessels being
destroyed with great loss of life. After her notable career as a ship of war was finished, she finally returned to
England, where she served as a training ship for young sailors. Her usefulness in this field was finalised in
1953.
Lodge Calliope, No. 252 was constituted and dedicated in 1923 under the mastership of W.Bro. H. L.
Halliday, and visiting Grand Officers from the Grand Lodge of New Zealand performed the ceremony. The
name Calliope was chosen because of its famous association with Apia, and of its outstanding example of
courage and achievement in the face of overwhelming odds. A ramshorn cleat from H.M.S. Calliope adorns
the Lodgeroom as a constant reminder of the ship from which the name is derived. Thus was born Lodge
Calliope, No. 252 on the register of Grand Lodge.
This year the Lodge will celebrate fifty years of continuous activity; fifty years in which the Lodge has
experienced its full share of prosperity and recession; fifty years in which the membership has changed
greatly, and a period in which Western Samoa has achieved independence, and with that independence, some
radical changes in administration. Fifty years in which Lodge Calliope has reached a degree of Masonic
maturity never previously experienced.
In the years following formation the Lodge prospered. The membership was mainly composed of New
Zealanders and other Europeans engaged in executive positions in both government and commerce. To these
should be added the leaders of the Samoan community, many of whom were eager to join Freemasonry.
Today the scene has greatly altered. After ten years of independent government we find that educated
Samoans are managing their own affairs with a degree of success not previously anticipated. Local
government has brought a new sense of responsibility to the residents of the island. As might he expected the
membership of the Lodge is now predominantly those of Samoan and European-Samoan descent. The
brethren dwell together in harmony, they are proud of their lodge and all that it stands for.
For 29 years the Lodge had met in leased premises which were far from ideal as a Masonic meeting place.
The tone of the Lodge suffered as a natural result and some local criticism was forthcoming. When
eventually new premises were secured it only required a good push with a bulldozer to demolish the old
structure which had served them for so long. Much could be said for the determination of the brethren to
achieve a new and permanent home for their Lodge.
Land was secured on a very favourable and elevated site overlooking the famous harbour, once the scene of
the escape of H.M.S. Calliope from destruction. More recently, the building of the Lodgeroom was
commenced to a modern and well prepared plan, at a cost of 12,000 Tala, or to the New Zealand equivalent
of $14,756. The then Grand Master, M.W. Bro. Sir Arthur Porritt, journeyed from New Zealand to Western
Samoa and laid the foundation stone — to the great joy of the brethren, and the wider interest of the
population of Apia.
Finance for this major project has not been easy, particularly in view of the separated membership of the
Lodge. Forty-six members live on the Island, and some 52 brethren live overseas, in New Zealand, Australia
or other Pacific Islands and Territories. To meet interest charges and reduction of the mortgage many
sacrifices were required of the whole membership. In addition to annual dues, already high by New Zealand
standards, a monthly building levy of $2.00 per member for locals, and $1.00 for those overseas was
introduced, and this levy has done much towards the success of the project. An appeal for assistance from
Lodges in New Zealand produced the handsome sum of $3642.24 and this too has aided Calliope in its
endeavour. Several members of Lodge Calliope have paid many years of dues in advance, in order to reduce
interest charges on the advance from the Bank of Western Samoa.
Success has attended the efforts of our brethren in Western Samoa. Today they enjoy a first-class building
containing excellent facilities. The Lodge has prospered and the name of Freemasonry stands high in the
view of the residents of Apia. Leaders in public and business life together with a wide cross-section of the
whole community have produced a sound Lodge membership, justly proud of its achievements. Of the future
of this fine Lodge there can be no doubt owing to wise leadership and the close co-operation of the brethren.
Recent visitors from Grand Lodge have happy memories and are proud to record their praise for our brethren
in Apia. Brotherly love is evident among the membership, attendances are excellent and the quality of the
work of a very high standard. Hospitality and friendliness are evident on all sides. There is also a laudable
ambition of the members to become more closely related to their brethren in New Zealand.
Another outstanding achievement by this remarkable Lodge is the establishment of the "Calliope Club".
Formed to develop the social life of its members, it now provides a venue for social activity on a wider scale,
and thus fills a need sadly evident in the community. From its commencement the Club has caught the
imagination of both the members and their friends. Membership consists of all the Lodge members (46), and
their wives and families, together with a carefully selected group from outside the Lodge.
Properly constituted, carefully controlled, and reaching for very high social standards, the Club has filled a
void long vacant in Apia.
