Speaking as an individual mason, subject to the usual caveats that this does not represent the official stance of any lodge, Grand Lodge, Concordant nor Appendant body of Freemasonry, I'd like to see these ten things return. I understand that some of the things on this list are simply not done in regular Freemasonry today in the United States, and I would not enact any of the unconstitutional items on the list before they became constitutional.
- Met in taverns.
- Put membership ceilings of 35, or 50, or 60 members of any particular lodge, with the understanding that if the lodge got too big, it would generate new lodges to accomodate new brethren.
- Fined brethren for not attending a stated communication of their lodge (except in cases of sickness, absence from town, or urgent business), and fined officers more harshly than the brethren (with the Master and Wardens being fined about 150% more than the regular members). Prolonged absences without excuse, or refusal to pay fines would result in reprimand, suspension or expulsion.
- Made degree candidates exemplify the degree catechisms after a thorough education in the meanings of the three degrees (I know some lodges still do this).
- Gave Stewards liberty of the floor in order to refill the glasses, tankards, and pipes of the brethren.
- Allowed for the tyler to be a profane, and paid the man for his service to the lodge.
- Performed the Royal Arch degree in blue lodge, under the authority of the Grand Chapter of their particular jurisdiction.
- Were well-represented in the local media, announcing individual stated communications in the newspaper, as well as processionals, church visits, banquets and lodges of table instruction, and Grand communications.
- Voted after each degree to decide if the candidate was worthy of the next degree.
- Had an officer, called an Almoner, to collect sufficient funds from the brethren of the lodge to liberally come to the relief of distressed brethren of the lodge, their widows and orphans. They would not consider giving any funds to any charities for profanes while their own brethren were in want. No mason could leave a stated communication without giving the Almoner money (this is still the case in Norway).
I've been mulling these over since your earlier post on Facebook. Regarding #1: I just did a search of a PDF of our Grand Constitutions and nowhere is there a single occurrence of the words 'alcohol', 'spirits', 'wine', 'beer', or 'temperance'. Do you happen to know if the general dryness of our jurisdiction is the result of a past Grand Master's edict (probably in the late 19th/early 20th century)? I know individual lodges and building corporations may have their own rules as well, for example I believe I have heard that the Worcester Temple does not allow alcohol on the premises under any circumstances... but in general, I see nothing in the Grand Constitutions themselves which would forbid meeting in a tavern. I have often thought a "tavern degree" would be a delightful alternative to a wilderness degree, if one could find a historic tavern with a private room... but only of it were constitutionally legal.
ReplyDeleteAC,
ReplyDeleteIt was an edict/ruling by M.W. Bro. Stanley F. Maxwell in 1975. There is a copy of it on the Secretary's Disk under Misc. Alternatively, e-mail me Frank-AT-Kautzlaw.com and I will e-mail you the pdf.
Fraternally,
Frank
=====================
1. Met in taverns.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree. My opinion is that lodges should be allowed to meet in any building that can be properly tyled. I wrote about this a while back which you can find here.
2. Put membership ceilings of 35, or 50, or 60 members of any particular lodge, with the understanding that if the lodge got too big, it would generate new lodges to accommodate new brethren.
I could easily be swayed to support an idea like this. I think our Masonic buildings are not used nearly enough.
3. Fined brethren for not attending a stated communication of their lodge (except in cases of sickness, absence from town, or urgent business), and fined officers more harshly than the brethren (with the Master and Wardens being fined about 150% more than the regular members). Prolonged absences without excuse, or refusal to pay fines would result in reprimand, suspension or expulsion.
I can’t go along with this one mainly because this is a volunteer organization. We can discuss the lofty goals and beliefs but I for one would be quite uncomfortable sanctioning a Past Master who has since retired to another state. The old fining rules were at a time when people did not leave their hometowns. We are now a mobile society and our rules should reflect that.
I also believe in representative government and if the brethren aren’t happy with the lodge leadership, they must wait one year to do anything about it or if the absences are quite sever, to ask the Grand Master to arrest the offending brother’s jewel. Of course, our ancient brethren set up a series of backstops by allowing the Senior Warden to sit in the Master’s chair in his absence.
4. Made degree candidates exemplify the degree catechisms after a thorough education in the meanings of the three degrees (I know some lodges still do this).
