I can take no credit for any of this. I’m gleefully stealing it from the Worshipful Master of an extremely successful and dynamic Lodge in my Jurisdiction.
But, at our most recent Rummer & Grapes he posed a very interesting idea. I’m not certain if it was a proposition or a thought experiment, but either way, it is certainly interesting, and I thought it would be good for us to discuss.
What if all of our various Masonic organizations got together and mapped out specific ‘lanes’ for each? Specific focuses.
What if our Masonic Lodges turned the entirety of their focus to Making men into Masons, and dropped everything else?
What if, because of that our Scottish Rite, York Rite, and the other smaller but similar organizations turned the entirety of their focus to Masonic/esoteric/fraternal/research education?
What if, because of that our Shrine and its myriad of clubs, plus groups like it, Grotto, Tall Cedars, and the rest turned the entirety of their focus towards having fun?
In other words, what if all of our Masonic organizations specialized in those things that they were created to do? Would that result in a better Masonic experience for Masons?
Would these clearly defined ‘lanes’ result in better cooperation between our various organizations, making us more effective and impactful as a whole?
Freemasonry is a filter by itself. Not everyone that comes to the Order has intentions to turn into an esoteric guru or to really know what the so called secret is. Most just want to have fun with their friends and be in a space that allows them to talk freely with like minded people.
Nothing of this is wrong but it also serves as a way for the Order to found the right ones to pass down the deepest knowledge therefore keeping the Order alive.
Everything is design for that purpose and some will take more time or lives than others.
Thank you for this Brother! I really like the way you mention that Freemasonry can serve as a filter, and undoubtedly that is correct. But, I'd never really thought about it that way before.
Here’s the idea broken up into everyone’s ‘love language’.
To the Blue Lodge Mason:
Is there anything more exciting than introducing a man to the Craft and witnessing that surge of love, interest, and appreciation?
Focus on the Degree conferral experience and build pride in the quality of Masons that originate from your Lodge. Outsource all your research and fun events to the other organizations.
To the York Rite Mason:
Should things not be arranged in such a way that neither envy, discord, nor confusion interrupts the peace and good-fellowship among the workmen?
Focus on ritual and traditions, do not take up the calendar for anything but Degree work. Develop Degree Teams for your District.
To the Scottish Rite Mason:
Reference: Nash Equilibrium, Production Possibility Curve, ‘Wheel of Fortune’ tarot card.
Focus on education, do not take up the calendar for anything but Degree work. Develop ‘Masonic think tanks’ to provide Blue Lodge educational pieces.
To the Shriners and Grotto:
Would you rather be at a lively bar or a formal business meeting?
Focus on fun and fellowship. Own the weekends and host casual events that are free for EA’s and FC’s to let them socialize with Masons from other Lodges.
I was present when a group of Shriners from Tampa came to my province in Canada to give their pitch to make that group an option with no waiting period after becoming a MM… we were told it wasn’t for more money to operate the hospitals (they said they had enough money to run the hospitals for 9 years if there were no Shriners at all!). They said they just wanted to be a third concordant body… a few really good SR guys got up and quietly left the room.
Then the “recruiting” started… I put a stop to Shriners coming to Degrees… especially Thirds. For a group that needed no members and had lots of money… they sure were aggressive recruiters… it was relentless!
Silly me always thought that Shriners (as Masons) were to abide by Masonic rules that include NO RECRUITING! And with all their money they advertise and have a web site called “Be a Shriner Now”… we all know that is a false statement!
I, and lots of others, think that we should go back to just SC and YR as concordant bodies and let Shriners have their run at the entire population instead of the small percentage of same that are Masons.
When I became a Mason, my only real interest was in becoming a Scottish Rite Mason. Based upon what I had read online.
But, my mentor through the three Craft Degrees told me that it would be best if I were to wait at least a year before joining any concordant or appendant body. And he was a superb mentor, so I took his advice.
Actually, I went a little extreme on taking his advice.
I didn't join the Scottish Rite until I was Worshipful Master of my Lodge. I didn't join the York Rite or the Shrine until I was Grand Master. And I didn't join SRICF until I was a Past GM.
And I think that was a really, really solid way of going about it. I didn't join any other body until I had a really clear understanding of Craft Masonry. I didn't know all there is to know about Craft Masonry when I did, indeed, I don't think that any man can ever know all there is to know about it, but I was very well on my way. And I think that was a very good thing.
