Post by taylorsman on Feb 22, 2005 12:37:33 GMT
Bill, I think you may have hit the nail on the head. For my part I don't hide my Freemasonry either in business nor personal life and to me those two are quite separate not integrated. If wearing a suit or blazer my pin will be in my lapel. Then again I am just a foot soldier at work, I do not deal with customers nor the public, I do not buy in goods or services for my Employers, I do not interview Candidates for a job these days, so I can indulge this luxury.
The Yanks and the Scots are a lot more open about being Freemasons and I wish UGLE was too. Things are a bit better than they used to be here but we are still far too diffident and secretive as we were from the dark days of WW2 till very recently and I feel lip service only is paid to the ideas of Openness, albeit limited, emanating from Great Queen Street. In my opinion this excessive Secrecy has done us great damage over the years.
Let me tell you a little joke I heard once about the difference between Yanks and Brits as exemplified by Trinityman. A British visitor goes into a bar in New York and in time starts to talk to a smart suited man. "I'm an Executive Vice President of Chase Manhattan Bank" he proudly states and goes on to list the big name companies who's accounts he handles, etc, etc." The other Americans present look on him with approbation and are impressed.
Back in the UK our visitor goes into a local pub in a little village. In comes an middle aged man with his Sunday paper and his dog. He is wearing an old sports jacket . If he speaks of it all he merely says, "Oh I work in a bank" Our visitor thinks, "He must be a cashier in the local Barclays". When he goes out he asks the barman who that nice old chap with the dog was, to be told. "Oh, that's Sir George, he's a Director of Lazzards".
We are more reserved than our American cousins to be sure, and that is not a bad thing in many ways. We look more to the qualities of the man and not to his material standing and the assets he owns. I do however feel that we should be less diffident or apologetic and should be prepared to help our Brother in time of need, as long as we do not break the Law of the Land, Code of Conduct for Elected Representatives, or our Employer's Rules to do so, nor select someone who is unfit for the job or unqualified purely because he is a Freemason.
I certainly would not hold it against anyone at an Interview etc if he was wearing a Masonic Pin, Tie or Ring, or gave me the Masonic Grip but would subtly test him during our discussions to ensure he was what he claimed to be and not a Cowan.
The Yanks and the Scots are a lot more open about being Freemasons and I wish UGLE was too. Things are a bit better than they used to be here but we are still far too diffident and secretive as we were from the dark days of WW2 till very recently and I feel lip service only is paid to the ideas of Openness, albeit limited, emanating from Great Queen Street. In my opinion this excessive Secrecy has done us great damage over the years.
Let me tell you a little joke I heard once about the difference between Yanks and Brits as exemplified by Trinityman. A British visitor goes into a bar in New York and in time starts to talk to a smart suited man. "I'm an Executive Vice President of Chase Manhattan Bank" he proudly states and goes on to list the big name companies who's accounts he handles, etc, etc." The other Americans present look on him with approbation and are impressed.
Back in the UK our visitor goes into a local pub in a little village. In comes an middle aged man with his Sunday paper and his dog. He is wearing an old sports jacket . If he speaks of it all he merely says, "Oh I work in a bank" Our visitor thinks, "He must be a cashier in the local Barclays". When he goes out he asks the barman who that nice old chap with the dog was, to be told. "Oh, that's Sir George, he's a Director of Lazzards".
We are more reserved than our American cousins to be sure, and that is not a bad thing in many ways. We look more to the qualities of the man and not to his material standing and the assets he owns. I do however feel that we should be less diffident or apologetic and should be prepared to help our Brother in time of need, as long as we do not break the Law of the Land, Code of Conduct for Elected Representatives, or our Employer's Rules to do so, nor select someone who is unfit for the job or unqualified purely because he is a Freemason.
I certainly would not hold it against anyone at an Interview etc if he was wearing a Masonic Pin, Tie or Ring, or gave me the Masonic Grip but would subtly test him during our discussions to ensure he was what he claimed to be and not a Cowan.