Short answer to the question: have we lost that spirit today? Yes.
Unfortunately the "do not speak of religion and politics in Lodge" has cause to todays Freemasons to lose that spirit. And I mean it in an official way. One of the most important things in any country is politics in the sense of how it should behave and how it supposed to take care of its citizens. But if Freemasons cannot speak about it in an open official meeting, then there is little to do to have an official stand point based on the morals of the Order.
I don't see a George Washington, a Simon Bolivar, a José de San Martín in todays Freemasonry.
I think that in some ways we are so caught up in partisan politics today that we are unable to see that a larger frameworks exists. A fundamental framework about the rights of man, from where they come, and how they can best be protected. A fundamental framework about mortality and one's duty to others, and the creation of a moral and just society. These things are not the partisan politics the discussion of which is banned in our Lodges, but so many people are so passionate about partisan politics, and defending their views of such, that they can't see the difference.
But, you are unfortunately correct. I don't see a Benito Juarez either.
I grew up in West Virginia, where our official State Motto is "Montani Semper Liberi" (Mountaineers are always free)! The WV Masonic Grand Lodge took the ritual from the burial of the State of Virginia, and added "West" before any "Virginia" in that ritual book.
I think freemasonry, as a framework, teaches us how to live and improve our selves so that we may better serve others. Most importantly it teaches us by reinforcing those cardinal virtues through which we are prepared for death and readied for life ever lasting. In that thought death is but a transition. Imho the soul survives death and is eternal. Our own footprint here in life survives here in memory and reputation.
>>>In that thought death is but a transition. Imho the soul survives death and is eternal.
Agreed. I sometimes encounter people of faith with an obvious phobia of death. In those cases I can only conclude that the faith must not run very deep. If we do believe, as Masonry teaches, that we continue beyond death, then we can't be overly fearful of it.
I think the great divide has to do with how we must achieve and maintain such freedom. It seems humanity finds freedom in war and killing things but I see that as enslavement to lower parts of our being that is controlled by fear. The message is clear :-freedom allows us to correct our ways and beholds the possibility of ending this vision we set before us - That by killing our fellow man we have freedom from fear.
Certainly there are just wars and unjust wars. I would argue that the nations of the Americas throwing off European domination were just wars. World War II certainly seems to fit that bill as well.
But World War I surely seems as if it was fought without purpose, and would therefore be unjust, and I fear that most wars are probably the same.
Pike declared Freemasonry 'The Great Peace Society of the World.' Referencing the fact that Freemasonry seeks to unite men of diverse backgrounds and beliefs. If we can continue that work, we are, I believe, on the side of right.
I'm thinking here about the liberation of the death camps in 1945. Undoubtedly the US and her allies had to kill vast numbers of people, in combat, in order to liberate those camps. But doing so was the right and just thing to do.
And it did result in unity. When the people of the society that had built and maintained those death camps were confronted with what they did, they gave up their previous ideas of conquest and racial superiority, turning instead to stand as a good partner to their neighboring nations.
The trouble in my mind is that we fight so many wars that are unjust.
I don't think Freemasonry could do what it had in the past in our country or others. In our jurisdiction the new WM agrees to these during his installation:
You agree to be a peaceable citizen, and cheerfully to conform to the laws of the country in which you reside? You promise not to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the government, but patiently submit to the law and the constituted authorities?
I tend to believe that a 'worthy' Brother Mason has a claim upon our assistance. An 'unworthy' Mason does not, and that an 'unworthy' man doesn't somehow magically become 'worthy' by being given the three degrees in some Lodge that didn't properly guard its West Gate.
And I've come to the conclusion, based solely on my own contemplation, that the Founding Fathers thought along similar lines. That they had promised to support the government, but that they were released from that when the government became 'unworthy' of that support. In effect that they saw it as an illegitimate government that needed to be replaced with a legitimate government.
Because they didn't just run around shooting Englishmen, they ran around shooting Englishmen while at the same time writing, and meeting, and debating, and voting, to lay the foundations of a new and in their eyes legitimate government.
Outstanding questions, MW. Here are my immediate reactions but you may want to ask me again someday.
Have we lost that spirit today? I don't think so, we just express it differently than our Founding Fathers. Edward Bulwer-Lytton first said that the pen is mightier than the sword (yes, I had to Google it), and he said it when there were a lot more swords than pens. Now we've gone past pens to high-speed internet, blogs and Tik-Tok videos. We often can make our point without shooting at each other.