All of these groups were started by people not finding what they expected in the craft and decided to start their own masonic group to fulfill that need. I have no idea what the grotto, amaranth, tall cedars, etc actually stand for (don't really care either).
The biggest groups, York Rite, Scottish Rite and Shriners all exist for different reasons, and even different reasons from what they were originally started for.
Don't get me started with the OES.
I look at it from the perspective of why do we have all these different groups, not just masonic, but in general? Elks, Eagles, Rotary, Kiwanis, Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias, Knights of Columbus, B'nai B'rith, VFW, American Legion...the list is almost unlimited. Then you have so many cultural organizations, youth organization, etc. I honestly don't think you could come up with a group that isn't duplicated somewhere else.
All of these groups exist to fulfill a need, and that is to gather like minded people to socialize and feel a part of something bigger than themselves.
And that is where Masonry is supposed to be set apart from everyone. The whole "make good men better" thing. Discover the mysteries of life and the universe. Is that what we are today, or are we just like all the other social groups competing for our time and money?
The purpose of a lodge is to make master masons, not a stepping stone to the Shrine. There is nothing inherently wrong with joining the Shrine, or any of the other groups, except your main focus should be on what the craft lodge is for.
I can't think of a single reason why the Shrine (not to keep picking on them, well, maybe) should require masons to join. Just what is masonic about them? Don't get me wrong, I applaud their charitable work, it is above reproach. But it has nothing to do with masonry.
For the York Rite and Scottish rite, you can at least make the arguments that they are extensions of the masonic teachings in their own ways. I don't know enough about all the other groups to weigh in for their goings on, but I suspect they have little to nothing in common with the craft.
I'm sure what I'm writing will rankle a few folks, I just am talking about what I have observed. I may be wrong. Probably am.
I think it would certainly be fair for Craft Masonry to have an evaluation of all of our concordant and appendant bodies. Every group claiming to be a part of the Masonic family. Why was it founded? What is its purpose? Is it fulfilling that purpose? Does it serve a need today? Does it enhances, or detract from Masonry writ large? I think that those are fair questions for Masons to ask, and indeed for Grand Lodges to ask. Actually asking those questions would I think give Masonry a good perspective of where we are at, and where we want to go.
We are admonished to 'Know Thyself' in our personal lives. It makes sense to me that Freemasonry as well should dig into itself, in order to Know Itself.
I have no idea about masonry but I have been thinking about joining a lodge in the coming months. That means you have at least 2 months to study me for how I would react as a 'man approached.' I don't know if I'm reading too much into it, but it seems like the intention is something like spreading an intention, if not a philosophy.
A question: is there any craft which men should hesitate before improving? If not, then does the improvement of all men at least suggest qualities which should be held higher aloft? If so, then would not this effort be hampered by positing the converse of the first question, that of upholding the improvement of man's qualities regardless of its relational matrix to the whole of all other qualities in the context of improvement?
I believe I am likely isolating an age old struggle in Masonry and perhaps in self-improvement movements all together: once a degree of power is achieved, the next steps are arbitrary to some unknown degree. In specification that unknown can be reduced, and yet ultimately without a grand congress in which the different degrees coalesce, arbitrariness will allow continued development in any, even conflicting, directions under the nominal umbrella of the self-improvement movement or religion. Can anyone trace the development of the focus of lodges relative to the historical focuses and successes, and then also see the current situation in the context of each other?
Of course, when I say men, I am imagining all intelligent beings. I try not to speak for women directly, but only imagine the set of transcendent qualities which we all share and by which, through application to the same, we can improve ourselves imperative upon the common recognition of each person's transcendent worthiness. If a women were talking about 'all women' in the context of human self-improvement, I would consider myself related either in form (by sharing the species) or content (applying the credo to myself as best my imagination can do) I believe in successful worlds of sexual dimorphism and traditional gender roles, as much I believe in the success of those where the concept of gender identity is fleshed out in all possibilities. That is, both sides of a single cultural conflict can succeed, if only they could raise enough virtuous qualities. Nothing hinges upon one issue, that I know of, except the co-alignment of each. Because the increasing cost on investment to coercion, a clearly co-aligned virtue signalling effort is creating discord, since it attempts to win by force what should be won by enrichment and common entitlement.
