This post is where we can discuss the final four recommendations made in The Laudable Pursuit.
If you need to read this short, but vital book, you can find it online here, or purchase a printed copy here. I certainly encourage you to do so. I first encountered this book when I was still a wet behind the ears Mason, and it has influenced my Masonic practice ever since.
I’ll provide each of the final recommendations below, and add a few comments to get our discussion of them started. I hope that we can have a solid discussion about each of them, because I believe that by doing so we can find a good path for Freemasonry’s future.
10. End our preoccupation with saving the appendant bodies. New Masons should wait one year after being raised before joining an appendant body. The Lodge is not responsible for the troubles of other groups that compete for our members' reduced free time and discretionary cash. The other members of the Masonic family have a lifetime to seek a man’s participation. Let’s make him a Freemason first.
I very strongly agree with this.
Like many who become Freemasons today, I read a great deal about Freemasonry, online, before I became a Mason. And that reading had me fully and completely convinced that I wanted to be a Scottish Rite Mason.
And I think that has largely proven true. I really value my Scottish Rite membership. I didn’t seem to fit in with the first Valley I joined, so after a couple of years I went inactive. No one seemed to even notice that, until of course I was elected Junior Grand Warden, then they wanted me back. But, I went through the Master Craftsman Program and joined the Scottish Rite Research Society. I’ve found both of those to be truly amazing resources, worth much more than their cost. Quite recently I’ve moved my membership to a different Valley. It’s really tiny, but it is fun, and it clearly values those of us who are members.
I’ve also attended, along with a number of Washington Masons, the Spring Reunion at Guthrie. That has proved to be one of the very best Masonic experiences I’ve ever had, and I look forward to returning.
All of that is my brief history with the Scottish Rite.
But, I didn’t actually join the Scottish Rite until I was a pretty seasoned Mason.
I received, from my mentor, the advice given in this recommendation. Even though he knew about my interest in the Scottish Rite, he encouraged me to wait at least a year before joining. I followed that advice, and exceeded it by years. I don’t think that I joined Scottish Rite until I was Worshipful Master of my Lodge, or was very close to being Installed as such.
And that served me extremely well. My focus was 100% on the Craft Lodge, allowing me the opportunity to come to understand Craft Masonry.
I did not join any other large appendant or concordant body until I became Grand Master. I think that was wise as well. We’ll never be able to truly understand our Craft if we overwhelm ourselves with so many attached groups, so quickly.
11. Encourage local Lodges to have their own personality, style and customs. Cookie-cutter demands that each Lodge must look, feel and act alike is stifling and ignores human behavior. In England and elsewhere it is common for many rituals to be worked within a given jurisdiction under the same Grand Lodge. It should not be unlawful to for a Lodge to work Emulation, Scottish Rite or other alternative but regular rituals for the three degrees. Greater variety means greater knowledge and deeper understanding of our heritage. We must not simply stick our heads in the Masonic sands and pretend other rituals do not exist.
Here in Washington, I think that our Jurisdiction has done a good job encouraging Lodges to develop and highlight their own unique personalities and focus. Indeed, we formally teach the importance of doing this at our Lodge Leadership Retreat each year.
But, I think that this needs to go further. That we need to, as is recommended, open up our ritual. It makes no sense to me that we have fully standardized and dictate every single word in our Ritual. Other rituals than our own version of the Preston/Webb Work exist, and Lodges should be free to explore them.
Think how much more Masonic thought would be stimulated, if different Lodges used different rituals, focusing on different aspects of our Craft. Think about how Masonic visitation would increase if one were to get a much different ritual experience by simply visiting the Lodge in the next town over.
Does north Seattle truly need 12 Lodges working the exact same ritual? Wouldn’t it be awesome if one of them worked a Scottish Rite Craft ritual, or one of the variations practiced to the north of us in British Columbia and the Yukon?
Why are we too afraid to allow this?
Doesn’t fear, as my friend and Brother Frank points out, kill Masonry?
12. Slow down, not speed up our degree process. One day classes will quickly die by running out of candidates who want to participate in such mass raisings. They are already shrinking in popularity and becoming less successful in every year and in every jurisdiction that tries them. New Masons want to learn and understand before moving on.
My Jurisdiction never really bought into the whole One Day Class thing. I think it was done a time or two, long ago, before the Brothers roundly rejected it.
