|
|
Post by paul on Nov 28, 2011 8:46:03 GMT 9.5
Why is Worshipful used in Masonic titles?
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 28, 2011 9:39:34 GMT 9.5
Because it refers to That Which is Spirit, Soul, Intellect (for want of a better word)? The Trinity of God and Man and NOT the persons representing them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Nov 28, 2011 10:17:43 GMT 9.5
Worshipful is used because of English custom in addressing a "superior." That is all.
We are informed of this as shiny, new EAs learning our catechism.
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 28, 2011 10:24:56 GMT 9.5
... but all men are equal in lodge - meet on the level, act on the plumb and part on the square and all that....
|
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Nov 28, 2011 10:39:55 GMT 9.5
... but all men are equal in lodge - meet on the level, act on the plumb and part on the square and all that.... Hence the quotation marks. It is a title. |
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 28, 2011 11:31:04 GMT 9.5
Ah - so we agree yet again.
It was the "That is all" bit that threw me. In Freemasonry there is never any "that is all". There can't be, as there is no dogma.
|
|
|
|
Post by chingus on Nov 28, 2011 14:11:20 GMT 9.5
We must be careful, however. A lack of dogma within the Free-masonic system does not mean there is a void that can be filled with all manner of whatsit or hoobajoob. As Freemasons, we are exhorted to freely employ Grammar and Rhetoric, but always with a firm application of Logic, lest we leap to a wrong conclusion. For instance: some of our detractors deduce that, since the word 'worship' appears in one of our titles, then we must be doing some kind of worship within the Lodge, which as we all know is as false a claim as it is stupid. Henka is right. The word 'Worshipful' is honorific only. It comes from a time when a barrister might be called 'Your Worship' as opposed to 'Your Honor,' which we hear more often today. The Right Honorable so-and-so would once have been called the Right Worshipful so-and-so. The oft-facile application of this phrase shows that it is oft misunderstood. We are all equal when we enter and leave the lodge. However when lodge is tyled and in session, the WM is the presiding officer. That makes the WM first among equals for the duration of the session. This is part of his position as chief officer of the lodge; he presides over the convocations by setting the Craft to work and giving the necessary instructions whereby they might pursue their labors. During that time he is director of the work, chief administrator of business, and effectively the CEO of a small corporation. Even outside of the lodge his status is still that of a superior. He still runs the organization from a business standpoint as its chief elected officer. When a Brother passes to the next world, the WM then becomes part funeral director and part chaplain. So at times he is also a servant. The honorific title is well earned and should be used with respect. |
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 28, 2011 14:44:42 GMT 9.5
However when lodge is tyled and in session, the WM is the presiding officer. That makes the WM first among equals for the duration of the session. This is part of his position as chief officer of the lodge; he presides over the convocations by setting the Craft to work and giving the necessary instructions whereby they might pursue their labors. And this would also apply if we substitute Spirit (symbolised by the Sun) for the elected officer who fills the role. By tyling the lodge against thoughts of the outside world we are more likely to be inspired to greater good, by That which created the Plan. There are many levels of understanding, if one is right it does not mean that the others are wrong. Just a different understanding. Jesus talked about things one way for disciples and another way for others. |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Nov 28, 2011 15:19:45 GMT 9.5
Worshipful is certainly honorific, but why worshipful? Why not Sir or Lord or Architect?
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 28, 2011 15:53:17 GMT 9.5
They address judges as "Your Worship" or somesuch... anything to do with Law?
