|
legendaryRev posted:Sorry about all or the slashes, I guess I'm ultimately wondering if being involved in a college organization and being a Mason at the same time are compatible. This isn't an issue I can speak to directly, but several members of my lodge are members of Sigma Chi, alumni and current (I reside in a college town). They don't see a conflict in their dual membership and all of them speak well of their greek experiences. As for a small clique "controlling" a lodge for an extended period of time; this, like many things masonic, varies from lodge to lodge. The short answer is that yes, it could certainly happen, masonry being after all an organization no less vulnerable to internal politics that any other human enterprise. There are certain aspects of masonic politics on the lodge and grand lodge level that I personally feel are vulnerable to manipulation. Whether or not this is a problem varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Ideally everyone involved takes their obligations seriously and also obeys Wheaton's law, but again, masonry is made up of fallible human beings. In practice it is typical for the same individuals to be re-elected to multiple terms as treasurer and secretary, as these offices both benefit from an incumbents experience and involve a lot of organizational work that not everyone wishes to volunteer for. Secretaries in particular can accumulate a certain amount of influence over their terms. In lodges with smaller memberships the same individuals do often repeatedly hold the same offices, but if/when membership sees an increase they are usually happy step aside in favor of new blood. Hope that answers your questions, but note that this is all based on my own personal experiences, others will certainly hold different opinions.
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2012 06:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 03:17 |
|
|
legendaryRev posted:I guess that my question then pertains to the other people in office, what we would call Grand Master of Ceremonies(the person who most of the time deals with pledges, new membership, and ritual in general), the Grand Procurator, who deals with enforcement of the rules, and punishments, which most organizations would refer to as a Vice President, and a Grand Master, who is the main driving force of the chapter, or lodge, much as a president would. While I understand that secretaries and treasurers hold a certain amount of influence through their positions, what about the most high positions? is there much turnover from year to year, or is it primarily driven by a select few? The Master is the executive officer of the lodge during his term and the Senior Warden can be seen as a vice presidential figure. In the lodge I currently attend we have an appointed Lodge Instructor (Ritual Officer) and a Mentoring Committee which works with new members. A lot of work is parceled out as committee assignments and membership on these committees can become static over time. In the blue lodge, in the US States I've traveled in, elected officers hold one year terms; as mentioned secretaries and treasurers are usually re-elected several times. For the other elected offices there is a progressive line - starting about 4 positions down from the Worshipful Master, so long as one does a good job in the lower positions you're usually elected to the next highest office at the end of your current term. So the model is set up to be consistently bringing different people up through the line and into the Masters chair, but is somewhat dependent on a new members joining at a certain rate to avoid repeat office holders. There tends to be a split between, usually newer, members interested in holding office and members who are less active or are have already held office and are focused on a committee, ritual or a particular charitable project. None of this prevents each lodge's Supreme and most Wise Council of Venerable Elders from exercising the influence that comes from having belonged to an organization for decades; in both lodges I've attended their agenda has been limited to insisting that coffee be brewed to the consistency and strength of brown dishwater. In other places this cabal may have more nefarious motives.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2012 17:41
|
|
|
lone77wulf posted:I've heard this from many different people online, but then I've read about the popularity of the "one-day mason" classes in a few states. While I understand the idea of learning as much as you can at each step, is there really a benefit to taking time between, or did you learn more after and looking back on it? I firmly believe that there is a more value in progressing through the degrees in the traditional manner. I think it's a better experience for the candidate if the degree work is done for them alone as opposed to a class of candidates. I would be disappointed in a lodge that expressed a preference for sending candidates to these events instead of doing the work themselves. Performing the work allows the lodge to re-visit and re-examine the degrees, which is always rewarding experience for me at least. Doing the ritual proficiency the old way also lays a better foundation for ones later ritual work and engages more veteran members of the fraternity as mentors, forming stronger bonds between new and old members. Finally, I dislike that it creates two different classes of Mason in terms of their initiatory experience. That said; every time this comes up for discussion supporters of the "all the way in one day" events point out that retention rates for members joining this way are no worse than those that join the traditional way. I also have to say that I've met Brothers who joined the Fraternity in this way who have been exemplary Masons, so its not a clear case that it doesn't work or harms the candidate. tldr: I am a curmudgeon. The old ways were better. Get off my lawn.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2012 18:20