But we still, in a lot of cases, push our Masons too fast. What’s wrong with a guy spending a year between Degrees? Wouldn’t that year give him time to reflect on the Degree he has received instead of slamming him right to the next one?
And doesn’t this desire of a Lodge to make a man a Master Mason as quickly as possible put undue pressure on him?
I became a Master Mason over a short period of months. I suspect I would have become a brighter Mason had it taken significantly longer.
13. The internet is making the Masonic world smaller on a daily basis. Masons from around the world can converse instantly. Questions of recognition and regularity must be more thoughtfully weighed and decided upon, and multiple Grand Lodges within the same jurisdictions will be common in the future. That situation already exits in the US with Prince Hall recognition. The same should be true in foreign jurisdictions where multiple, regular Grand Lodges stubbornly shun each other. Ignoring these issues will only be detrimental to the future of Freemasonry.
Two or three years ago I took a contingent of Masons with me to Mexico. While there, we visited two very different Craft Lodges.
The first Lodge works a ritual that mirrors ours here in Washington, almost word for word. The Lodge and its Grand Lodge is governed very similarly if not exactly the same as my own. Its Grand Master joined us during our visit.
The second Lodge works a Scottish Rite derived Craft ritual, vastly different from what we are used to here in Washington. It demands much from its initiates, meeting four times more often than the average Lodge in my Jurisdiction. We were joined by its Grand Master during our visit as well.
But here’s the really radical departure from practices here in the United States:
Both Lodges, from different Grand Lodges, meet in the exact same building. Two completely separate Jurisdictions share the same facility.
That we demand Legitimacy of Origin for foreign Grand Lodges is a proper standard for us to hold. That we demand Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction within the United States seems a step too far, and an unneeded restriction on Freemasonry.
We also, as Masons in the English tradition, need to start rethinking our position regarding Continental Freemasonry. The French tradition has a long and just as honorable history as our own, having, as we have done, improved the lives of millions over the course of hundreds of years. Prominent American Masons have practiced Masonry in the Continental tradition, and indeed our own Scottish Rite grew out of that tradition.
The fact that we don’t work, collectively, to heal the schism between us makes no sense. By allowing it to continue to fester, we lock ourselves away from greater understanding of our Craft.
Get more from Cameron M. Bailey in the Substack app
Available for iOS and Android
So, those are the final recommendations, and a few of my brief thoughts on each.
I hope that you’ll join me for an in depth discussion of each of them in the comments below.
I support one single ritual for our jurisdiction. There should be a standard that all masons should be held to, even if that standard is a bare minimum.
But...
There is nothing stopping a lodge from cracking open the Scottish Rite ritual(s) for study. There is nothing stopping a lodge from performing one of these degrees, as long as it's not a substitute for a brother's progression. It can be treated like all of the other unofficial "fun" degrees we have around the state. In fact, if a lodge was to spend the effort to learn an entirely new ritual for presentation to the brothers, I'd attend, even if it was just out of curiosity.
A brother's progression is entirely up to him. There are many factors that dictate when they are ready for the next degree, and everyone will progress at different speeds. There is nothing wrong with getting all three degrees within one year, if the brother was able to absorb the material. Some can, some can't. They have a lifetime after receiving the degrees to dig into them deeper. Most don't, but that's not because they don't have the opportunity.
Our GL should never, ever, recognize another GL that doesn't conform to the basic landmarks of recognition.
>>>There is nothing stopping a lodge from performing one of these degrees, as long as it's not a >>>substitute for a brother's progression. It can be treated like all of the other unofficial "fun" >>>degrees we have around the state.
I actually don't know that this might be true. Depending on who the GM was at the time, I could see a massive freak out if a Lodge attempted to exemplify something like one of the Scottish Rite versions of one of our Craft Degrees.
And I don't mean conferring the Degree, I just mean acting it out for people to see.
I think there could be a massive amount of pushback to a Lodge attempting this.
>>>Our GL should never, ever, recognize another GL that doesn't conform to the basic landmarks >>>of recognition.
I'm not sure if this is referencing the bit about Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, or Continental style Freemasonry.
We already recognize Grand Lodges that don't exercise Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, although we don't really talk about it much. But, of course that had to be done in order to recognize Prince Hall Grand Lodges in the United States. And it is done frequently elsewhere in the world. In those cases, we will recognize two or more GL's in the same territory as long as they both exist via treaty.