|
|
|
|
Post by chingus on Nov 28, 2011 16:43:34 GMT 9.5
However when lodge is tyled and in session, the WM is the presiding officer. That makes the WM first among equals for the duration of the session. This is part of his position as chief officer of the lodge; he presides over the convocations by setting the Craft to work and giving the necessary instructions whereby they might pursue their labors. And this would also apply if we substitute Spirit (symbolised by the Sun) for the elected officer who fills the role. By tyling the lodge against thoughts of the outside world we are more likely to be inspired to greater good, by That which created the Plan. There are many levels of understanding, if one is right it does not mean that the others are wrong. Just a different understanding. Granted, what we do in lodge has several interpretations in a Macro/micro sense. With that said, when discussing something as mundane as lodge protocols/etiquette, it might be best to start with the micro. To go straight from a honorific title to Spirit/Soul/Intellect is a mighty leap. Not everything in our sacred space has a bajillion meanings, nor does everything need to. Sometimes a cigar is nothing but, and it does not require levels of understanding to deduce that the potted rubber plant in the corner of your lodgeroom represents anything more than what it is. My lodge room has a pic of George Washington in the center of the north wall. He was called Worshipful too I bet. It can be a pic of George without having any mystical significance attached to it. |
|
|
|
Post by chingus on Nov 28, 2011 18:08:42 GMT 9.5
They address judges as "Your Worship" or somesuch... anything to do with Law? Not just Law. The terms 'worshipful' and 'right worshipful', both English colloquialisms, date back to the 14th century. The appellation would have been used in reference to people of rank-- such as judges. It was also used to refer to 'distinguished people'-- such as dignitaries from the various prestigious merchant Companies. I'd bet good money that the leadership of various trade Guilds were also regarded as among the distinguished of the time, given that the Guilds enjoyed a steady ascendancy in England between the 14th and 17th centuries. It is from certain of those Guilds that Masonry is said to have sprung and grown, so it should be of no surprise that an old idiom, now archaic, would have found a way into Masonic custom. We also probably adopted our parliamentary procedures during the same time period. Why did we keep it? The English East India Company was chartered in 1600, but after a business merger in 1708 it was commonly known as the Honourable East India Company. We can suppose that the shift in English idiom occurred during that century. I suppose that we Masons kept the term 1) to adhere to tradition and 2) to cater to our love of all things antiquarian. We love our antiquarianism so much, indeed, that some of our number have tried to trace our lineage back to the Pyramids, the (real!) Temple of Solomon, or even further back to some mythic antediluvian paradise. Some swallow the fluff, some spit. I prefer to stick to the known first (micro) before elabourating with speculation (Macro.) .... why worshipful? Why not Sir or Lord or Architect? Probably because 'Worshipful' had broader uses. 'Sir' and 'Lord' were much more specific, referring only to certain groups of distinguished folk. 'Architect'... different story. I don't think that has ever been used as an honorific in English custom. The term 'Great Architect of the Universe' was coined by Calvin in 1539 in his commentary on Psalm 19. It was written into the Constitutions by Anderson, himself a Calvinist minister, in 1723. My guess is that the usage of 'worshipful' had become a part of 'tradition' by then. At any rate, since we use the word 'Architect' as an allegorical reference to the Creator, I wouldn't see the logic in using the same title to address the presiding officer in our lodges. Putting the Master on a level with God 1) smacks of hubris, 2) goes against that whole 'meeting on the level' thing, and 3) equating the Master with God turns us in to a very cultish kind of religion, and I seriously doubt our rituals were designed with that in mind. |
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Nov 29, 2011 1:26:21 GMT 9.5
Ah - so we agree yet again. It was the "That is all" bit that threw me. In Freemasonry there is never any "that is all". There can't be, as there is no dogma. There is "dogma" and there is "fact." This is the latter. No rabbit hole to go down here, Dear Alice.  |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Nov 29, 2011 5:34:30 GMT 9.5
Hopeful means full of hope. Is worshipful full of worship? That might sound religious.
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 29, 2011 7:01:35 GMT 9.5
There is "dogma" and there is "fact." ;D  |
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 29, 2011 7:31:20 GMT 9.5
My lodge room has a pic of George Washington in the center of the north wall. He was called Worshipful too I bet. It can be a pic of George without having any mystical significance attached to it. Above the emptly chair in the North, our lodge had a portrait of the Comte de St Germain, alchemist and international man of mystery as they say. The original 'International Man of Mystery,' the Count St. Germain, was an 18th century European aristocrat of unknown origin. He had no visible means of support, but no lack of resources, and moved in high social circles. He was a renowned conversationalist and a skilled musician. He dropped hints that he was centuries old and could grow diamonds. He never ate in public, was ambidextrous, and as far as anyone could tell, totally celibate. He served as a backchannel diplomat between England and France, and may have played some role in Freemasonry. He hobnobbed with Marie Antoinette, Catherine the Great, Voltaire, Rousseau, Mesmer, and Casanova. He dabbled in materials and textile technology as well as alchemy, as did many intellectuals of the time (e.g., Newton). These are established historical facts, documented by the extensive collection of contemporary accounts in this book. www.sacred-texts.com/sro/csg/csg02.htmwww.omegansareliars.com/germaine1.htm |
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Nov 29, 2011 8:47:05 GMT 9.5
Other systems of Freemasonry use the term "venerable." Also, why do art shows at Union Plaza always smell like patchouli? I guess it must have that horrible odor to be art.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Nov 29, 2011 8:49:55 GMT 9.5
Venerable certainly avoids the topic of this thread
|
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Nov 29, 2011 8:54:25 GMT 9.5
It does nothing of the sort. "Venerable" is used in the same situations as "worshipful" in other systems of Masonry.
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Nov 29, 2011 9:54:44 GMT 9.5
The Worshipful Company of Grocers was incorporated in 1428.
The Worshipful Society of Apothecaries of London was incorporated by royal charter on 6 December 1617
|
|
