I couldn’t agree with you more. Younger, newer members should be encouraged as well as older, established members who may be willing to step out of their comfort zone and speak or present in lodge. Not knowing all the facts, and if the criticism of the younger Mason took place in lodge, but if it did, where was the WM during this? I believe that since he approved the presentation he should have put an end to the comments before they got to where they did.
I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I do believe there is an entire generation or two that simply lost their way in the fraternity. This article points that out. While disgusting, it's also hopeful that there is a new generation of masons coming in demanding more than the same old shit of the past. I'd like to think that I'm part of that group. The key is to keep fighting to make the changes you think should be made for the betterment of the fraternity.
If it is within the bounds of our landmarks, it should either be publicly encouraged or if some adjustment is needed, that should be done gently and in private. Furthermore, I have to wonder how a younger brother could have gotten so far off the mark, is his older brothers had been present in his life, mentoring and aiding his development as a mason?
My wife and I teach a martial art. Our late sensei insisted, and now we insist, that the most important student in class is the newest one. It makes for a healthy class vibe - and it’s more fun.
To be fair, not all "education" topics, nor interpretations on the symbolism of Masonry are valid. I could see how a WM would prevent or take issue with certain topics. In this instance, we are only hearing one side of the story. Should we be so quick to condemn an entire Lodge? Should we not consider that in fact the Lodge was valid in their criticisms? After all, it is a Lodge's prerogative to determine when an Apprentice is proficient.
Good Masonry > Increasing Membership
That being said, one could take issue with, to coin a phrase, MINO Masons (Masons in Name Only), or those who were rapidly pushed through the Degrees without proper training nor adherence to the nature and principles of our institution. It could be the case that memorization of a pancake recipe took more precedent than an understanding of our Craft. Under those circumstances, I would expect behavior like what was presented.
"Not all interpretations on the symbolism of Masonry are valid" - perhaps, but does that mean you're scolded and told not to do that in the future? I've heard people's ideas on some of the symbolism in freemasonry that I didn't necessarily agree with, but that doesn't give me the right to shut them down. They have a right to voice that opinion, and there is nothing wrong with hearing other people's point of view. Perhaps a better way would have been to open up discussion and allow others to present their own ideas instead of trashing his.
Remember, the lessons and symbolism are there for each man to discover on their own, no one can tell you what they are. They may or may not be right. Up to you to decide.
Oct 21, 2023·edited Oct 21, 2023Liked by Cameron M. Bailey
Excellent points! Honestly, I could not fathom why a Lodge would react that way.
I would suggest, however, that our symbols conceal lessons, which is why they must be taught by proficient Master Masons. The first task we give the EA's in our lodge is to answer questions from our Jurisdictions New Candidate Education Program. This ensures they know the 'book answer', because there is indeed a book answer. If you do not know the true lesson behind a symbol, that was overtly given during your degree, then your personal interpretation will likely miss the mark.
I couldn’t agree with you more. Younger, newer members should be encouraged as well as older, established members who may be willing to step out of their comfort zone and speak or present in lodge. Not knowing all the facts, and if the criticism of the younger Mason took place in lodge, but if it did, where was the WM during this? I believe that since he approved the presentation he should have put an end to the comments before they got to where they did.
I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I do believe there is an entire generation or two that simply lost their way in the fraternity. This article points that out. While disgusting, it's also hopeful that there is a new generation of masons coming in demanding more than the same old shit of the past. I'd like to think that I'm part of that group. The key is to keep fighting to make the changes you think should be made for the betterment of the fraternity.
If it is within the bounds of our landmarks, it should either be publicly encouraged or if some adjustment is needed, that should be done gently and in private. Furthermore, I have to wonder how a younger brother could have gotten so far off the mark, is his older brothers had been present in his life, mentoring and aiding his development as a mason?
My wife and I teach a martial art. Our late sensei insisted, and now we insist, that the most important student in class is the newest one. It makes for a healthy class vibe - and it’s more fun.
To be fair, not all "education" topics, nor interpretations on the symbolism of Masonry are valid. I could see how a WM would prevent or take issue with certain topics. In this instance, we are only hearing one side of the story. Should we be so quick to condemn an entire Lodge? Should we not consider that in fact the Lodge was valid in their criticisms? After all, it is a Lodge's prerogative to determine when an Apprentice is proficient.
Good Masonry > Increasing Membership
That being said, one could take issue with, to coin a phrase, MINO Masons (Masons in Name Only), or those who were rapidly pushed through the Degrees without proper training nor adherence to the nature and principles of our institution. It could be the case that memorization of a pancake recipe took more precedent than an understanding of our Craft. Under those circumstances, I would expect behavior like what was presented.
"Not all interpretations on the symbolism of Masonry are valid" - perhaps, but does that mean you're scolded and told not to do that in the future? I've heard people's ideas on some of the symbolism in freemasonry that I didn't necessarily agree with, but that doesn't give me the right to shut them down. They have a right to voice that opinion, and there is nothing wrong with hearing other people's point of view. Perhaps a better way would have been to open up discussion and allow others to present their own ideas instead of trashing his.
Remember, the lessons and symbolism are there for each man to discover on their own, no one can tell you what they are. They may or may not be right. Up to you to decide.
Excellent points! Honestly, I could not fathom why a Lodge would react that way.
I would suggest, however, that our symbols conceal lessons, which is why they must be taught by proficient Master Masons. The first task we give the EA's in our lodge is to answer questions from our Jurisdictions New Candidate Education Program. This ensures they know the 'book answer', because there is indeed a book answer. If you do not know the true lesson behind a symbol, that was overtly given during your degree, then your personal interpretation will likely miss the mark.