Returning to my original question, I'll address now what could have been done differently.
1) the attainment of co-alignment is fraught by secrecy. If co-aligned ethics is compatible with all possible worlds--not contingent upon upholding the transcendent values, but co-aligned with reality in itself--then further secrecy serves the secret bearers. Therefore all secrecy would be best considered provisional to a revelation, especially when it comes to co-alignment. In a world (like ours) where a secrecy lineage wants to offer service to our common success, then for that to come about, there must exist both an inner culture of openness (otherwise critiques can be silenced) as well as an eventual end of co-alignment secrecy (as it seems we are discussing here) otherwise the benefits of degrees will be in competition with the improvement of our fellow human (arbitrary degrees of freedom gained in unaligned specialization), which will be assumed to be self-adventageous for the sake of self. There is nothing ethically wrong with this, but neither is there an ethical argument to be made in secret which does not require supporting beliefs. For either the ethics are local to the craft, or global and much more delicately handled. Whether or not the choices are co-aligned with ethics is answered in the fear response of everyman to the tower. The hierarchy which supported the structural beliefs will bear its insides on the path to infinity, and then the collective can rebuild with the stones. I don't wish this on anyone, but I think it's worth a realistic consideration that co-alignment of values can be a challenging process. It is made impossible by power-dynamics which need to maintain their own degrees at the cost of common sense: just look at persuation's failure to virtue signal and its recourse to coercion. I am hopeful that with this dose of realism, each human can maintain the maximum number of degrees of freedom, since open discussion and compassionate address will resolve our differences. Especially so, since we have been culturally prepared to accept so many liberties, the co-alignment may yet prove fruitful. Perhaps the tower is already destroyed. Look at us here, discussing this online. Who knows what stones I am picking up here, or how far deep down tower's structure broke?
I'll add that there is an ethical purpose to secrecy's divergence, which is the eventual reunifications of co-aligning values. However this is not an ethical argument for the world in any specific sense, but rather the common background argument in a larger transcendental context. With 'provisional secrecy,' I am proposing that coordinated revelation is compatible with the categorical imperative. All my arguments for transcendent terms are based on the unity prerequisite, namely that there is one transcendence and no more. I can imagine any world succeeding, but not in the context of competing transcendent truths. Otherwise there is no real sense of the word transcendence.
If you aren't in North America, let me know, I'll try to find a different resource for your area.
I read all your comments with a good deal of interest, but will refrain from giving you my answers to the questions posed, as I think it is best to go into Freemasonry as blind as possible, without preconceived notions, and to simply learn from contemplation of the Degrees as they are received.
I'm not sure exactly what form the re-imagined Craft should take, but with numbers as low as they are, some for of reimagining is called for. Maybe, we should consider an integrated approach and the various orders experienced as specialization. Blue Lodge as the boot camp and core. Scottish and York rites and the Shrine identify their unique quality and then present them as specializations within a larger whole.At that point brethren who acquired expertise in those specializations could be called upon when the Blue Lodge had need or interest in those specializations. As examples, Shriners are expert at fund raising and socializing, Scottish Rite as experts in the Esoteric and could teach and present in those topics. I'm not in the York Rite, so I am unqualified to speak to their specializations, but I think you get the idea. Within each Rite its governance would be internal, but in service to the larger Blue Lodge community. The truth of the matter is that the seperateness of these rites today is an illusion, brethren cross lines all the time. Let's just formalize that. Maybe we can find a way to integrate the concordant bodies into the Grand Lodges formally, while still maintaining their uniqueness.
I am in complete agreement with you. I don't know what form our Craft should take in the future, but we must ask ourselves fundamental questions about it, and we must based on the answers we find, strive to reimagine it. Times change, and the management and governance of Freemasonry must change along with the times. Our teachings and philosophies may be eternal, but the way we operate certainly is not.
I want more ESOTERIC! More! So much MORE. More Ritual. More Introspection. More Philosophy. More Tarot. More Guardian Angels. More innovation. More creativity. More King Solomon Goetic Tradition. More symbolism. More...I'm not afraid of no ghosts.
I will be at the Tarot Symposium for the entire event. I'm not yet certain about the Esoteric Conference, I love it each year, but have to adjust my schedule in order to be able to attend.
