HENDERSO.NTX      p14

The "Albatross"
of Terminology
in the
Fraternity of Free Masons

by John S. Hcnderson, MPS

(Prepared for and delivered to W.M. Taylor
Chapter, The Philalethes Society, on November
10, 1990, in Houston, Texas)

"Oh wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us!

It wad frae money a blunder free us,
And foolish notion:

What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us
And e'n devotion! "
(Robert Burns: To a Louse)

These famous words, penned by our
Brother Robert Burns many years ago
still ring clear in Scottish splendor per-
haps more meaningful today than ever
before. Countless words are being writ-
ten and countless more are being spoken
within the Fraternity of Freemasons de-
nouncing the several religious institu-
tions for their suspicions and, in some
cases, downright hostility toward this
Fraternity. Much hand-wringing is
going on because of the television disclo-
sures and distortions that have appeared
on our television sets. Unfortunately,
Freemasons are being accused of practic-
ing a "religion" by some; and the
Fraternity is even viewed by many as a
cult. I say "unfortunately" for you and
I know this is not the case. We know that
the Fraternity of Freemasons is the
world' s eldest and largest Fraternity with
over a million members (still) in the
United States alone. We also know that
"it is a Fraternity of good men, linked
together by honorable and indissoluble
bands, to accomplish these noble pur-
poses, eschewing all interest in factional
politics and sectarian religion and free
from the dictation of both." 1 We know
that the Fraternity of Freemasons is uni-
versal in that it admits to membership
men of all religions that believe in one
Supreme Deity. Why then should our
Fraternity be so shamefully disparaged?
There are, no doubt, a number of rea-
sons for this hostility, including some
that are probably envious and selfish.
These reasons are left for discussion else-
where. I do suggest that perhaps we
Freemasons have inadvertently contrib-
uted to this disparagement and hostility.
Surely one great benefit that can come
from all this controversy is a forced
examination of our own practices and
terminology that tend to offend and con-
fuse non-Freemasons, including some
who otherwise respect our organization.
When I view Masonic terminology still
in use today, I am reminded of
Coleridge's tale of the Ancient Mariner!

"From fiends that plague thee thus!--
Why look'st thou so?"--

With my cross-bow I shot the Alba-
tross. "
(and)
"Instead of the cross, the Albatross
About my neck was hung. "

Surely we too have hung an albatross
about our own necks by terminology that
is at once archaic and misunderstood!

Perhaps the most misunderstood word
used today is the word "profane" to
describe those who are not initiated into
this Fraternity. The writer readily recog-
nizes that most dictionaries still include
"profane" as having a legitimate mean-
ing of "one that is not initiated;"3 or
" not initiated into the inner mysteries or
esoteric knowledge of something. "4
Alas, most people are not students of the
dictionary and the word "profane" im-
mediately associates in their minds with
the word "profanity." To the world-at-
large, Freemasons are thus, by wide-
spread misunderstanding, accusing non-
members of being false swearers and
users of soiled language. This need not
be so as such phrases as "non-member"
or "non-Freemason" can be just as ef-
fectively substituted for the word "pro-
fane " in our Fraternal writings and
speech. A potential irritant to the unini-
tiated can be easily eliminated and the
image of our Fraternity protected from
criticlsm.

Moving on, it is interesting to observe
that Coils does not even try to describe a
meaning for the word " masonry, "
surely the most overworked word in the
Fraternity's vocabulary! Mackey 6 clev-
erly avoids a clear definition by the
rather elementary observation that:
"Although Masonry is of two kinds,
Operative and Speculative, yet Masonic
writers frequently employ the word Ma-
sonry as synonymous with Freemasonry."
Why do we even use this word "ma-
sonry?" Are we simply too lazy to write
out or speak the words "Freemasons"
or, even better, "Fraternity of Freema-
sons? " Perhaps the term " masonry"
would be acceptable were it not for the
interpretation--by association--that
others may place upon it. Christianity.
Scientology. Masonry! The word unwit-
tingly can imply to many that we are a
religion or cult--or some of both! Even
more damage can occur when this word
is coupled into such catchy slogans as
"Masonry--A Way of Life," a phrase
now appearing prominently in the offi-
cial publication of at least one Grand
Lodge.7 If we truly respect our Frater-
nity and its real purposes, let us not
demean it, nor cause misunderstand-
ing--even when well intentioned--by
use of short titles such as "masonry."