I do think that if we were to open a dialog with those Grand Lodges/Orients practicing Continental style Masonry we could likely move to a place of understanding and compromise, without necessarily violating our own beliefs about Freemasonry. We were clearly moving that way during World War 1, when US Masons, from at least some Jurisdictions were permitted to visit Lodges of the Grand Orient of France. When the war ended, we quickly ran back to our own corners, but at least one of our Lodges here in Washington has a fine collection of artifacts that were given to it's Masons stationed in France by Grand Orient Lodges during that war.
12. Slow down, not speed up our degree process. Yes, and: I'm of the belief that the "lets make it easier" movement is a dramatic mistake, maybe a catastrophic one. In this modern world, we've developed an attitude of "we've got to make it easier!" "It's all a numbers game!" "People won't come if it's too hard!" This is true of all fraternities, and organizations, more especially this of ours.
Yet, when you look at military recruiting numbers for example, it appears that this philosophy is possibly less correct than conventional wisdom would have it be.
There is one and only one branch of the US Armed Forces that does not regularly fall short of recruiting goals. The USMC.
Within the various branches, which parts of the organizations have less problems filling their rolls?
The ones who are more exclusive, like the AF PJs, the US Submarine Service, SEALs, Delta, the Rangers, Fighter pilots...
The point here is that those outfits state boldly "ARE YOU GOOD ENOUGH to be one of us? PROVE IT!"
That challenge never goes out of fashion.
Exclusivity is NOT a bad word. Make our existence known, make our goals and beliefs known, show our works, and then ask, "Can you be a part of this? Do you have the dedication, and character? Would you like to find out? To be one, ask one."
Your take on No. 10 strikes the right balance. We don't want to abolish the Concordant bodies in a foolhardy attempt to bolster Lodge attendance, but at the same time, those Concordants shouldn't be trying to sell their group like a Kirby vacuum cleaner. Yeah, I know their leadership pushes the sales pitches, but from personal experience, I know it doesn't work.
I joined the Scottish Rite in 2000, right after my first term as Worshipful Master. I joined the York Rite 9 years later, towards the beginning of my 2nd term in the East. I got much more out of the York Rite ceremonies than I did from the Scottish Rite, despite the absolutely brilliant degree work from the Olympia Valley. If the two Concordants were swapped in when I received the degrees, I'm sure I'd be active in the Scottish Rite instead. I wish I had waited longer before joining the Scottish Rite.
I'll pick on the Shrine for just a second, but the criticism isn't directed only at that group. It's just that the example comes closest to my mind. These are two things that have happened quite recently, in my town.
-The local Shrine Installed its officers at a banquet facility in the building directly behind my Lodge. A Lodge scheduled its own Installation in our building, to start right after the Shrine's event ended. Out of all those Shriners, only a single one made the extremely short walk over to attend the Lodge's Installation.
-That same local Shrine got into contact with two of my Lodge's Entered Apprentices somehow or another and pestered them both to join. Long before either of them were even Master Masons. Before either of them had even proven proficiency on the EA Degree.
The Shrine does a heck of a lot of amazing and good work. It is a wonderful organization. But, in my area it is dying. Quickly dying. That quick death is directly the result of doing things like the two things mentioned above.
I support one single ritual for our jurisdiction. There should be a standard that all masons should be held to, even if that standard is a bare minimum.
But...
There is nothing stopping a lodge from cracking open the Scottish Rite ritual(s) for study. There is nothing stopping a lodge from performing one of these degrees, as long as it's not a substitute for a brother's progression. It can be treated like all of the other unofficial "fun" degrees we have around the state. In fact, if a lodge was to spend the effort to learn an entirely new ritual for presentation to the brothers, I'd attend, even if it was just out of curiosity.
A brother's progression is entirely up to him. There are many factors that dictate when they are ready for the next degree, and everyone will progress at different speeds. There is nothing wrong with getting all three degrees within one year, if the brother was able to absorb the material. Some can, some can't. They have a lifetime after receiving the degrees to dig into them deeper. Most don't, but that's not because they don't have the opportunity.
Our GL should never, ever, recognize another GL that doesn't conform to the basic landmarks of recognition.
>>>There is nothing stopping a lodge from performing one of these degrees, as long as it's not a >>>substitute for a brother's progression. It can be treated like all of the other unofficial "fun" >>>degrees we have around the state.