Today do we view death as the worst possible outcome? It depends. If I'm called to the Celestial Quarry to day I'll go kicking and screaming. In another 10-20 years I'll more likely feel like I've made of this life what I could and be focused on not becoming a burden to my loved ones. During those 10-20 years I'll concentrate of nobler thoughts, greater deeds, and higher achievements, so when I'm called I'll more likely be ready.
Would we, as individuals, and as a society, rather live under tyranny than die? Almost certainly not. I say almost not because I feel that I might adjust to tyranny, rather its because I could probably buy a plane ticket and go someplace else. The Wright brothers took flight about 150 years after the Declaration of Independence, and so created alternatives that our Founding Fathers could not have imagined.
Would we choose death over enslavement? Maybe. Which one is better for my family?
Does any principle remain, so dear to us, that we would choose death over having it taken from us? For me the central principle is the safety and care of my family, and if I had to lay down my life for them I would. If you had asked me that question in the early 60s, when our nation was basking in the glory of our victory in WW2, there would be more causes for which I'd make the ultimate sacrifice. But by the late 60s Vietnam caused a lot of us to rethink that.
I don't think principles are any less important than they were decades or centuries ago. I do think we've become more civilized and less barbaric over time, and therefore have developed the temperament and means to stand for principles and preserve life at the same time.
Thank you for this. It gives us much to ponder, and as you've no doubt seen, inspired a post of its own.
I do think that our ability to travel, as people of the United States, is an extremely powerful check on governmental abuse. If the government gets carried away, we can, as you suggest, hop on an airplane and go live under a different government.
That's certainly a lot easier than having to remove and replace a government as our founding fathers did here in the U.S.
But, I must wonder if that ability, that freedom, is something limited to the people of the United States, and a very few other countries around the world?
We are largely welcomed throughout the world, and we generally have the financial resources to begin again elsewhere in the world. But, I don't think that holds true for the majority of people we share this earth with.
As Freemasons, how can we not talk of politics or religion in lodge. I think we’ve taken the “rule” of not talking of either beyond its intention. If we’re teaching esotericism then we’re likely talking of religion. If we’re talking of Freedom and Liberty, then we’re talking of politics. We do need to, at all costs, avoid discussions of partisan politics or proselytizing a religion. A strong WM should be able to moderate any discussion in lodge. In my experience, any discussion can fall apart if comments are not directed to the Master. As far as a willingness to die for a cause such as Liberty or Freedom, as a group of Freemasons, we are clearly a group of men that have seen too many winters or not enough. Most of us have never experienced violence, let alone ever been hit in the face. We can’t decide the simplest things or get participation in lodge activities. Individual Freemasons may be willing to die for such causes but that would look as a lone ranger type of incident and bring discredit to the Brotherhood. So, until we’re willing to be brave enough to talk about such high ideals, taking any action beyond would be a fools folly.
I agree. The discussions that must be avoided are those about partisan politics and sectarian religion.
Not discussions about the questions that are fundamental to life and the living of a good, proper, and moral life.
And you are right, the most effective way of keeping any Lodge discussion on track is to direct all comments to the Master. Indeed that is how our Legislative bodies work as well.
Unfortunately. Covid showed that every fraternity i belonged to willingly gave up the right to free assembly when threatened not even with death but just fines and arrest. Sad really.
At some point, long before any of us were ever born, our Craft decided to move itself out of the backrooms of bars and the space above stores, and into purpose built Temples. That move required banking. It decided to create perpetual financial funds to help in its work. That required investments. It decided to create institutional sized charitable endeavors. That required employees, office buildings, tax filings, more banking, more investments.
In essence, we moved large portions of our Craft from the sacred realm into the profane realm. And in doing so, we became subject to "giving Caesar that which is Caesar's"
Our Craft could choose to leave the profane world, just as it chose to enter it. Would Freemasonry be better off if it chose that course? I often think so.
I grew up in Cleveland Ohio and I always stand with my brothers to be free and thank you my freemasonry brothers God please continue to bless us all in Jesus Christ name I pray
It is an obvious discrepancy, when we consider the freedom fighters of centuries past who were Freemasons. But I never believed George Washington did what he did as a general, convention delegate, and president because of his Masonic lodge membership. Were the Masons on the other side of the Revolution failures as Masons?
We speak ritually of Live Free Or Die and Liberty Or Death at the pivotal moment of the Third Degree. GMHA’s defiant saying about integrity is pure Stoicism, and it’s on the same wavelength as the New Hampshire motto and Patrick Henry quotation.