The presence of a copy of the Sacred
Book of the Divine Law is indispensable
within the physical confines of every reg-
ularly recognized Lodge of Freemasons.
One would think that religious men who
are not Freemasons would rejoice that
this Fraternity, though not a religion,
considers the Law in such a Book to be
essential to the guidance of the Lodge!
Such is not the case as critics point to the
presence of The Book as evidence that
the Fraternity of Freemasons is a religion
and that Lodge meetings are, de facto,
services of worship. Such is not the case
of course; but our rituals, our practices,
even our laws and particularly our termi-
nology invariably refer to The Book as
"The Holy Bible. " No doubt, The Book
displayed in the Lodges of Freemasons
in the United States is the Protestant
Christian Holy Bible--most probably
the King James version. As a matter of
fact, the Laws of the Grand Lodge of
Texas, in prescribing the necessary par-
apherna,ia in a Lodge room, specifically
requires The Book to be the " Holy
Bible."3 Why the Books of other, non-
Christian, faiths are not also permitted
for display is not for discussion here; but
the use of the phrase "The Holy Bible"
is. The Fraternity of Freemasons could
go a long way toward defusing its re-
ligious critics if we would return to the
constant use of the phrase "The Sacred
Book of the Divine Law;" or "Book of
the Law" if a shorter title is preferred.
This is especially true if such change in
terminology is accompanied by the dis-
continuance of the word "Altar" to de-
scribe the piece of furniture upon which
The Book is displayed.

Unabridged dictionaries quite com
pletely include the definition of an altar
as "a piece of furniture resembling an
altar and used in ritual and ceremonial
practices in the Masonic and other frat-
ernal societies. "9 Again, most people are
not serious dictionary students and when
we Freemasons use the word "altar" we
" spook-up" visions in their minds of
sacrifices and burnt offerings. (You can
almost smell the flesh cooking!); or, per-
haps more kindly, the mental image of a
church with its raised communion table.
Either view is damaging and detrimental
to the Fraternity and some word other
than "altar" should be adopted and used
to diffuse this erroneous image of the
Fraternity as a cult or religion. While the
simple term "Book Stand" easily comes
to mind, perhaps something more ap-
propriate to our particular Fraternity,
such as "Foundation Stone," could be
set in place. (No pun intended.) While
criticism might still be directed our way,
we could then accurately point out that
we are, indeed, eschewing all interest in
factional politics and sectarian religion
and are indeed free from the dictation of
both .

Regrettably, another ecclesiastical
word hangs about our necks like the alba-
tross of the Ancient Mariner! The use of
the term "cathedral" to identify the
housing of the Scottish Rite of Freema-
sons also hurts our public image. A good-
ly number of Lodges of Freemasons also
meet in Scottish Rite buildings. At best
the term "cathedral" is confusing to
non-Freemasons and frankly tends to of-
fend some of our own members and
friends. After all, except for the Scottish
Rite and Robert Shuller's "crystal"
house of worship in California, the term
"cathedral" is most often thought to be
the home Church of a Bishop. Non-
members of the Fraternity quite under-
standably look with suspicion at Freema-
sons meeting in a "cathedral," around
altars (with kneeling pads) upon which
lie copies of "The Holy Bible. " Can you
blame them for suspecting our veracity
when we disavow the Fraternity of Free-
masons as a religion? You know: "If it
looks like a duck, quacks like a duck,
(and so forth). " This Fraternity would
be well served in the public mind if the
hierarchy of the Scottish Rite would dis-
continue the use ofthe word "cathedral"
and substitute a more universally ac-
cepted term to describe its housing. The
Rite recently changed the long-used
name of its publication, The New Age, to
avoid the stigma of association with a
"new" religion. The Rite should like-
wise change the name of its buildings to
avoid confusion with some of the "old"
religions !

Archaic language continues to perme-
ate far too much of our Ceremonies,
particularly the prayers offered by Free-
masons during various public events of
the Fraternity. While the Anglican, and
other churches historically influenced by
that Communion, have busied them-
selves with modernizing the language of
their rituals and prayers, the prescribed
prayers to the Deity in our Ceremonies
are still full of "thees" and "thous" and
"thines." While probably not particu-
larly offensive to non-Freemasons, the
impression can nevertheless be given
that Freemasons are now more Anglican
than the Anglicans! As beautiful as
Elizabethan English may be, the time
has come to modernize all our language
and bring that part of our practices into
the 20th Century before the 21st Cen-
tury soon arrives. In this general area of
prayers, addressing the Deity as the " Su-
preme Architect of the Universe" has
caused criticism with some justification.
At public Ceremonies, non-Freemasons
can be confused by just who it is we (and
they) are addressing in our prayers.
They may ask just who is this Supreme
Architect of the Universe? Is this some
all-powerful architect in some secret
place to whom all Freemasons owe a
secret allegiance? Since it is GOD to
whom we are addressing our prayers,
why don't we just say so and end the
possibility of confusion and distress?