My lodge still requires brothers to perform their memory work in open lodge. We also assign them a mentor and give them a mentor packet to increase their knowledge.
5. Gave Stewards liberty of the floor in order to refill the glasses, tankards, and pipes of the brethren.
For me, drinking during a meeting would take away from the solemnity of the affair. During the meal afterwards, I would say Stewards should fulfill their traditional roles.
This is what I wrote in that article referenced above on alcohol:
I do believe that the Lodge Room themselves should be considered sacred space. Unless there is a ceremonial reason for serving alcohol, I believe that Lodge Rooms are completely off-limits.
6. Allowed for the tyler to be a profane, and paid the man for his service to the lodge.
Certainly feasible. In my Grand jurisdiction, the Tyler can be from any lodge so in theory, there could be one Tyler for a whole Masonic building and if he’s in the appendant bodies, he could tyle those meetings as well.
Nick
7. Performed the Royal Arch degree in blue lodge, under the authority of the Grand Chapter of their particular jurisdiction.
ReplyDeleteCompletely agree with this. I hear time and time again how the Royal Arch is just not being focused on or there are no members. I wrote a post about a Lodge in South Australia, Lodge Copernicus, which is actually allowed to confer the three Craft degrees, the Royal Arch, and the Mark Master degree. I’d love to see that happen in Minnesota.
8. Were well-represented in the local media, announcing individual stated communications in the newspaper, as well as processionals, church visits, banquets and lodges of table instruction, and Grand communications.
Agree. I’ve read old copies of the Minneapolis Tribune (now the Minneapolis Star Tribune) and the Masonic events would be on the first or second page. That included Masonic celebrations and even Masonic trials.
9. Voted after each degree to decide if the candidate was worthy of the next degree.
Personally, I like giving that responsibility to the Master but I could go along with this. In the Scottish Rite Craft degrees, I believe this is done.
10. Had an officer, called an Almoner, to collect sufficient funds from the brethren of the lodge to liberally come to the relief of distressed brethren of the lodge, their widows and orphans. They would not consider giving any funds to any charities for profanes while their own brethren were in want. No mason could leave a stated communication without giving the Almoner money (this is still the case in Norway).
My lodge just implemented this office. As IPM, I’ve been lucky to have a Master of my lodge that is more than willing to continue my crazy inklings. Again, I wouldn’t force a brother to give money because I don’t know if he is also in need and I don’t want that to be a hindrance to his attendance. I’ve really enjoyed helping to create this office for my lodge. I will be writing an article for my blog of how we implemented an Almoner very soon. I’m currently doing a three part series for my lodge on Faith, Hope, and Charity and next month is Hope. Charity is the big reveal.
This is a great list. Thank you for sharing it with us.
Nick
The fines were exempted in cases of sickness, absence from town, or urgent business. I would, including the above exemptions, change the rule to "unless you communicate that you will be absent to the Master and/or Secretary, you will be fined." I also like the idea of fining officers more harshly than brethren, and fining the Wardens and Master the most.
ReplyDeleteTemperance is learning to indulge appropriately, in moderation. Abstinence is choosing of one's own free will to completely eschew a particular substance. Prohibition is forbidding everyone from indulging. Somehow, the Temperance Movement became an Abstinence Movement before becoming a Prohibition Movement. And each step of the way, Masons joined in in the misguided hope that we could score PR points with the general public after the Morgan scandal. But Masons preach Temperance as one of the Four Cardinal Virtues. And it is impossible to be temperate in the midst of prohibition. I think that alcohol is appropriate if it suits the temperament of the brethren of the lodge, and inappropriate otherwise. It is possible to drink alcohol in a sacred space without profaning it (the Catholic Mass, and the Passover Seder come to mind). But again, the comfort of the brethren should be foremost in consideration.
@47th, I'm still unconvinced that having alcohol in a Lodge Room is appropriate. The examples you list are both Examples of ritualistic use of alcohol. I think having Stewards walking around, during a stated, refilling glasses is not the same as taking Communion.
ReplyDeleteNick
My lodge also requires the performance of memory work to be allowed to receive the next degree, but there are problems with that:
ReplyDelete1. Memorizing words doesn't mean you learned, let alone understand, the degree.
2. The bar is set so low that it would take a ridiculously hotrrible performance to not pass.
Jeff: that's why I added the clause: "after a thorough education in the meanings of the three degrees".
ReplyDelete