But death is necessary to Masonic man, who is looking long term at the immortality of his soul. That transcends politics, law, or anything in this world.
I do believe, based on my own experience, that Freemasonry can teach us how to die. By inspiring true faith that our soul continues after it sheds our mortal body.
As a young man, I occasionally worried about dying. I was afraid of death. This despite my upbringing in the Church. I didn't believe the dogma, and while I thought I did believe the fundamental truths that God exists and the soul lives on, I don't think I actually did at some deep level. The faith in those fundamental truths was eroded by the obvious untruth of some aspects of the accepted dogma.
Then I became a Freemason, and specifically I became a Scottish Rite Freemason. And here was this long dead Freemason, telling me through is writings, that an unknowable God existed, that we were from that divinity and we would return to that divinity, but beyond that everything, every word was speculation. And that clicked for me, on a truly fundamental level. Those old fears that I used to have went away. Because I believed, and believe, that I encountered the truth. And that truth was 100% anti-dogmatic.
I think it is most succinctly put in the final charge that we are given by the WM as a newly crafted Entered Apprentice Mason.
I took a similar oath when I joined the service. Though the words differ, they resonate similarly to me.
I think that understanding the levels of conflict, and when to employ them, is more important now than ever before.
We have an entire generation of people that believe violence is the only solution. Most lack the proper instruction in conflict escalation and resolution to effect meaningful change. Resulting in many being willing to die for a cause, but unable or unwilling to work for it. Lacking the ability to do anything less than fight, thereby creating further tension and violence. I was one of them.
Social, financial, legal, and physical is the proper flow in the escalation of conflict. Not unlike the time tested adage of “soap box, ballot box, bullet box…”.
In an world intent on romanticizing violence and death for noble causes, the majority have not been visited by it. Unable to truly appreciate the significance of that sacrifice until it darkens their door. Leaving those left behind to judge whether the price paid was worth it.
I hope that those who are able will teach the next generation to appropriately engage in these levels of discourse.
I pray we can avoid the necessity of having to test how strong our individual convictions are in the face of our own mortality. In this generation and for those to come.
The constitution of this great country clearly defines our obligations as its citizens, and when it is not only appropriate, but expected for a citizen to act in support of their country.
We must not fail to rise to the occasion in social, financial, and legal warfare to continually and perpetually secure our rights as citizens and free people. Not unless we are willing to allow Jefferson’s words to ring true at the price of our loved ones and fellow citizens.
I do think this calls for us to develop the ability to have and maintain civil discourse with challenging topics to include political and religious discussion, within the confines of the law and our obligations. Current and future Masons will face challenges on these fronts ill prepared to meet them if we are unable to face them amongst our own Brethren. We will be left defenseless to counter those that would use these methods to dismantle our organization, and what it stands for.
I can say with certainty that death is not the highest price that an individual might pay in life.
I believe that honor falls to the compromise of character, morals, and ethics resulting in conflict and discord. The failure to perform the work essential in maintaining the rights, freedoms, and liberties that so many have sacrificed for is a much higher price. Often that price is left for future generations to pay, unfairly burdened by decisions made on their behalf.
Many of us fail to consider how we will be remembered until it is far too late. We forget what words might be etched above our resting place in this plane of existence.
If we obey that final charge, we need not wonder or worry whether we are willing to pay the price. It will be inherent in our words and actions. By promoting harmony and prosperity, choosing to do what is right, we can prevent or delay that terrible day from becoming necessary.
I think instead of asking ourselves whether we are willing to die for our causes and beliefs, perhaps we should instead ask how we might live for them as beacons of hope and prosperity.
>>>Many of us fail to consider how we will be remembered until it is far too late. We forget >>>what words might be etched above our resting place in this plane of existence.
A favorite snippet of our ritual is for me "to live respected and die regretted." And I think it points to what you are saying here.
If we keep it at the front of our minds, always, we will surely have a guidepost to living a proper and good life. To live respected. Well, to be respected, we must earn respect, and we do so by living a moral and upright life. To die regretted. We must earn that regret as well, through our uprightness, our sense of justice, and our work as yet unfinished.
Short answer to the question: have we lost that spirit today? Yes.
