Initiation, hammers and chisels
Q: …the rule of no initiation for disabled people (often
unapplied) is in force in almost every Masonic regulation. Even though we consider
all historical and cultural roots behind the rule, this aspect of Freemasonry
has become quite “questionable”, because sensibility has changed
and civil value of disability has evolved…
A: It’s time to remember that initiatory wisdom isn’t
like the artisan professionalism of masons, stone-cutters and joiners that climb
bell towers with their tools. It rather belongs to minds “enlightened”
by spiritual conscience. We can call it also Royal Secret or Gnosis, it’s
In a tricky moment of monarchic and religious obscurantism (i.g. Templar Excommunication)
Free Masonry “had the honour” to be considered by Enlightened minds
as an “ideal shelter” for their ideas.
So Free Masons should look with pride at this precious heritage both scientific-initiatory
and spiritual, instead of dwelling on histories of “hammers and chisels”.
They should also keep all meanings of “lesser and Greater Mysteries”
(Mediterranean Schools Mysteries) shut in the “closets” of high
(?) administrative degrees.
But I know that it’s easier and less demanding to become Free Masons than
to become Initiates, even if I hope this will not count for all masons.
To get back to the meaning of our question, I believe that handicap discriminations
of every kind are to be considered as morally indecent and initiatorically ridiculous.
Initiates and handicap
I’d like to speak for the last time about handicap, that some past rules
placed in a very “merciless” light.
Masons’ and stone-cutters’ rules “of the trade” meant
to protect professional (and not initiatory) values, or they just referred to
the operative conceits of a professional initiation.
Today we have to look at the question from the point of view of initiatory Ethics.
So, being “a priori” opposed to the disabled could be nothing but
a hideous, merciless, intolerant and above all isolating action, unless we say
that yesterday’s “professionalism” is better than the sensibility
reached (law of evolution and progress) by today’s conscience. If it’s
like this, I’d be obliged to leave a stone-cutters association to look
again for a Community of Initiates.
Esonet Editorial Staff