Of this happy Lodge and its industrious membership we have wonderful memories, memories of happy
hours within the Lodge, and also of joyful occasions in members' homes. We recall the pleasure of their
company and we all share in the success of their achievement, a new and better Lodge Calliope, No. 252.
Finally, may I say that Freemasonry has come alive in Apia in no uncertain manner. The standing of its
members, the quality of the Lodge work, the spirit of fellowship and brotherliness, the wonderful co-
operation of the womenfolk and the general atmosphere of human happiness leaves little more to be desired.
Freemasonry is secure in this outpost of the Auckland District.
LETTERS
A United Grand Lodge of N.Z.?
I understand that the Brethren of the English Constitution in New Zealand are remodelling their Districts to
provide a more simplified system of management.
Would this not be a good time for some serious consideration to be given by English Lodges to coming over
to the N.Z. Constitution? Indeed even better would it be for them to be joined by Irish and Scottish
Constitution Lodges.
It is hard to understand why many of our N.Z. Constitution brethren perpetuate the myth of how delightful it
is to have other Constitutions in our midst. To me it is a scandal of separation.
It should be unnecessary to add that our Constitution provides that the customs peculiar to these early Lodges
are preserved should they decide to join our Constitution and by so doing they would gain for their members
both present and to come the great benefits enjoyed by our Constitution, and which are denied to them at. the
present time. For example, two Masonic widows live next to each other, their circumstances the same. The
N.Z. Constitution widow receives generous assistance from the Board of Benevolence, the other a token
payment. Not only the widows ask "Why"?
The Grand Lodge of England as do many American Grand Lodges uphold the doctrine of "sovereign
jurisdiction" and it is my opinion that 1973 should be a commencing point to complete that which was
desired over 90 years ago, "One Grand Lodge in New Zealand for, and embracing all Lodges".
It is 83 years since we formed our Grand Lodge of New Zealand. It would be a wonderful happening if we
did indeed become one before we reach our centennial year. But let us remember that this could be achieved
much earlier if we plan for that result now.
R. J. Towers (P.G.Alm.)
THE JEWISH VIEW OF THE GOLDEN RULE
By Wor. Bro. A. Rosenfeld, the Chief Rabbi of Wellington
Many articles have been written in numerous publications, particularly Masonic ones, on the Golden Rule,
'Love your neighbour as yourself', but this one conveys to us the 'Golden Rule' according to the Jewish view.
— Editor.
————
Although the world at large is aware of the fact that this comprehensive maxim of morality — the Golden
Rule of human conduct — was first taught by Judaism, nevertheless, no less a thinker than John Stuart Mill
expressed his surprise that it came from the Pentateuch. Not only is it Jewish in origin, but, long before the
rise of Christianity, Israel's religious teachers quoted Leviticus 19.18, either verbally or in paraphase, as
expressing the essence of moral life. In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (109 B.C.F.) we read: "A
man should not do to his neighbour what a man does not desire for himself." In the book of Tobit (250
B.C.E.) he admonishes his son in the words : 'What is displeasing to yourself, do not to any other". Ben Sira
(132 B.C.E.) says : "Honour your neighbour as you-self" and finally, Hillel (70 B.C.E.), a descendant of
David, whose love of a man was considered as the kernel of the entire Jewish teaching said, "What is hateful
to you do not to your fellow man. This is the whole law, the rest is mere commentary!"
Almost the same is taught by Paul1, a pupil of Rabbi Gamliel the grandson of Hillel. Hillel was a true Mason,
for he preached brotherly love, relief and truth. The Rabbinic Talmud is ascribed to him as the great teacher
who lived in the memory of posterity, and who enjoined and practised the virtues of charity, patience and
true piety.
However, Hillel's version of the Golden Rule is, as you will note, stated in negative terms. It does not bid
men to do what they love : it bids them not to do to others what they would hate if done to themselves.
Curiously enough, the negative form is used by most of the teachers as quoted above. Even Paul in the
Epistle to the Romans, explaining the Decalogue, forbidding various unsocial acts, might be summed up in
the Old Testament saying : "You shall love your neighbour as yourself." Paul justifies this attempted
summarization by the remark: "Love works no ill to his neighbour, therefore love is the fulfilling of the
Law!"2 clearly giving love its negative application, making it signify the complete avoidance of what is
harmful, rather than the performance of what is helpful.