Unfortunately the "do not speak of religion and politics in Lodge" has cause to todays Freemasons to lose that spirit. And I mean it in an official way. One of the most important things in any country is politics in the sense of how it should behave and how it supposed to take care of its citizens. But if Freemasons cannot speak about it in an open official meeting, then there is little to do to have an official stand point based on the morals of the Order.
I don't see a George Washington, a Simon Bolivar, a José de San Martín in todays Freemasonry.
I think that in some ways we are so caught up in partisan politics today that we are unable to see that a larger frameworks exists. A fundamental framework about the rights of man, from where they come, and how they can best be protected. A fundamental framework about mortality and one's duty to others, and the creation of a moral and just society. These things are not the partisan politics the discussion of which is banned in our Lodges, but so many people are so passionate about partisan politics, and defending their views of such, that they can't see the difference.
But, you are unfortunately correct. I don't see a Benito Juarez either.
I grew up in West Virginia, where our official State Motto is "Montani Semper Liberi" (Mountaineers are always free)! The WV Masonic Grand Lodge took the ritual from the burial of the State of Virginia, and added "West" before any "Virginia" in that ritual book.
Thanks! That's a fine motto!
I think freemasonry, as a framework, teaches us how to live and improve our selves so that we may better serve others. Most importantly it teaches us by reinforcing those cardinal virtues through which we are prepared for death and readied for life ever lasting. In that thought death is but a transition. Imho the soul survives death and is eternal. Our own footprint here in life survives here in memory and reputation.
>>>In that thought death is but a transition. Imho the soul survives death and is eternal.
Agreed. I sometimes encounter people of faith with an obvious phobia of death. In those cases I can only conclude that the faith must not run very deep. If we do believe, as Masonry teaches, that we continue beyond death, then we can't be overly fearful of it.
I think the great divide has to do with how we must achieve and maintain such freedom. It seems humanity finds freedom in war and killing things but I see that as enslavement to lower parts of our being that is controlled by fear. The message is clear :-freedom allows us to correct our ways and beholds the possibility of ending this vision we set before us - That by killing our fellow man we have freedom from fear.
Certainly there are just wars and unjust wars. I would argue that the nations of the Americas throwing off European domination were just wars. World War II certainly seems to fit that bill as well.
But World War I surely seems as if it was fought without purpose, and would therefore be unjust, and I fear that most wars are probably the same.
Pike declared Freemasonry 'The Great Peace Society of the World.' Referencing the fact that Freemasonry seeks to unite men of diverse backgrounds and beliefs. If we can continue that work, we are, I believe, on the side of right.
Is unity manifest in war? We have to get rid of the (il)logic that war unites us. I would challenge Pike if he said such a thing.
I think that war can unite us, if it is just.
I'm thinking here about the liberation of the death camps in 1945. Undoubtedly the US and her allies had to kill vast numbers of people, in combat, in order to liberate those camps. But doing so was the right and just thing to do.
And it did result in unity. When the people of the society that had built and maintained those death camps were confronted with what they did, they gave up their previous ideas of conquest and racial superiority, turning instead to stand as a good partner to their neighboring nations.
The trouble in my mind is that we fight so many wars that are unjust.
I don't think Freemasonry could do what it had in the past in our country or others. In our jurisdiction the new WM agrees to these during his installation:
You agree to be a peaceable citizen, and cheerfully to conform to the laws of the country in which you reside? You promise not to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the government, but patiently submit to the law and the constituted authorities?
Maybe those came about after our Civil War?
Those derive from Anderson’s Constitutions of 1723, which adapted them from centuries-old English law.
Thank you for this.
I tend to believe that a 'worthy' Brother Mason has a claim upon our assistance. An 'unworthy' Mason does not, and that an 'unworthy' man doesn't somehow magically become 'worthy' by being given the three degrees in some Lodge that didn't properly guard its West Gate.
And I've come to the conclusion, based solely on my own contemplation, that the Founding Fathers thought along similar lines. That they had promised to support the government, but that they were released from that when the government became 'unworthy' of that support. In effect that they saw it as an illegitimate government that needed to be replaced with a legitimate government.
Because they didn't just run around shooting Englishmen, they ran around shooting Englishmen while at the same time writing, and meeting, and debating, and voting, to lay the foundations of a new and in their eyes legitimate government.
Outstanding questions, MW. Here are my immediate reactions but you may want to ask me again someday.
Have we lost that spirit today? I don't think so, we just express it differently than our Founding Fathers. Edward Bulwer-Lytton first said that the pen is mightier than the sword (yes, I had to Google it), and he said it when there were a lot more swords than pens. Now we've gone past pens to high-speed internet, blogs and Tik-Tok videos. We often can make our point without shooting at each other.
