Should we be more or less visible to the public? Dec 17, 2006 15:26:30 GMT
Post by Munro on Dec 17, 2006 15:26:30 GMT
Some Masons like to be very open about their membership in the fraternity, while others prefer to be more discreet.
This line says alot to me, concerning the situation. I am by no means an older member of Freemasonry -far from it. But I still see where all sides are coming from and what, in my opinion, is required in many situations, regarding the public face of the organization.
Putting things simply, I voted more.
Some masons, yes (such as myself) like to be very open about their membership. I am personally proud to be a Freemason, all be it a young, inexperienced one. If asked I would proudly tell those who ask, that I am a mason, and I would thank them for the opportunity.
On the other hand, there are those who do not readily divulge their association. This is entirely their choice...and only choice is the decision subject to! It is not because Freemasonry is a secret society or because they are not proud of their membership (...heavens no). It is, in most cases, because they are a private, personal person.
This seems like an ideal place to drop the infamous line: "Freemasonry is NOT a secret society, it is a society with secrets"
It could be debated until the cows come home what aspects of Freemasonry should be made more public and what aspects should not.
One thing remains clear; remains clear and certain, and all masons will no doubt agree, is that the ritual; the craft work....the symbols and the allegory and the teachings of the lectures and those who came before us...
....those things and others like them should remain CONTAINED within Freemasonry. After all, what benefit would they be to newly joining brothers if the "secret" was already out?
So thats my opinion, so far. CONTAINED rather than CONCEALED.