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:So was Santa good to everyone in this thread? Bro. Kringle is master of the lodge? Kudos.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2012 01:24
|
|
|
Lovable Luciferian posted:My question is: do you think it would be out of line to ask the district inspector to qualify me for the staircase lecture? I don't want to steal anyone's job, but it would be nice to know that I can still do it if it's needed. The main thing of course is that I don't want to step on anyone's toes. In this jurisdiction the only potential downside to such an action would be that you'd be asked what else you wanted to be qualified for. I've never run into a situation where making the pool of people who know the ritual broader and deeper was resented - sooner or later the regular guy is going to be sick or traveling and they'll need a backup. Here the smaller/more rural lodges always need people who can help out with the work as well. Go for it brother.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
SafetyTrain posted:What kind of income disparity is there usually in your run-of-the-mill Lodge? My own personal experience has been that lodge membership is fairly diverse in an economic sense, both in terms of professions represented and income levels. Both lodges I belong to count retirees, teachers, lawyers, welders, insurance salesman, small business owners, mechanics, carpenters, students, bureaucrats (my fault) and clerks as members. That is only counting the folks I've met and gotten to know a bit. As far as homogeneity, I find that masons are looking for like minded folks insofar as the membership requirements are concerned, but not so much beyond that. Perhaps the most personally enriching aspects of masonry for me has been the opportunity to meet and befriend brothers whose life experiences and opinions fundamentally differ from my own. Because of the leveling aspect of the lodge and the fraternal tie, I've become friends with those who I might have remained perpetually distant from and at odds with in the ordinary course of life. Now, I've lived my entire adult life in the american mountain west and in smaller cities and towns, so others will have to speak to their own experiences in different regions. I know from conversations with others that some lodges have very high dues and that this restricts their membership. I've also heard of, but not visited, lodges where membership was predominately of a single profession - railroad employees, active military, law enforcement and professors are the examples that come to mind.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Grandmaster.flv posted:I'm gonna disclaimer this with I don't think I know any Masons so pardon my ignorance. Okay, I'll try to field these: A lodge will generally (hopefully) reflect the diversity of the community of which it is a part. The current master of my mother lodge in New Mexico is of african-american descent and a large percentage of the membership is Hispanic, with several other races and nationalities represented. I live in Montana now and the lodge here is overwhelmingly Caucasian, but so is the community. Realistically, the smaller the community, the more white I'd expect a lodge to be. Depending on where you live, there could also be cultural or historical factors at work. Anyway they should be quite welcoming of those of different faiths and all, though sometimes I run into folks who just don't have that much experience being around different people. Again, that's the community as well. You become involved by asking; call your local lodge or email them if they have a website and ask when they meet and if you could come by to meet members and find out more about masonry. Every lodge I've been to in America has a light meal before the regular meeting and this is open to the public. Go a couple of times and talk to different people - no one set of brothers reflects the makeup of a lodge. Also, if there is more than one lodge in your area, go to both. As for making in-roads, well, you do know some old white dudes are pretty cool, right? Especially if you take the time to talk to them and all. Fees vary. I haven't seen any north of $200, but I don't live in L.A. or Manhattan either. Regular meetings nights involve a formal prayer at the opening and closing and some formal ritual. Here in the States we generally say the pledge of allegiance as well. The rest of it, when a degree isn't being conferred, does consist of the same sort of business that occupies the time of any organization - meeting minutes, committee reports, discussion, presentation of bills for goat feed, lectures, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2013 08:32
|
|
|