Today do we view death as the worst possible outcome? It depends. If I'm called to the Celestial Quarry to day I'll go kicking and screaming. In another 10-20 years I'll more likely feel like I've made of this life what I could and be focused on not becoming a burden to my loved ones. During those 10-20 years I'll concentrate of nobler thoughts, greater deeds, and higher achievements, so when I'm called I'll more likely be ready.
Would we, as individuals, and as a society, rather live under tyranny than die? Almost certainly not. I say almost not because I feel that I might adjust to tyranny, rather its because I could probably buy a plane ticket and go someplace else. The Wright brothers took flight about 150 years after the Declaration of Independence, and so created alternatives that our Founding Fathers could not have imagined.
Would we choose death over enslavement? Maybe. Which one is better for my family?
Does any principle remain, so dear to us, that we would choose death over having it taken from us? For me the central principle is the safety and care of my family, and if I had to lay down my life for them I would. If you had asked me that question in the early 60s, when our nation was basking in the glory of our victory in WW2, there would be more causes for which I'd make the ultimate sacrifice. But by the late 60s Vietnam caused a lot of us to rethink that.
I don't think principles are any less important than they were decades or centuries ago. I do think we've become more civilized and less barbaric over time, and therefore have developed the temperament and means to stand for principles and preserve life at the same time.
Thank you for this. It gives us much to ponder, and as you've no doubt seen, inspired a post of its own.
I do think that our ability to travel, as people of the United States, is an extremely powerful check on governmental abuse. If the government gets carried away, we can, as you suggest, hop on an airplane and go live under a different government.
That's certainly a lot easier than having to remove and replace a government as our founding fathers did here in the U.S.
But, I must wonder if that ability, that freedom, is something limited to the people of the United States, and a very few other countries around the world?
We are largely welcomed throughout the world, and we generally have the financial resources to begin again elsewhere in the world. But, I don't think that holds true for the majority of people we share this earth with.
As Freemasons, how can we not talk of politics or religion in lodge. I think we’ve taken the “rule” of not talking of either beyond its intention. If we’re teaching esotericism then we’re likely talking of religion. If we’re talking of Freedom and Liberty, then we’re talking of politics. We do need to, at all costs, avoid discussions of partisan politics or proselytizing a religion. A strong WM should be able to moderate any discussion in lodge. In my experience, any discussion can fall apart if comments are not directed to the Master. As far as a willingness to die for a cause such as Liberty or Freedom, as a group of Freemasons, we are clearly a group of men that have seen too many winters or not enough. Most of us have never experienced violence, let alone ever been hit in the face. We can’t decide the simplest things or get participation in lodge activities. Individual Freemasons may be willing to die for such causes but that would look as a lone ranger type of incident and bring discredit to the Brotherhood. So, until we’re willing to be brave enough to talk about such high ideals, taking any action beyond would be a fools folly.
I agree. The discussions that must be avoided are those about partisan politics and sectarian religion.
Not discussions about the questions that are fundamental to life and the living of a good, proper, and moral life.
And you are right, the most effective way of keeping any Lodge discussion on track is to direct all comments to the Master. Indeed that is how our Legislative bodies work as well.
Unfortunately. Covid showed that every fraternity i belonged to willingly gave up the right to free assembly when threatened not even with death but just fines and arrest. Sad really.
At some point, long before any of us were ever born, our Craft decided to move itself out of the backrooms of bars and the space above stores, and into purpose built Temples. That move required banking. It decided to create perpetual financial funds to help in its work. That required investments. It decided to create institutional sized charitable endeavors. That required employees, office buildings, tax filings, more banking, more investments.
In essence, we moved large portions of our Craft from the sacred realm into the profane realm. And in doing so, we became subject to "giving Caesar that which is Caesar's"
Our Craft could choose to leave the profane world, just as it chose to enter it. Would Freemasonry be better off if it chose that course? I often think so.
I grew up in Cleveland Ohio and I always stand with my brothers to be free and thank you my freemasonry brothers God please continue to bless us all in Jesus Christ name I pray
And thank you brother Bailey
Thank you Brother! I'm honored to have you here!
It is an obvious discrepancy, when we consider the freedom fighters of centuries past who were Freemasons. But I never believed George Washington did what he did as a general, convention delegate, and president because of his Masonic lodge membership. Were the Masons on the other side of the Revolution failures as Masons?