I actually don't know that this might be true. Depending on who the GM was at the time, I could see a massive freak out if a Lodge attempted to exemplify something like one of the Scottish Rite versions of one of our Craft Degrees.
And I don't mean conferring the Degree, I just mean acting it out for people to see.
I think there could be a massive amount of pushback to a Lodge attempting this.
>>>Our GL should never, ever, recognize another GL that doesn't conform to the basic landmarks >>>of recognition.
I'm not sure if this is referencing the bit about Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, or Continental style Freemasonry.
We already recognize Grand Lodges that don't exercise Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, although we don't really talk about it much. But, of course that had to be done in order to recognize Prince Hall Grand Lodges in the United States. And it is done frequently elsewhere in the world. In those cases, we will recognize two or more GL's in the same territory as long as they both exist via treaty.
I do think that if we were to open a dialog with those Grand Lodges/Orients practicing Continental style Masonry we could likely move to a place of understanding and compromise, without necessarily violating our own beliefs about Freemasonry. We were clearly moving that way during World War 1, when US Masons, from at least some Jurisdictions were permitted to visit Lodges of the Grand Orient of France. When the war ended, we quickly ran back to our own corners, but at least one of our Lodges here in Washington has a fine collection of artifacts that were given to it's Masons stationed in France by Grand Orient Lodges during that war.
12. Slow down, not speed up our degree process. Yes, and: I'm of the belief that the "lets make it easier" movement is a dramatic mistake, maybe a catastrophic one. In this modern world, we've developed an attitude of "we've got to make it easier!" "It's all a numbers game!" "People won't come if it's too hard!" This is true of all fraternities, and organizations, more especially this of ours.
Yet, when you look at military recruiting numbers for example, it appears that this philosophy is possibly less correct than conventional wisdom would have it be.
There is one and only one branch of the US Armed Forces that does not regularly fall short of recruiting goals. The USMC.
Within the various branches, which parts of the organizations have less problems filling their rolls?
The ones who are more exclusive, like the AF PJs, the US Submarine Service, SEALs, Delta, the Rangers, Fighter pilots...
The point here is that those outfits state boldly "ARE YOU GOOD ENOUGH to be one of us? PROVE IT!"
That challenge never goes out of fashion.
Exclusivity is NOT a bad word. Make our existence known, make our goals and beliefs known, show our works, and then ask, "Can you be a part of this? Do you have the dedication, and character? Would you like to find out? To be one, ask one."
Nailed it. Excellent, Brother.
>>>"ARE YOU GOOD ENOUGH to be one of us? PROVE IT!"
Exactly right. Thank you Brother. That is the attitude we should take when considering men for Freemasonry.
Your take on No. 10 strikes the right balance. We don't want to abolish the Concordant bodies in a foolhardy attempt to bolster Lodge attendance, but at the same time, those Concordants shouldn't be trying to sell their group like a Kirby vacuum cleaner. Yeah, I know their leadership pushes the sales pitches, but from personal experience, I know it doesn't work.
I joined the Scottish Rite in 2000, right after my first term as Worshipful Master. I joined the York Rite 9 years later, towards the beginning of my 2nd term in the East. I got much more out of the York Rite ceremonies than I did from the Scottish Rite, despite the absolutely brilliant degree work from the Olympia Valley. If the two Concordants were swapped in when I received the degrees, I'm sure I'd be active in the Scottish Rite instead. I wish I had waited longer before joining the Scottish Rite.
I'll pick on the Shrine for just a second, but the criticism isn't directed only at that group. It's just that the example comes closest to my mind. These are two things that have happened quite recently, in my town.
-The local Shrine Installed its officers at a banquet facility in the building directly behind my Lodge. A Lodge scheduled its own Installation in our building, to start right after the Shrine's event ended. Out of all those Shriners, only a single one made the extremely short walk over to attend the Lodge's Installation.
-That same local Shrine got into contact with two of my Lodge's Entered Apprentices somehow or another and pestered them both to join. Long before either of them were even Master Masons. Before either of them had even proven proficiency on the EA Degree.
The Shrine does a heck of a lot of amazing and good work. It is a wonderful organization. But, in my area it is dying. Quickly dying. That quick death is directly the result of doing things like the two things mentioned above.