28.02.2013 Views

The Universal Language of Freemasonry - ArchiMeD - Johannes ...

The Universal Language of Freemasonry - ArchiMeD - Johannes ...

The Universal Language of Freemasonry - ArchiMeD - Johannes ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 8 - Categorization <strong>of</strong> Rituals 659<br />

internal market, that is trade between the brethren which could exclude and<br />

economically damage non-Masons. Does a strong fraternal bond induce<br />

nepotism? Is a brother obliged to deal with another because <strong>of</strong> the common oath<br />

at the altar? Claudy, in A Master's Wages, gives the following information to<br />

young and inexperienced brethren:<br />

<strong>The</strong> young Mason is faced with a problem [...]; 'must I trade only with<br />

Masons? Is it unMasonic to trade with the pr<strong>of</strong>ane?' [...] Masonry is not<br />

a mutual benefit society, in the sense that the Rochedale Cooperative<br />

Society is one. That, and similar organizations, are formed for the<br />

purpose <strong>of</strong> promoting trade among members; they <strong>of</strong>fer financial<br />

inducements to trade with their members. <strong>The</strong>re is nothing like that in<br />

Masonry. <strong>The</strong>re is no Masonic obligation taken at the Altar which even<br />

hints that a Mason must deal only with Masons. <strong>The</strong>re is no Grand<br />

Lodge law, nor any lodge by-law, which compels such trading. It is<br />

therefore, not a violation <strong>of</strong> any Masonic law or obligation not to trade<br />

with a Mason. 1620<br />

This sounds almost too positive to be credible. However, Claudy continues:<br />

"But there is the obligation <strong>of</strong> brotherhood." 1621 This would suggest in-group<br />

preferences again. With unbiased logic, Claudy argues that every individual<br />

brother has to decide for himself how far the obligation <strong>of</strong> brotherhood is to be<br />

applied. In his eyes, when a brother has the choice between two merchants, he<br />

should follow his common sense. That is, when he has an <strong>of</strong>fer from a pr<strong>of</strong>ane<br />

selling the same article as a Mason but at lower cost, then the pr<strong>of</strong>ane's <strong>of</strong>fer<br />

ought to be accepted, <strong>of</strong> course. However, Claudy also states clearly that "[a]s<br />

between two merchants, one a pr<strong>of</strong>ane, the other Masonic, both giving the same<br />

goods at the same price [...], the Mason should receive the Mason's trade." 1622<br />

<strong>The</strong> trade which has developed around fraternal societies and their outfit and<br />

emblems is amazing. A vast amount <strong>of</strong> Masonic book traders exists, and dealers<br />

for regalia <strong>of</strong>fer their products in elaborate catalogues. Petty articles like<br />

(bumper) stickers, t-shirts with fraternal logos, lighters, suspenders, etc. are sold<br />

at auctions, in esoteric shops, or by online trading. This includes fun articles like<br />

tie tacks or cooking aprons with the emblem <strong>of</strong> the "Knife & Fork Degree," or<br />

humorous postcards, depicted elsewhere in this paper, to name the least sincere<br />

products. Let us view some bumper stickers acquired at a German store for<br />

Masonic goods:<br />

1620 Ibid, p. 65; bold print added.<br />

1621 Claudy, A Master's Wages, p. 65.<br />

1622 Ibid.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!