I've been to six of the last six or so Stated meetings as Esoterika. I'm looking into attending Esotericism in Freemasonry Conference at the Occidental Lodge from Friday September 27th to Sunday September 29th as well as the October 22nd Table Lodge there. Always looking for more opportunities for further light and Truth.
Freemasonry is a filter by itself. Not everyone that comes to the Order has intentions to turn into an esoteric guru or to really know what the so called secret is. Most just want to have fun with their friends and be in a space that allows them to talk freely with like minded people.
Nothing of this is wrong but it also serves as a way for the Order to found the right ones to pass down the deepest knowledge therefore keeping the Order alive.
Everything is design for that purpose and some will take more time or lives than others.
Thank you for this Brother! I really like the way you mention that Freemasonry can serve as a filter, and undoubtedly that is correct. But, I'd never really thought about it that way before.
Here’s the idea broken up into everyone’s ‘love language’.
To the Blue Lodge Mason:
Is there anything more exciting than introducing a man to the Craft and witnessing that surge of love, interest, and appreciation?
Focus on the Degree conferral experience and build pride in the quality of Masons that originate from your Lodge. Outsource all your research and fun events to the other organizations.
To the York Rite Mason:
Should things not be arranged in such a way that neither envy, discord, nor confusion interrupts the peace and good-fellowship among the workmen?
Focus on ritual and traditions, do not take up the calendar for anything but Degree work. Develop Degree Teams for your District.
To the Scottish Rite Mason:
Reference: Nash Equilibrium, Production Possibility Curve, ‘Wheel of Fortune’ tarot card.
Focus on education, do not take up the calendar for anything but Degree work. Develop ‘Masonic think tanks’ to provide Blue Lodge educational pieces.
To the Shriners and Grotto:
Would you rather be at a lively bar or a formal business meeting?
Focus on fun and fellowship. Own the weekends and host casual events that are free for EA’s and FC’s to let them socialize with Masons from other Lodges.
Thank you Brother. I find this to be really interesting to consider, and, I think, well worth our consideration.
I was present when a group of Shriners from Tampa came to my province in Canada to give their pitch to make that group an option with no waiting period after becoming a MM… we were told it wasn’t for more money to operate the hospitals (they said they had enough money to run the hospitals for 9 years if there were no Shriners at all!). They said they just wanted to be a third concordant body… a few really good SR guys got up and quietly left the room.
Then the “recruiting” started… I put a stop to Shriners coming to Degrees… especially Thirds. For a group that needed no members and had lots of money… they sure were aggressive recruiters… it was relentless!
Silly me always thought that Shriners (as Masons) were to abide by Masonic rules that include NO RECRUITING! And with all their money they advertise and have a web site called “Be a Shriner Now”… we all know that is a false statement!
I, and lots of others, think that we should go back to just SC and YR as concordant bodies and let Shriners have their run at the entire population instead of the small percentage of same that are Masons.
When I became a Mason, my only real interest was in becoming a Scottish Rite Mason. Based upon what I had read online.
But, my mentor through the three Craft Degrees told me that it would be best if I were to wait at least a year before joining any concordant or appendant body. And he was a superb mentor, so I took his advice.
Actually, I went a little extreme on taking his advice.
I didn't join the Scottish Rite until I was Worshipful Master of my Lodge. I didn't join the York Rite or the Shrine until I was Grand Master. And I didn't join SRICF until I was a Past GM.
And I think that was a really, really solid way of going about it. I didn't join any other body until I had a really clear understanding of Craft Masonry. I didn't know all there is to know about Craft Masonry when I did, indeed, I don't think that any man can ever know all there is to know about it, but I was very well on my way. And I think that was a very good thing.
All of these groups were started by people not finding what they expected in the craft and decided to start their own masonic group to fulfill that need. I have no idea what the grotto, amaranth, tall cedars, etc actually stand for (don't really care either).
The biggest groups, York Rite, Scottish Rite and Shriners all exist for different reasons, and even different reasons from what they were originally started for.
Don't get me started with the OES.
I look at it from the perspective of why do we have all these different groups, not just masonic, but in general? Elks, Eagles, Rotary, Kiwanis, Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias, Knights of Columbus, B'nai B'rith, VFW, American Legion...the list is almost unlimited. Then you have so many cultural organizations, youth organization, etc. I honestly don't think you could come up with a group that isn't duplicated somewhere else.