Finally, Brethren, an objective look at
the term "Worshipful" as used by this
Fraternity is needed. Probably no other
word in our fraternal vocabulary offends
non-Freemasons more than use of the
term "Worshipful." Several years ago,
the General Secretary of a Scottish Rite
Valley in Texas received an irate letter
from a Minister of Religion. In the letter,
the author complained against a news-
paper article announcing the installation
of officers of the local Masonic Lodge.
Reference was made in the article to in-
stallation of Brother"Blank" as Worship-
ful Master. (Emphasis supplied.) The let-
ter writer stated in no uncertain terms
that he knew of but one Worshipful Mas-
ter--and He reigned in Heaven! The use
by Freemasons of the Fraternity's pri-
vate term of respect for incumbent lea-
ders is far too widespread outside the
Fraternity! Repeated admonitions not to
use the term "Worshipful" or any of its
gradients, either spoken or written, out-
side the hearing or sight of the members
apparently falls on deaf ears and blind
eyes! I despair that it shall always be so!
The term "Worshipful," with its acces-
sory gradients of "Right," "Very" and
"Most" causes unnecessary damage to
the image of our Fraternity in this Coun-
try. Reaction ranges from the quite vi-
olent described above to snickers on the
faces of non-Freemasons when they hear
us using this pretentious term. Non-
Freemasons in this Country almost al-
ways attribute the word "worshipful" to
a divine being or a supernatural power.
It is only in more socially stratified na-
tions that the custom prevails of address-
ing jurists and other high officials as
"Your Lordship".or "Your Worship. " It
seems amazing and quite out of charac-
ter that American Freemasons carried
over that form of address after the Rev-
olutionary War. After all, widespread ef-
forts were made at that time to dispose of
all vestiges of royalty and social stratifi-
cation. But we Freemasons persist! We
even persist in referring to our Grand
Lodges as being "Most Worshipful."
Now how can an inanimate object such
as a Grand Lodge be "Most Worship-
ful?"(No pun intended.) Which Grand
Lodge is the MOST " Most Worship-
ful?" In the case of the Grand Lodge,
the term "Most Worshipful" should be
dropped altogether as unnecessary and
inappropriate. It is suggested that the
Fraternity adopt less offensive terms of
endearment to use in addressing its
leaders. For Grand Lodge Officers, cer-
tainly the honor of the Office occupied is
already present in the title. Grand Master,
Grand Senior Warden, etc. After all, just
how much more Grand can you get? In
the case of Masters of Lodges, the non-
divine address of "Honorable Master"
should be honorable enough for anyone
in a non-socially stratified society such as
ours.

Brethren, the Constitutional right of
Freemasons to adopt and use the ter-
minology it chooses is not questioned
here. We have that right beyond ques-
tion! We also bear responsibilities. The
Fraternity of Freemasons is (still) a large
group of good men within society today;
but, as such, cannot exist and operate in
isolation from that society. We Free-
masons hold ourselves out to be a good
and moral force. If this be so--and I
believe it to be so--then we must meld
ourselves into this society in such a way
as to most effectively influence it for the
good. If our terminology offends others
in our society who are also working, in
their own way, for good and moral and
civil standards, then we have the boun-
den duty to change our practices and
terminology that offend! We have abso-
lutely no right to dictate to non-Freema-
sons that they are wrong in their per-
ceived definitions of words. Such, in fact,
would be absolutely contrary to our
image as a gentle Craft. Concerted ef-
forts are now underway by the Confer-
ence of Grand Masters, through its Re-
newal Task Force, and by the several
Grand Lodges, to once again bring the
Fraternity of Freemasons up on the sky-
line for public view. For goodness sake,
let this Fraternity rid itself of archaic and
misunderstood terminology that will
impede this noble effort. Then, in con-
trast to the Ancient Mariner, this Frater-
nity can say:

From fiends that plague us thus!--
Why look'st us so?--

With my goodness I spared the Albatross
(and)
Instead of the Albatross, the cross (uni-
versal)
About my neck was hung.
Footnotes

I. Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Texas, A.F &
A.M., (as amended), Division 11, Article 1., Sec-
tion 2.

2. The Aneient Mariner I; and The Ancient Mariner II,
Samuel Taylor Coleridge.

3 . Webster 's Unabridged Third International Dictionary.

4 . Webster 's New World Dictionary, Sccond College
Edition .

5 .Coil 's Masonic Encyclopcdia, Henry Wilson Coil,
Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co.
(current edition.)

6. Encyclopedia of Freernasonry, Albert G. Mackey,
McClure Publishing Co, Philadelphia, PA (cur-
rent edition. )

7. "The Masonic Herald," publication of The
Grand Lodge of Virginia, A.F. & A.M.

8.Laws of Thc Grand Lodge of Texas, A. F.& A. M. (as
arnended), Title 11, Chapter 6, Article 223.

9 . Webster 's Unabridged Dictionary .