Professor Israel Abrahams, in one of his sermons, wrote : "We do not know when it began to be urged that
the negative form of the Golden Rule was lacking in completeness." To reproach, Hillel, who used the words
of our text, also said, in an even more famous utterance: "Be of the disciples of Aaron (the High Priest),
loving peace and pursuing peace, loving your fellow-creatures, and bring them near the Holy Law"3. Thus
Hillel taught in positive terms the duty of loving mankind; but he must have had sufficient motive for
formulating the Golden Rule in negative terms. The negative form is, in fact, more fundamental, whether
from the point of view of human reason or of human nature. This argument is now seen to be illusory. The
delicate difference which has been thought to exist between the negative and positive form is due to modern
reflection on the subject, and was quite apparent to the men of antiquity, said G. Kittel.
_________
(1) See Galatians 5.14, comp. also Romans 13.8-9.
(2) See Romans 3.1D.
(3) See Mishnah Aboth 1.12.
To see the matter in its true light, one must carefully con-;icier the circumstances under which Hillel spoke,
The same heathen that came to Hillel, came first to Shammai (with whom Hillel stood in striking contrast not
only in legal-religious decisions and discussions, but also in character and temperament) asking him to teach
him the Law while he stood on one foot. Being ungifted with Hillel's gentleness he showed the questioner the
door (what most people would have done under similar circumstances), but Hillel answered him calmly in
the negative form (see above). A renowned Talmudist of 17th century, Rabbi Samuel Edels, asked, "Why did
not Hillel say to the heathen: 'Love your neighbour as yourself'?" The explanation given is, because Billet
went straight to the root of the whole matter; he told the questioner, 'that the Law of love is itself a
commentary'. He was not offering the perfect Law, but was giving the heathen with his one-legged
philosophy, another leg to stand on. Hillel was offering him the principle without which there would be no
sure foundation for social intercourse. If Hinel had said, 'love your neighbour', or 'do to him as you would
have him do to you' the heathen might have replied, "That is all very well, but I do not want anything from
my neighbour, I want neither his love nor his favours, why should I love him or do him service?" The
objection would have needed more argument for its refutation than a man on one foot would have listened to
with patience. Hence he stated at the outset the axiom itself which showed the heathen at a glance that here
was the fundamental basis of social and religious virture. In other words, "I may not need my neighbour's
love, but I cannot live with him if he hates me." The negative form seems therefore to go deeper to the heart
of the problem.
Now let us approach this question from another angle. Has it ever occurred to us to find out how large a part
of popular wisdom is cast in the negative form? How many proverbs, whether in etiquette or ethics, began
with 'DO NOT.' Of the Ten Commandments, seven are negative. In the Old Testament there are according to
the traditional Jewish enumeration, 248 affirmative commandments; our Rabbis maintain that they are
supposed to equal the number of limbs. There are 365 negative precepts, one for every day in the year or the
number of veins in the body (totalling 614 commandments as observed by the Jewish people). This is
unhappily a true proportion between good and evil; you need to exert all your powers, use all your limbs to
do good, while to do evil, you need but let the days roll on, and the opportunities for harm come of their own
accord. What would the world be if men, though they did no good, yet did no wrong? The world would be an
earthly paradise! No falsehood, no violence, no revenge, no dishonesty, no arrogance, no jealousy, and no
war. When we remember all this, we must sadly admit that though Hitters maxim may be proclaimed while
we stand on one foot, we must, however, take a firm grip with both our feet if we sincerely desire to obey it.
The negative form of the precept is therefore the demand made on man not to injure his fellow-man! This is
the teaching of the Jewish form of the Golden Rule. The suppressed individual or for that matter a
suppressed people dare not ask: "Guide us your friendly hand to raise us"; they merely plead, "lay not your
unfriendly hand so heavily on us to crush us down." He or they fear to ask, 'love me!' They only say: "Do not
hate us!" They ask for non-interference, to be permitted to live. How can God's highest truth direct a world
which has not yet fully learned the simplest fundamental rule of moral equity? Thank goodness, that in our
fraternity we at least have the opportunity of obeying the Great Architect's guiding rule, who not hating
others, may become godly. For in His image He created us — with love and mercy.
The Golden Rule of conduct bids man do as he would be done by, but loving is something more than doing.
One must do lovingly and think also lovingly of others, and when we say think we mean possessing loving
kindness for others. Indeed, this is the widest stretch of love; one must weep internally for them when one
can do nothing to soften their pain, when one can only stand by them, look on and love them.