All of these groups exist to fulfill a need, and that is to gather like minded people to socialize and feel a part of something bigger than themselves.
And that is where Masonry is supposed to be set apart from everyone. The whole "make good men better" thing. Discover the mysteries of life and the universe. Is that what we are today, or are we just like all the other social groups competing for our time and money?
The purpose of a lodge is to make master masons, not a stepping stone to the Shrine. There is nothing inherently wrong with joining the Shrine, or any of the other groups, except your main focus should be on what the craft lodge is for.
I can't think of a single reason why the Shrine (not to keep picking on them, well, maybe) should require masons to join. Just what is masonic about them? Don't get me wrong, I applaud their charitable work, it is above reproach. But it has nothing to do with masonry.
For the York Rite and Scottish rite, you can at least make the arguments that they are extensions of the masonic teachings in their own ways. I don't know enough about all the other groups to weigh in for their goings on, but I suspect they have little to nothing in common with the craft.
I'm sure what I'm writing will rankle a few folks, I just am talking about what I have observed. I may be wrong. Probably am.
I think it would certainly be fair for Craft Masonry to have an evaluation of all of our concordant and appendant bodies. Every group claiming to be a part of the Masonic family. Why was it founded? What is its purpose? Is it fulfilling that purpose? Does it serve a need today? Does it enhances, or detract from Masonry writ large? I think that those are fair questions for Masons to ask, and indeed for Grand Lodges to ask. Actually asking those questions would I think give Masonry a good perspective of where we are at, and where we want to go.
We are admonished to 'Know Thyself' in our personal lives. It makes sense to me that Freemasonry as well should dig into itself, in order to Know Itself.
I have no idea about masonry but I have been thinking about joining a lodge in the coming months. That means you have at least 2 months to study me for how I would react as a 'man approached.' I don't know if I'm reading too much into it, but it seems like the intention is something like spreading an intention, if not a philosophy.
A question: is there any craft which men should hesitate before improving? If not, then does the improvement of all men at least suggest qualities which should be held higher aloft? If so, then would not this effort be hampered by positing the converse of the first question, that of upholding the improvement of man's qualities regardless of its relational matrix to the whole of all other qualities in the context of improvement?
I believe I am likely isolating an age old struggle in Masonry and perhaps in self-improvement movements all together: once a degree of power is achieved, the next steps are arbitrary to some unknown degree. In specification that unknown can be reduced, and yet ultimately without a grand congress in which the different degrees coalesce, arbitrariness will allow continued development in any, even conflicting, directions under the nominal umbrella of the self-improvement movement or religion. Can anyone trace the development of the focus of lodges relative to the historical focuses and successes, and then also see the current situation in the context of each other?
Of course, when I say men, I am imagining all intelligent beings. I try not to speak for women directly, but only imagine the set of transcendent qualities which we all share and by which, through application to the same, we can improve ourselves imperative upon the common recognition of each person's transcendent worthiness. If a women were talking about 'all women' in the context of human self-improvement, I would consider myself related either in form (by sharing the species) or content (applying the credo to myself as best my imagination can do) I believe in successful worlds of sexual dimorphism and traditional gender roles, as much I believe in the success of those where the concept of gender identity is fleshed out in all possibilities. That is, both sides of a single cultural conflict can succeed, if only they could raise enough virtuous qualities. Nothing hinges upon one issue, that I know of, except the co-alignment of each. Because the increasing cost on investment to coercion, a clearly co-aligned virtue signalling effort is creating discord, since it attempts to win by force what should be won by enrichment and common entitlement.
Returning to my original question, I'll address now what could have been done differently.