cda posted:So I guess my question is what's up with the JEW ROBES? In some of the degree work various historical personages belonging are represented, some of them being from the old testament and other sources of antiquity. Naturally some of these people are Jewish and in keeping with modesty, those portraying these folks do wear robes.  Very Nice Eraser posted:Can those of us who aren't obliged to Masonic rules bring up the secret stuff? Assuming we don't violate copyright on the monitors, there's no problem, right? Sure. None of can really respond, confirm or deny though. It'd be courteous at the least to spoiler them though, in consideration of those reading the thread who are interested in applying and would prefer it to be a surprise to them. Very Nice Eraser posted:Also, I'm curious how serious Masons take the brotherhood. For instance, suppose I'm running down the street looking back over my shoulder. A police siren sounds somewhere out of site. I happen to run past a Mason barbecue going on (go with me here) and give the distress gesture. Will I get some no-questions-asked help? Or would that not really fly? (Hey, you can never be too prepared!) I would never hesitate to help a brother; in the context of your hypothetical scenario, aid might best be rendered in seeing that he did not harm himself or others in resisting an arrest order from lawful authority, received a fair trial and if guilty, to aid in his reformation if he was sincerely repentant and open to such aid. This answer goes for me, today, in the US. Very Nice Eraser posted:Which reminds me of another question: what's the procedure for shitcanning a brother? What can get you kicked out? In general, trial by the members lodge, the procedural details of which vary by Jurisdiction. You can also be suspended for non-payment of dues, but that isn't quite the same as expulsion.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 05:54
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Anyhow, little things can change. My lodge is working on altering bylaws to change dues (currently $50 plus the grand lodge assessment) among other things, which is something we first have to submit to the grand lodge, and if approved we then have to notify every member by mail, and then pass by 2/3 majority of all members who attend the meeting. If it isn't already in your by-laws or draft proposal, I humbly suggest adding language to the effect that dues will automatically increase to match increases in the grand lodge assessment. We did this in my mother lodge a few years ago, after repeated increases in the GL assessment amount put us in the position of sending significantly more to the Grand Lodge than we retained. Assessments have gone up a couple of times since then and its been very helpful not to have to go through the process of amending the by-laws each time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
qraham posted:But if I'm being completely honest, the thing that is most intriguing is the idea that being a mason might help my career in some way; I've heard stories of people getting jobs or promotions because they did the right handshake with the right person. Can you guys speak to this at all? Your candor is appreciated, but I'd recommend that you don't join if this is your primary motivating factor. Career advancement is the reason a lot of people join different organizations, including Masonry, and is a fine and appropriate reason to join a professional organization, but a terrible reason to become a Mason. If an applicant brought this up during the investigation and interview process as honestly and directly as you have, I'd ask them to seriously reconsider their motives in joining. I'd also consider voting against their application. This isn't to say that I'd necessarily vote against them if they understood that the fraternity isn't a professional organization and still wanted to join regardless. In the jurisdictions where I've been involved part of the job of the investigating committee is answering questions like this. In both however the petitioner is at different times told that they should not expect material benefit from joining the organization and directly asked to declare that they aren't joining for mercenary motives. From a certain point of view this probably sounds naive. Of course there have been and are Lodges and Masons that form important segments of different good old boy networks, and being a Mason probably has materially benefited some. My own feeling and opinion is that such favoritism abuses the fraternal tie and violates the spirit of our promises to act fairly in our dealings with all people.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
Congratulations to all our new brothers. And Alehkhs, I apologize for the indisposition of the goat, but think the rest of the degree went rather well, despite my being part of it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 17:10
|
|
|
lone77wulf posted:While the WM told me the advice he got when he first joined was "don't forget, there are going to be assholes in any organization", I can see the definite ties of brotherhood amongst them. This is advice worth remembering, another I've heard and repeated over the years is "Being a Mason doesn't mean you're good man, it means that at one point your Brothers thought you were."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Also I'm really strongly thinking of demitting, but it isn't something I've found a lot of clear answers about. Most of the information I've found is more to the purpose of changing lodges. Masonry would be great if not for all the loving Masons, and there is a further reason some in the thread are privvy to. Anyone have bullet points? I hope whatever is going on is resolvable without dimitting, but sometimes it is the right choice and should be straight forward. I happen to be working on a dimit for for a Brother in the Lodge I'm secretary of here in Montana, so I can't speak to the process in other jurisdictions, but I imagine it would be similar.