There is a Rabbinic commentary on the statement in Leviticus, "Love your neighbour as yourself":—Two
men were in the desert with a little water in possession of one of them. If the one drinks it, he will reach
civilization; but if two of them share it, both will die. Ben Petura, one of the scholars said. "Let the two share
the water though both will die" Rabbi Akiba said, "In such a case your own life has precedence over the life
of your fellow-man. There is no reason why two should perish where death demands but one as its toll."
And, indeed, if the Bible had meant that a man must love his neighbour to the extent of sacrificing his own
life for him in all circumstances, it would have said: "Love your neighbour more than yourself!" However,
we can always find two schools of thought. one more prominent than the other. Some would fellow the first
view (that of Ben Petura) that both should die together, rather than one should have to watch his loving
friend perish.
But why should we give examples of love when facing death; why not find the way of loving one's friend
while alive? That is where Hillel's view is more instructive; 'what is hateful to you, do not to your fellow-
man!' From this the ascent is inevitable to the higher truth, `love your neighbour as yourself'. Indeed, more
love is the one touch of Divine nature that makes all men akin. And man, starting from the basis of non-
hatred of his fellow-man, will soon reach the stage of loving hint. Yet, he will not rest even there, he will
pass onward to realise all that his nature is capable of. From this love of his fellow he will pass to the love
that makes a man of him, and his heart will be warm with the love of God. The last word of social ethics
is:"You shall love your neighbour as yourself!" and the last word of religion is : "You shall lore the Lord
your God!" Whereupon, Ben Azzai, a contemporary of Rabbi Akiba, remarked, provided "love your
neighbour' is read in conjunction with Genesis 5.1 (viz. "This is the Book of Generations of man, in the day
that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him"); this latter verse teaches reverence for the
Divine image in man, and proclaims the vital truth of the unity of mankind and the consequent doctrine of
the brotherhood of man. All men are created in the Divine image, therefore, all are our fellow-men and are
entitled to human love.
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CRAFT
A paper recently delivered by V.W. Bro. R. D. Richmond, P.G.Lec.,
to the Research Lodge of Wellington, No. 194.
Let us look first at the Book of Constitution :
Rule 15 is headed "The Government of the Craft" and states —"The government of the Fraternity of
Freemasons of New Zealand is in the hands of Grand Lodge. Grand Lodge possesses a supreme
superintending authority over the Craft". According to the Oxford Illustrated Dictionary "to govern" means
"to rule with authority, conduct policy, actions, and affairs despotically or constitutionally", and
"government" is "the act, manner, fact of governing". "To govern" has of course other meanings but so far as
this paper is concerned they can be disregarded.
For any organisation to be ruled effectively the governing body must have both the power and the means to
do so, therefore what we are looking for are provisions which will do just this.
First as to the power — Rule 16 provides that "Grand Lodge alone has the inherent power of enacting laws
and regulations for the government of the Craft, and altering repealing and abrogating them in manner
prescribed by the Book of Constitution always taking care that the antient landmarks of the Order be
preserved".
This then is a source of governing power. It is one source. There are others — the Landmarks; customs and
usage; and the Collected Rulings and Notifications of Grand Lodge. It is however the means of government
that I am concerned with in this paper — executive or administrative on the one hand and judicial or
enforcing on the other.
Both are essential; for somebody must have authority to carry the laws into effect and somebody must also
have authority to exercise discipline and deal with complaints.
Rule 17 of the Book of Constitution is headed "Executive and Judicial Power of Grand Lodge" and it states:
(1) Grand Lodge has also the power of investigating, regulating, and deciding all matters relating to the
Craft, to particular Lodges, and to individual Brethren.
(2) This power it may exercise either of itself, acting in General Communication, or by such delegated
authority as in its wisdom and discretion it may appoint;
Provided that powers conferred on any person or body by the Book of Constitution shall not be
interfered with except to the extent that the Book of Constitution permits or by amendment of the
Book of Constitution duly made pursuant to Rule 25.
(3) But Grand Lodge alone has the power of erasing Lodges and expelling Brethren from the Craft,
powers it does not delegate to any subordinate authority.
I will deal shortly with the judicial side first and the executive and administrative second for the very good
reason that so far as I am aware the disciplinary powers of Grand Lodge have very rarely been called upon.
This is, of course, just as it should be in an organisation with the principles and precepts that Freemasonry
has.