1) the attainment of co-alignment is fraught by secrecy. If co-aligned ethics is compatible with all possible worlds--not contingent upon upholding the transcendent values, but co-aligned with reality in itself--then further secrecy serves the secret bearers. Therefore all secrecy would be best considered provisional to a revelation, especially when it comes to co-alignment. In a world (like ours) where a secrecy lineage wants to offer service to our common success, then for that to come about, there must exist both an inner culture of openness (otherwise critiques can be silenced) as well as an eventual end of co-alignment secrecy (as it seems we are discussing here) otherwise the benefits of degrees will be in competition with the improvement of our fellow human (arbitrary degrees of freedom gained in unaligned specialization), which will be assumed to be self-adventageous for the sake of self. There is nothing ethically wrong with this, but neither is there an ethical argument to be made in secret which does not require supporting beliefs. For either the ethics are local to the craft, or global and much more delicately handled. Whether or not the choices are co-aligned with ethics is answered in the fear response of everyman to the tower. The hierarchy which supported the structural beliefs will bear its insides on the path to infinity, and then the collective can rebuild with the stones. I don't wish this on anyone, but I think it's worth a realistic consideration that co-alignment of values can be a challenging process. It is made impossible by power-dynamics which need to maintain their own degrees at the cost of common sense: just look at persuation's failure to virtue signal and its recourse to coercion. I am hopeful that with this dose of realism, each human can maintain the maximum number of degrees of freedom, since open discussion and compassionate address will resolve our differences. Especially so, since we have been culturally prepared to accept so many liberties, the co-alignment may yet prove fruitful. Perhaps the tower is already destroyed. Look at us here, discussing this online. Who knows what stones I am picking up here, or how far deep down tower's structure broke?
I'll add that there is an ethical purpose to secrecy's divergence, which is the eventual reunifications of co-aligning values. However this is not an ethical argument for the world in any specific sense, but rather the common background argument in a larger transcendental context. With 'provisional secrecy,' I am proposing that coordinated revelation is compatible with the categorical imperative. All my arguments for transcendent terms are based on the unity prerequisite, namely that there is one transcendence and no more. I can imagine any world succeeding, but not in the context of competing transcendent truths. Otherwise there is no real sense of the word transcendence.
I'm assuming that you are in North America, if that assumption is correct, you can find a local Masonic Lodge here:
https://beafreemason.org/
If you aren't in North America, let me know, I'll try to find a different resource for your area.
I read all your comments with a good deal of interest, but will refrain from giving you my answers to the questions posed, as I think it is best to go into Freemasonry as blind as possible, without preconceived notions, and to simply learn from contemplation of the Degrees as they are received.
I'm not sure exactly what form the re-imagined Craft should take, but with numbers as low as they are, some for of reimagining is called for. Maybe, we should consider an integrated approach and the various orders experienced as specialization. Blue Lodge as the boot camp and core. Scottish and York rites and the Shrine identify their unique quality and then present them as specializations within a larger whole.At that point brethren who acquired expertise in those specializations could be called upon when the Blue Lodge had need or interest in those specializations. As examples, Shriners are expert at fund raising and socializing, Scottish Rite as experts in the Esoteric and could teach and present in those topics. I'm not in the York Rite, so I am unqualified to speak to their specializations, but I think you get the idea. Within each Rite its governance would be internal, but in service to the larger Blue Lodge community. The truth of the matter is that the seperateness of these rites today is an illusion, brethren cross lines all the time. Let's just formalize that. Maybe we can find a way to integrate the concordant bodies into the Grand Lodges formally, while still maintaining their uniqueness.
I am in complete agreement with you. I don't know what form our Craft should take in the future, but we must ask ourselves fundamental questions about it, and we must based on the answers we find, strive to reimagine it. Times change, and the management and governance of Freemasonry must change along with the times. Our teachings and philosophies may be eternal, but the way we operate certainly is not.
I want more ESOTERIC! More! So much MORE. More Ritual. More Introspection. More Philosophy. More Tarot. More Guardian Angels. More innovation. More creativity. More King Solomon Goetic Tradition. More symbolism. More...I'm not afraid of no ghosts.
There is a great deal of Esotericism in Freemasonry, but it must be sought and found. Might I suggest as a good place to start:
https://www.esotericmasonry.com/
As for Tarot, I would suggest:
https://nwtarotsymposium.com/
I will be at the Tarot Symposium for the entire event. I'm not yet certain about the Esoteric Conference, I love it each year, but have to adjust my schedule in order to be able to attend.
I've been to six of the last six or so Stated meetings as Esoterika. I'm looking into attending Esotericism in Freemasonry Conference at the Occidental Lodge from Friday September 27th to Sunday September 29th as well as the October 22nd Table Lodge there. Always looking for more opportunities for further light and Truth.