Having processed applications for affiliation by Brothers holding a dimit from another jurisdiction; the dimit is copied for the lodge records and sent to the state Grand Lodge, who verifies its authenticity with the Grand Lodge of the constituent issuing lodge, after which balloting is held on the application for affiliation. A Brother in raised in Montana, having been unaffiliated for more than a year, would not be eligible to visit lodges while traveling, as they would not technically be in good standing. And why yes, being a Lodge Secretary is exactly as much fun as it sounds like. Glorified Scrivener fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Mar 8, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Your post was very helpful, but this brings up a follow up question. Can charges be brought against a Brother after he demits? I'll be at the lodge tomorrow and will reread the relevant sections of the code and confer with brothers about such as scenario. My initial thought is yes, charges could certainly be brought against a dimitted brother, as dimitting is voluntary relinquishing membership in a Lodge, not one's status as a Mason. My feeling is that the grand lodge governing the lodge from which the brother had dimitted would continue to claim jurisdiction. Particularly if the brother in question still resided in their geographic bailiwick. Again, anything I've said that isn't a quote should be taken only as my opinion. Masonic jurisprudence can be more confounding than the regular legal system.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Your post was very helpful, but this brings up a follow up question. Can charges be brought against a Brother after he demits? I've conferred with some knowledgeable brethren and the consensus is that a dimitted mason could have charges brought against them. Here Montana the Jurisdiction would be held by the oldest extant lodge in the town in which the brother resided. There will be some variance in who has jurisdiction depending on the constitution and rules of the governing grand lodge.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Which of course would be even further complicated if the Mason in question resides in a state he holds no affiliations in Well, yes and no, the code and constitutions of most Grand Lodges have some very broad language about having authority over sojourning brethren in their territory, covering non-affiliates and those affiliated with other Grand Lodges. Whether or not charges would be brought against a brother residing in another jurisdiction and being non-affiliated would probably depend on the nature and severity of the charges, as well as how much will there was to pursue charges. I don't want to derail the thread into a long discussion of the minutiae of masonic jurisprudence, so my last thought on the matter is that geographic distance is no barrier to charges being brought, either practically or legalistically. Whether or not it was done would depend on the circumstances. Feel free to send me a PM, but I think that only someone familiar with the situation and the Lodges & Grand Lodges involved could give any useful advice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
lone77wulf posted:For a little content, I found it odd that at the night of the last meeting, I was being told about each step and the time in between to learn while 2 people were turning in petitions to be read so they could be voted on in time for them to attend the 1 day Grand Master's class, where they'll run through all 3 plus SR 4th degree in one day. I got the feeling that it is kind of looked down on to so it that way, and promised myself I'd do it the "right" way, so even if they'd ask I wouldn't go. It just confused me to see such a difference within one lodge on that. I'm pretty sure I'm going to self impose a 1 year wait on myself between MM and any appendant bodies. I don't like the all the way in one day classes being done as a routine matter, but I do see their value in extenuating circumstances. That said, i'd prefer that they weren't done for the sake of convenience or expedience. I've seen this topic become pretty contentious when brought up; those opposed to the 1 day classes see it as cheapening the masonic experience, while the Brother's that have gone through resent what they feel to be an attempt to label them as second class masons or put an * on their record. To be fair, being able to recite a catechism and show some patience doesn't make someone a good Mason. I do think it helps someone internalize the lessons of the degrees, build a friendship with their mentor and prepare to take part in the degree work or be an officer. I certainly find the process of mentoring or coaching someone through the proficiency requirements to be rewarding, in much the same way that I don't get tired of participating in or watching the degree work - I'm always either discovering some new insight or being reminded of some valuable bit of knowledge. Everyone comes to the lodge for different reasons though - I place a lot of importance on ritual work because I feel its one of the things that really differentiates masonry from other fraternities, service organizations and charities. Because