In any organised society, provision must be made for offences and penalties—for disciplinary measures—
and so far as we are concerned, these arc contained in Part VI of the Book of Constitution under the heading
"Discipline and Complaints".
Rules 291 to 296 inclusive specify the offences, e.g.— assisting irregular proceedings and the use of
Masonic emblems in business. Rules 297, 298 and 299 provide for the penalties which are : admonition,
censure, fine, suspension or expulsion. Grand Lodge in General Communication, the Board of General
Purposes and a Provincial Grand Master acting within his jurisdiction may admonish, censure, fine or
suspend a Lodge or a Brother, but Grand Lodge alone has the power to erase a Lodge or expel a Brother.
Rules 300 to 304 inclusive lay down the procedure to be followed when dealing with offences and Rules 305
to 325 inclusive specify the limits of jurisdiction of Provincial Grand Masters, the Board of General Purposes
and Grand Lodge. There is a right of appeal to the Board of General Purposes from a decision of a Provincial
Grand Master and there is a right of appeal to Grand Lodge in General Communication from a decision of
the Board of General Purposes, the Board of Benevolence or any other Board or Committee of Grand Lodge.
There is an exception so far as the Board of Benevolence or any other Board or Committee is concerned
where it is expressly provided that no appeal will lie.
So much for the judicial functions of Grand Lodge. Let me now return to the executive or administrative
functions. You will recall that under Rule 17 Grand Lodge has the power of regulating and deciding all
matters relating to the Craft either by itself acting in General Communication or by delegated authority.
Although under Rule 17 Grand Lodge has the delegating power in fact the Constitution appears to take this
out of Grand Lodge's hands to a great degree. Rule 46 lays down the duties of Provincial Grand Masters;
Rule 47 specifies the dispensing powers of Provincial Grand Masters; and Rule 48 gives them certain other
powers. Rule 53 specifies the duties of the Grand Secretary. Rules 56 and 57 relate to the duties and powers
of Assistant Provincial Grand Masters; and finally there are the Boards of Benevolence and General
Purposes.
The former administers the charitable funds of Grand Lodge under Rule 150 and the latter has the general
care and regulation of all the concerns of Grand Lodge. Included in this function are:
(1) Responsibility for the keeping of proper accounts.
(2) Responsibility for the Annual Report submitted to Grand Lodge at the Annual Communication.
(3) Approval of Lodge By-laws and amendments thereof.
(4) Disposal of property or dissolution of a Lodge.
(5) Determination of the number of Grand Lecturers.
(6) Recommendation of improvements in the regulation of Grand Lodge.
(7) The official avenue for the bringing of motions before Grand Lodge.
(8) The control of Grand Lodge property.
(9) The scheme of Distribution of Grand Lodge Offices.
What I have just recounted to you is a synopsis of the Book of Constitution as it relates to the government of
the Craft. Let me now turn to the practical administration of our Order and let me once more recall to your
minds the provisions of Rule 17 giving Grand Lodge the supreme governing power, and in particular its
powers of delegation.
Now Grand Lodge consists of the following:
(1) The Grand Master.
(2) The other Grand Officers for the time being.
(3) The Past Grand Officers who are enrolled on the roll of Grand Lodge for the time being.
(4) The Master and Wardens of every Lodge on the Roll.
(5) The Past Masters who are enrolled on the Roll of Grand Lodge.
(6) The members appointed by the Grand Master under Rule 348.
(7) The additional members elected under Rule 349.
The last two categories relate to honorary rank for meritorious service to a Brother who is not already a
member of Grand Lodge.
There were as at 24 November, 1971, 439 lodges each with a Master and two Wardens making 1317
members of Grand Lodge, before we come to Past Masters, Past Grand Officers and present Grand Officers.
I do not think it would be unreasonable to say there must be at least 3,000 members of Grand Lodge.
You can imagine the chaos that would result if even a small proportion of the members of Grand Lodge
sought to take an active part in the government of the Craft, It is not surprising therefore that the functions of
Grand Lodge are almost wholly carried out by persons or bodies under delegated authority.
So let us take a look at the practical day-to-day work of Grand Lodge and who does that work.
But before I commence this part of this paper I must extend my thanks to R.W. Bro. Oliver, Grand Secretary,
who in one and a half hours gave me an insight into Grand Lodge administration which I could not otherwise
have obtained.
