Last week I attended a meeting of a Lodge that takes Freemasonry seriously. Extremely seriously. They are what I would consider to be an Observant Lodge. For example over the course of many years they have dissected every aspect of the Degree Experience, working to infuse meaning into every single detail. From the moment that a man is informed that they have elected to give him the Degrees of Masonry to the Charge, every detail is carefully crafted and finely tuned.
Last week I also attended a Masonic meeting that was to the casual observer, the direct opposite. It was marked with laughter, storytelling, a copious amount of alcohol (it was not a Stated Meeting, nor did it take place within a Lodge room) and a great deal of frivolity. These men focus on building bonds of Brotherhood within their Lodges, and on hyper local but extensive charity in their community. Stated Meeting or other event, either way, a visitor to this group will have a superb time and quickly build friendships.
These two groups are as different from each other as our sun and moon.
Yet they are both practicing Freemasonry.
Having spent time with each of them, I would argue that they are both practicing Freemasonry extremely well. That they both serve as shining examples within our Craft. I admire both of these groups, and I have friends within each of them.
Yet they are both radically different in their approach to our sacred institution.
And that is perfectly OK.
In fact, that is a good thing.
What speaks to one man will not necessarily speak to another man. What one man finds interesting will not necessarily be interesting to another man. What one man considers to be vital will seem trivial to another.
Men are unique unto themselves.
As such, what might be one Man’s ideal Lodge might strike another man as an absurd assemblage.
This is why diversity in the character and personality of Lodges is so important. This diversity allows that every man can find a Lodge that suits him, assuming that he is willing and able to travel if need be.
I think that there is a bit of a drive for uniformity within Grand Jurisdictions around the United States. I imagine that is quite understandable in this land of chain restaurants where one’s hamburger and fries ordered in Seattle will taste exactly the same when ordered in Miami.
Perhaps the clearest example of this in Washington is the Standard Work. Work that no man save the sitting Grand Master is allowed to perform with any deviation whatsoever. That’s OK. It is our Work, adopted, refined, and perfected over generations. It is a good thing.
But I think, as with all good things, uniformity is best when taken in moderation. We do not want a Grand Lodge that dictates everything to Lodges. We do not want our Lodges to all be exactly the same, with as little deviation from each other as are fast food outlets within a single chain.
We want the Lodge that takes the ritualistic aspects of Freemasonry so seriously that they become famous for it, and we want the Lodge that becomes equally famous for the hearty and hale bonds of Brotherhood it creates within men.
We want both these Lodges, and a myriad of Lodges in between them, for in that way, and in that way alone will we have at least one Lodge that can resonate with and be important to, every good man.
The reborn Masonic Book Club has just announced its second book. Masonry Dissect’d by Samuel Prichard, first published in 1730.
I am lucky in that I have a complete set of the original MBC offerings in my office at the Grand Lodge, and I’m starting a collection of my own now that the old club has been re-created. I urge you to consider doing the same. Information can be found at:
https://scottishrite.org/media-publications/masonic-book-club/
Let’s prove Mackey wrong. Let’s show each other that Masons can be readers!
Thank you for your support of Emeth. If you enjoyed this essay, will you consider forwarding it to your Masonic friends, or sharing it on social media?
Good morning Grand Master,
I completely agree that a one-size-fits-all approach to our Lodges would damage our Fraternity. At the same time I believe we need the shared purpose of imbedding the lessons of our degrees and rituals into our everyday lives.
Taken to the extreme, emphasis on the ritual without understanding how the lessons help us in the outer world runs the risk of creating a Lodge full of Masonic trivia experts. Emphasis on fellowship without lessons that illustrate the practical application of the ritual run the risk of converting the ms of rft int int an exs.
All things in moderation.
And one thing you wrote really resonates with me: "We do not want a Grand Lodge that dictates everything to Lodges." Is there any way you can proclaim that this statement becomes the first page of the Washington Masonic Code?
As we've discussed before, a lodge should be able to identify just what kind of a lodge they are. Without direction or participation a lodge is just a building with guys wearing suits who meet once a month to pay bills. Too many lodges I've seen in our jurisdiction (and I assume elsewhere) fall into the same tedious group. I spend more time socializing with my little motorcycle chapter I ride with than my fraternal brothers. The chapter has a singular purpose, to advance motorcycle rights in the state, and we do what we can to help promote and protect our rights for the benefit of everyone who rides.
It should be the same with the craft. Being able to recite memorized words is not masonry. Arguing about bills, and inconsequential business in a meeting isn't masonry. We have a singular goal, but all too often fail to pursue it.