Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Mike Clevenger's avatar

Thank you. I as well have wondered why we say what we do when presenting an apron, and immediately the Entered Apprentice can look around the room and see many aprons that are not plain white lambskins.

I suppose we inherited from our British Brethren the thought that if you have a title you must have some sort of fancy regalia to go along with it. I often wonder how the Royal Family knows what to wear because they seem to have a different "uniform" on for each different event.

As a leadership instructor, I subscribe to the thought that your title does not make you a leader. I have known Masons in leadership positions who led poorly and believed that men should follow them because they wore fancy jewels and a fancy apron.

Your white lambskin with the small emblem sounds perfect and in keeping with the lesson that we all are on the level. I appreciate your thoughts.

John Gebhart's avatar

Grand Master, Your observation about the various adornments on so many aprons may also apply to Masonic "bling" in general. The essence of what we('re supposed to) do has no connection to fancier aprons or award pins scattered all over one's lapels. And the problem isn't that we have all kinds of Masonic finery, the problem is that some brothers ascribe them too much importance.

Like yourself I'm a bit conflicted. I tend to be a "less is more" person and yet I have a few awards and several fancy aprons on which I'm very proud. If we can ever determine the ideal balance I suggest we once and for all settle the dispute surrounding the designated hitter rule. Only then can we answer the question: tastes great or less filling?

14 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?