First of all there is the Grand Master. Traditionally he attends meetings of the Boards, but again, traditionally
he does not take part in discussion. When the Governor General is Grand Master then the Pro Grand Master
takes his place at Board meetings. While he is not active in matters of policy, nevertheless, subject to the
Constitution, his wish is Grand Lodge's command. M.W. Bro. Cuthbert Taylor in a paper delivered to this
Lodge in August, 1931, likened the Grand Master to the Sovereign under the British Constitution, who acts
on the advice of his Parliament. The Grand Master acts very largely on the advice of the Board of General
Purposes, and does not as a general rule himself initiate any line of action. This influence, nevertheless, like
that of our Sovereign, may be great and beneficial.
Next we come to Provincial Grand Masters, They are members of both Boards and traditionally are principal
spokesmen for their respective Districts. You will be aware that customarily they are in office for three years
and I am informed that their degree of activity in the Boards' business increases as their number of years in
office increases.
Next we have the two Boards, i.e., the Board of General Purposes and the Board of Benevolence. The latter
deals exclusively with the administration of the Benevolent Fund and cannot therefore be said to be a
governing body in the true sense of those words.
However, the Boards' membership is the same, except for the Presidents — this is on the grounds of
economy — and as they are integral parts of the general Grand Lodge administrative set-up, I include them
both as part of the government of the Craft. The Grand Registrar, Grand Treasurer, Grand Superintendent of
Works, the Presidents and Grand Lodge officers of Junior Grand Warden rank, and higher (including past
G.M.'s and past Prov. G.M.'s) arc members, and in addition there are a number of elective members who are
elected on a proportionate basis:
per District of 10-25 Lodges — l member
per District of 26-50 Lodges — 2 members
per District of 51-75 Lodges — 3 members
At present there are twenty-one elected members of each Board of which at least twelve have been members
for two years. Some have been members for longer than that. There is therefore a degree of continuity and
with it a degree of experience. Each Board meets five times a year only four of which can be considered
business meetings. The fifth takes place at the Annual Communication and serves essentially to introduce
new members. On an average forty members attend the business meetings which generally last for two and a
half hours both for the Board of General Purposes and the Board of Benevolence. As a matter of interest, at
the meeting of the Board of G.P. held in August, 1972, there were thirty-six items on the agenda and while
there were only thirteen items on the agenda for the meeting of the Board of Benevolence the actual agenda
paper, with relevant particulars of all applications to be considered, ran into forty-four pages. Voting at
Board meetings is by show of hands hut a Provincial G.M. or his designated substitute, has an additional vote
for each member of his district not present at the meeting. That is to say there can be a poll as against a show
of hands.
Then there are the three executive officers additional to the Presidents of the Boards — the Grand Registrar,
who is Grand Lodge's legal adviser; the Grand Treasurer, who is the financial adviser; and the Grand
Superintendent of Works, who is the buildings adviser.
And last but by no means least are the Grand Secretary and his staff which consists of one chief clerk, three
clerks, an accountant, and a typist. The staff is mainly concerned with routine work — annual returns, issue
of certificates (some 1500 every year), keeping of records and routine correspondence. Grand Lodge office
has a record of every member of the Craft—his name and his Lodge; the names and addresses of Masters and
Secretaries of Lodges; a register of Grand Lodge which includes Past Masters and Wardens; a register of
Grand Lodge Officers. The Fund of General Purposes' income for the year ended 31st August, 1971 was
$70,127 and that of the Fund of Benevolence $178,098. Expenditure was some $71,000 and Grants,
Annuities and Bursaries totalled $114,360 — so it can be seen that the running of the Grand Lodge office is
quite a business.
The Secretary is of course a most important, indeed administratively, probably the most important Grand
Lodge Officer, He is the general adviser not only to Grand Lodge but also to individual Lodges and
particularly to their secretaries. He is the man who has the overall picture of the Craft, who has his finger on
the pulse. He is not a member of either Board but he must attend all meetings—he prepares the agenda for
each meeting, and the minutes. He sees Grand Masters, Provincial Grand Masters, Presidents and members
of the Boards, come and go but like Tennyson's brook he seems to go on for ever. Because of this apparent
agelessness the Grand Secretary can and does gather to himself a great deal of influence and power. That in
itself is not a bad thing—it is a pattern which is followed in national organisations both voluntary and
commercial.
To summarise, therefore, in practice those who govern the Craft are the Grand Master to a very limited
degree, the Provincial Grand Masters, the Board of General Purposes, and the Grand Secretary.
[In the next issue V.W. Bro. Richmond makes some criticisms and offers some suggestions.]