We speak ritually of Live Free Or Die and Liberty Or Death at the pivotal moment of the Third Degree. GMHA’s defiant saying about integrity is pure Stoicism, and it’s on the same wavelength as the New Hampshire motto and Patrick Henry quotation.
But death is necessary to Masonic man, who is looking long term at the immortality of his soul. That transcends politics, law, or anything in this world.
Jay
I do believe, based on my own experience, that Freemasonry can teach us how to die. By inspiring true faith that our soul continues after it sheds our mortal body.
As a young man, I occasionally worried about dying. I was afraid of death. This despite my upbringing in the Church. I didn't believe the dogma, and while I thought I did believe the fundamental truths that God exists and the soul lives on, I don't think I actually did at some deep level. The faith in those fundamental truths was eroded by the obvious untruth of some aspects of the accepted dogma.
Then I became a Freemason, and specifically I became a Scottish Rite Freemason. And here was this long dead Freemason, telling me through is writings, that an unknowable God existed, that we were from that divinity and we would return to that divinity, but beyond that everything, every word was speculation. And that clicked for me, on a truly fundamental level. Those old fears that I used to have went away. Because I believed, and believe, that I encountered the truth. And that truth was 100% anti-dogmatic.
MW Brother Bailey,
I think it is most succinctly put in the final charge that we are given by the WM as a newly crafted Entered Apprentice Mason.
I took a similar oath when I joined the service. Though the words differ, they resonate similarly to me.
I think that understanding the levels of conflict, and when to employ them, is more important now than ever before.
We have an entire generation of people that believe violence is the only solution. Most lack the proper instruction in conflict escalation and resolution to effect meaningful change. Resulting in many being willing to die for a cause, but unable or unwilling to work for it. Lacking the ability to do anything less than fight, thereby creating further tension and violence. I was one of them.
Social, financial, legal, and physical is the proper flow in the escalation of conflict. Not unlike the time tested adage of “soap box, ballot box, bullet box…”.
In an world intent on romanticizing violence and death for noble causes, the majority have not been visited by it. Unable to truly appreciate the significance of that sacrifice until it darkens their door. Leaving those left behind to judge whether the price paid was worth it.
I hope that those who are able will teach the next generation to appropriately engage in these levels of discourse.
I pray we can avoid the necessity of having to test how strong our individual convictions are in the face of our own mortality. In this generation and for those to come.
The constitution of this great country clearly defines our obligations as its citizens, and when it is not only appropriate, but expected for a citizen to act in support of their country.
We must not fail to rise to the occasion in social, financial, and legal warfare to continually and perpetually secure our rights as citizens and free people. Not unless we are willing to allow Jefferson’s words to ring true at the price of our loved ones and fellow citizens.
I do think this calls for us to develop the ability to have and maintain civil discourse with challenging topics to include political and religious discussion, within the confines of the law and our obligations. Current and future Masons will face challenges on these fronts ill prepared to meet them if we are unable to face them amongst our own Brethren. We will be left defenseless to counter those that would use these methods to dismantle our organization, and what it stands for.
I can say with certainty that death is not the highest price that an individual might pay in life.
I believe that honor falls to the compromise of character, morals, and ethics resulting in conflict and discord. The failure to perform the work essential in maintaining the rights, freedoms, and liberties that so many have sacrificed for is a much higher price. Often that price is left for future generations to pay, unfairly burdened by decisions made on their behalf.
Many of us fail to consider how we will be remembered until it is far too late. We forget what words might be etched above our resting place in this plane of existence.
If we obey that final charge, we need not wonder or worry whether we are willing to pay the price. It will be inherent in our words and actions. By promoting harmony and prosperity, choosing to do what is right, we can prevent or delay that terrible day from becoming necessary.
I think instead of asking ourselves whether we are willing to die for our causes and beliefs, perhaps we should instead ask how we might live for them as beacons of hope and prosperity.
>>>Many of us fail to consider how we will be remembered until it is far too late. We forget >>>what words might be etched above our resting place in this plane of existence.
A favorite snippet of our ritual is for me "to live respected and die regretted." And I think it points to what you are saying here.
If we keep it at the front of our minds, always, we will surely have a guidepost to living a proper and good life. To live respected. Well, to be respected, we must earn respect, and we do so by living a moral and upright life. To die regretted. We must earn that regret as well, through our uprightness, our sense of justice, and our work as yet unfinished.