Letters

Letters to the Editor

Write to: The Editor, FMT, Freemasons’ Hall, Great Queen Street, London WC2B 5AZ Email: editor@freemasonrytoday.com

Eulogy for Bro Ejikeme

Sir, I am fortunate to have known Bro Ejikeme for the last 14 months. We met for the first time at the installation meeting of Enugu Lodge No. 5440 in October 2019. Bro Ejikeme was incumbent secretary of Enugu Lodge No. 5440 EC. Before the installation I had sent an email to Bro Ejikeme asking him to add my name to brethren attending the festive board. He refused to do so, citing the deadline for doing so as having passed. Bro Ejikeme was a time-conscious Freemason. On the day of the installation, I arrived early to socialise with brethren before business. I sighted Bro Ejikeme, dressed up in his officer’s regalia and waiting in the lodge, which was adjacent to the cloakroom where I was. He looked relaxed and was waiting for brethren to take their seats. I approached him to introduce myself and on sighting me he smiled as if he had seen an old friend. We exchanged pleasantries and spoke of how we both knew the Master Elect and the history of Enugu Lodge No. 5440 EC, which is legendary. Bro Ejikeme was a devoted Freemason. After the installation, we continued to discuss Freemasonry and the formation of Nigeria Heritage Lodge, proposed to be consecrated under the Provincial Grand Lodge of Surrey. Bro Ejikeme was full of optimism about the potential the lodge had as a tool for doing good in the wider society. Bro Ejikeme was a night owl and would call me after midnight to exchange ideas and discuss matters affecting formation of Nigeria Heritage Lodge. Bro Ejikeme was a proactive Freemason. My last conversation with Bro Ejikeme reassures me that he is in a good place. His sincerity is why I will miss him the most. It was a privilege to have known him and it was a sincere honour to call him my friend and brother.

Anthony Ijeh, Enugu Lodge No. 5440 EC, Nigeria

Sir, In the Spring edition of FMT, Companion Nigel Blore suggested that, ‘There remain two distinct views on Royal Arch...’, and referred to Jim Daniel’s article that ‘the 1813 Settlement was indeed a fudge...’

As in most things, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I cannot let these comments pass without a response.

I believe that the Royal Arch has very broad shoulders and any constructive criticism or commentary should be welcomed and considered, but I would challenge the contention that there are ‘two distinct views on Royal Arch’. Whereas I do not disagree with Nigel Blore, I would suggest that there are many other points of view ranging from the academic and historical perspective to those who just enjoy the ceremonies.

The 2004 revisions were entirely appropriate as they addressed certain ritualistic elements that required adjustment and tried to make the language more comprehensible by removing arcane and unnecessarily complex symbolic imagery.

It is my understanding that individual companions are encouraged to form their own opinion of the Royal Arch and its relevance to their lives, as opposed to the more prescriptive approach to the Craft where a great deal of information is available.

The Royal Arch may be considered the ‘thinking man’s order’, as it initially presents itself in a very colourful and solemn ceremony, with beautiful ritual and prayers, but on further examination there are many fascinating symbolic concepts hidden beneath.

The problem with this discovery is that it must rightly be driven by the individual’s curiosity and to seek out the covert or hidden meanings that he finds relevant to himself. This of course requires some effort, but once that journey has begun, each discovery leads to another, and what at first appears to be just spoken ritual leads to a far deeper understanding of not only the Royal Arch but the Craft as well.

This is alluded to in the phrase ‘the connection of the whole system and relative dependence of its several parts...’

I believe that rather than be diverted by a factual examination of the structure of the Royal Arch, though it is useful to have an understanding of the historical framework, our focus should be on what the ritual and the ceremonies are trying to tell us and in so doing yield a greater satisfaction from our (eventual) attendance.

Jeffrey Monnickendam, Friars’ Hiram Chapter No. 1349

Clarification

In the Spring edition of FMT we printed a letter from W Bro Willmouth that said that Bro Johnstone, whose letter was published in the Winter edition, wanted to remove or water down the ritual. Bro Johnstone has asked us to clarify that he did not say that he wished to remove or water down the ritual but rather use modern technology to assist participants during the ritual. He has also asked us to reiterate that his views are personal and not those of his lodges. We apologise to Bro Johnstone for any upset caused.

The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Grand Lodge of England. All UGLE members’ letters printed are appended with the contributor’s name, his mother lodge name and number, the town where that lodge meets, and the Province; please include these details at the foot of your letter. Please enclose an SAE for any items sent by mail that you wish to have returned.