Formation Of A New Lodge At Albany
There appears to be a need for the formation of a new Lodge which will meet in the Albany district. It is
envisaged that it will cater for the considerable number of brethren who have settled in and around Albany,
and who have not as yet affiliated with any of the North Shore Lodges. Considerable housing development is
taking place in the area. Quite a number of brethren who have transferred from other parts of New Zealand to
work in Auckland have established homes in the Albany district, and it is to cater for them that the new
Lodge is proposed.
Any brother interested in the formation of such a Lodge and who wishes to become a Founder Member is
asked to contact W.Bro. Doug. Lane, 479 Glenfield Road, Auckland 10, or telephone 449-341.
____________________________
Practical Charity
The children of the Grange Home, a home administered for girls by the Salvation Army, are often
entertained by the brethren of Lodge Trinity, No. 360.
A children's party is held annually for their entertainment and these children are often invited to accompany
the brethren to Church services, and to join them on other suitable occasions.
The association between the Lodge and the Home, which has been in operation for several years, was first
introduced by W.Bro. J. Burke, and has been carried on by succeeding Masters, officers and brethren.
As a further contribution to community service, this Lodge has also undertaken to care for coin-operated
binoculars installed on the summit of Mt. Victoria, Devonport.
The binoculars were set up by the Royal N.Z. Foundation for the Blind, in conjunction with the Devonport
Borough Council and Lodge Trinity. Proceeds from the project will go to the Foundation.
______________________________
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC FREEMASON
By W. Bro. ALEC MELLOR
Grande Loge Nationale Francaise.
[Editorial Note : For those who have been speculating as to the present relationship between the Vatican and
Freemasonry, this article will be a revelation. The author is a French Catholic Freemason who can speak
from either standpoint of the Church or the Craft with equal authority. This lecture was given on 24 October,
1970 before Phoenix Lodge, No. 30, a Research Lodge under the National Grand Lodge of France. The
introduction is by Arthur W. Barnett, who was then serving as Master of the Lodge. Brother Mellor was
Master in 1971-72; both are members of Britannic Chapter, No. 9, Royal Arch Masons.]
Introduction
"Brethren: The lecturer of the evening, is our Masonically-young brother, Alec Mellor, who was initiated
only some 18 months ago and quite recently became a joining member of Phoenix Lodge. He came to the
Craft with an established reputation as the author of Our Separated Brethren — The Freemasons and other
books on Masonic subjects, all written from the standpoint of an outsider after many years of patient
investigation, and at a period when compliance with the rules of conduct laid down by the Roman Catholic
Church precluded his applying for membership. Erudite in the letter of Masonry, he was nevertheless in a
state of darkness and deeply concerned to find out what that unfathomable secret was which linked the
adepts of the Craft in so tight a bond of fellowship.
"He has taken to the practice of Masonry like a fish to water. We have seen this busy author and lawyer
unsparingly give his time and efforts to the practice of the Royal Art; we have seen him display that
eminently Masonic virtue—humility, and become a true and faithful brother to Jew and Gentile alike, thus
demonstrating his ecumenical convictions. It was therefore with peculiar pleasure that I today appointed and
invested him as Junior Warden of Phoenix Lodge knowing that his assistance will be of inestimable value in
the promotion of our aims.
"He will explain to you that it has now, at long last, become quite reconcilable to be a fervent Roman
Catholic and a good Freemason. The expression of his authoritative views on this subject are undoubtedly
destined to mark an epoch in the annals of the Craft. I call on Brother Mellor."
Part I — The Past
Why do we speak of the "Roman Catholic Freemason"?
Why should there not be tomorrow a lecture on the "Protestant Freemason", the "Jewish Freemason", or the
"Muslim Freemason"? Isn't there a kind of paradox in the very title of my lecture? Now, the reason is that the
Roman Catholic Church is the only one which. up to a quite recent date, has not allowed its members to join
the Craft, and that this great historical conflict is now ending under our very eyes.
That is the reason for my title.
Brethren, I would never have dared to treat such a ticklish subject in any ordinary Lodge, even in my Mother
Lodge. But we are tonight in a Lodge of Research. In, as you would say, a Lodge for the diffusion of
Masonic knowledge, where I believe more allowance should be made. Nevertheless, I fully intend to remain
on purely historical ground and be obedient to our rules, which preclude anything that might resemble
religious controversy.
Brethren, I am a Roman Catholic.
I am a staunch supporter of the Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. My spiritual father is the Pope—and
I am proud of it.
I am also a staunch and loyal Freemason and I am proud of that. I make no secret of the fact that I am a
Mason. The whole world may know it, and I feel very moved when making this dual profession of faith,
because ten years ago it would not have been possible for anyone to do so.
With your permission I will divide this lecture into three parts. Firstly, why did the great conflict between the
Church and the Craft occur in the past? Secondly, how did it come to an end? Thirdly—and this is the most
important—how can we face the future?
The Three Historical Periods
I shall deal very quickly with the past. You know that the history of the Craft is traditionally divided into
three parts—the operative period, the era of transition and the speculative period.
During the operative period, harmony existed between the Church and the Craft. The Regius poem itself was
the work of a cleric, and this was quite natural because the main aim of the Craft was building religious
edifices. During the era of transition there were no attacks on the Craft by the Church—the few that did
occur were by the Puritans. During the speculative period, things were to change. When the first Grand
Lodge was founded in 1717, the Church made no move and uttered no word. When Anderson's Constitutions
was published in 1723, the silence continued. But suddenly and most unexpectedly, in 1738, Pope Clement
XII published his well-known Bull In Entinenti, the first condemnation of the Craft in history. This was
confirmed in 1751 by Pope Benedict XIV.
First Bull By Pope Clement XII
If we read the text of the first Bull, we find that two reasons are given. The first one is secrecy. I pass on. The
second reason is much more mysterious. It is expressed in a very short sentence, the text and translation of
which I quote. This text, in Latin, was "Aliisque justis ac rationalilihus causis nobis notis"; the translation
being "and for other just and rational causes known to us".
This little sentence is interesting because the Pope did not explain the term "other (aliisque) reasons", and we
are driven to the conclusion that there was a hidden or occult motive. What was that hidden motive? Was it a
religious one? I don't think so. Why?
First of all because Anderson's Constitutions was never put on the Index (forbidden reading for Catholics).
Secondly, if there was a doctrine to be condemned, we wonder what that doctrine could have been. It
couldn't have been the "Deism" upheld by the English philosophers of the time, such as John Locke.
Anderson, himself, was not a Deist. He was a Presbyterian clergyman, while Desaguliers was of the Church
of England.
Silence as regards the Revelation—I allude to Desaguliers—is no heresy. It couldn't have been 18th century
rationalism, for the German Aufklarung and that of Voltaire and the French Encyclopedaedist was still far
away. Had the Bull appeared 20 years later, in 1758 for instance, things would have been different. And
there is another reason. In 1776, almost at the end of the 18th century, when Pope Pius VI, in his Bull
Inscrutabili, condemned the doctrines and the rationalism of the 18th century, he did not allude to
Freemasonry.
When the Church condemns a doctrine, it always emphasizes what that doctrine consists of, and such was
not the case regarding Freemasonry. If the hidden motive was not religious, what could it have been? Was it
a moral one? Did the Roman Catholic Church put a ban against the Craft in 1738 for some hidden moral
reason? If so, for what reason?
A Moral Factor Behind First Ban
It is not speculation, but historical criticism that makes us put this question. In those days, as you know,
brethren, the first exposures came to light in England and in France and certain of our enemies reproached us
with homosexuality, and others with drunkenness. As for the first one, we find one protest in that old song
called The Swordbearer's Song, which I quote:
We have compassion for those fools,
Who think our acts impure;
We know from ignorance proceeds
Such mean opinions of our deeds.
As for drunkenness, things were different. The period was that of the implanting of the Hanoverian dynasty,
when all England reeled and rolled under the table! Since the Treaty of Methuen, port wine could be
imported free of duty. I remember an English lady, a friend of mine, telling me one day : "That's why we've
all got rheumatism!" The squires simply rolled under the table, and one was accustomed to speak about two
or three-bottle gentlemen, according to their capacity.
In 1722, 33,000,000 bushels of malt were used for brewing. At one time matters came to the point where
Parliament tried to check drunkenness by an Act, putting a tax on gin. It was a vain, laughable effort. During
a debate in the House of Lords, Lord Chesterfield stressed the inconsistency of banking on the reduction of
alcoholism on one hand by means of a tax and on the other hand counting on that same tax to finance
military expenditure. Gin to the rescue of the House of Austria! I am not trying to be funny, but want to put
the following question : Who in those days stood up against the immorality of that period of the first
Georges? The answer is: the Craft.
(To be continued) —Reprinted from The Cabletow.