of this I feel there's a lot of value in sticking to tradition and doing things like proficiency work and degree conferral in a conservative manner. Other Brothers have different priorities and focuses within the organization, which is as it should be. Though I do get sick of people complaining about the memorization being hard work. I know it doesn't play to everyone's strength, but it certainly isn't impossible. I often get the feeling that the drive to relax standards is borne out of a fear that we'll lose even a single person as a member because the memory work is difficult. Kudos for deciding to wait before joining any appendant bodies, take your time, get to know the Blue Lodge and decide if Masonry is really something you want to participate in. I haven't joined any because I've found that I really love Blue Lodge and don't want to join another body unless I can devote the same kind of attention and energy to it, which I can't at this point in my life.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2013 16:46
|
|
|
Straithate posted:Long story short, take an interest in members of a one day class and try to get them involved. If you are a member yourself or you are considering joining the non-traditional way, your experience is largely what you make it, so if they don't seek you out... seek them out. Seconded, and thanks to Straithate and Paramemetic for well reasoned posts. I agree that lodges need to do more to involve new members, no matter how they come to the lodge. Keeping long time members involved is also a challenge, and there isn't an easy way to do either. I do see the traditional degree process, when well done, as furthering this goal, particularly the opportunity for a candidate to develop a friendship with their coach, which should hopefully also help them develop ties to other lodge members. I see the process of conferring the degrees in the traditional manner in a similar light, as it provides an activity the members of the lodge must work on as a team, and hopefully encourages a sense of camaraderie. I'll admit that I was venting some frustration over the proficiency process; we have a small number of brothers willing to serve as mentors, relative to the number of candidates applying. I also see a generational divide at work - in general older candidates and brothers seem to really dislike to the proficiency process, while the younger ones enjoy it and seek it out. This might not be a universal phenomena. I do worry that the people will burn out on mentoring and degree work if it is always the same folks doing the work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Keetron posted:Anyway, was raised yesterday and now I can call myself MM. That was something different entirely, I must say. Congratulations. WAFFLEHOUND posted:Am I the only Mason in the history of the fraternity that finds degrees boring as hell at this point? Nah, but for me the degree work makes up for taking meeting minutes. As FreshFeesh has said, some of the work becomes less exciting the more often I take part in it, but the fact that we're doing it for a fresh audience every time and taking part in the continuation of tradition usually more than makes up for it. On an unrelated note, we usually go out for a pint after our meetings if they get out early enough, generally to the same bar. So last night we had a drunk guy sit down at our table wanting to know if we'd "closed a million dollar business deal." as he apparently couldn't think of any other reason for someone in this town to be wearing a suit and tie. We told him the truth, which led to a polite, if somewhat lopsided, conversation - the only points of reference he had for the craft were Dan Brown novels and Shriners and he wasn't really sober enough that any of us wanted to have a lengthy conversation with him. He didn't accuse us of being devil worshipers though, so I guess the public image of the craft is improving.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:You know what, I lay it super heavy on the controversy in the OP. Does anyone want to detail all the good things their Lodge does with regard to charity and so on, so I can include these kinds of things in the OP as well? Aside from the obvious like the Shrine Hospitals, iCARE from the Scottish Rite, and all the Masonic Retirement Homes, my Lodge engages in personal charity to people who are in need in the community and are brought to our attention. Maryland also participates in MASONIChip and so on. I know many of the lodges in other countries are actually part of social services - in Ireland they pay quite a bit in donations to underwrite welfare programs, and I imagine it's also such in Australia? I have always been blown away by the amount of money donated by Masons in the UK and Ireland relative to the US, where our dues mainly go towards keeping the building running. Our lodge does the Bikes for Books program in several area schools and supports most of the regular Masonic Charities. Our banquet for our the Widows of Lodge Members is coming up next week, which is also when we present our scholarships awards for the year - we're giving away five $1,000 scholarships renewable for four years and two one time $1,000 scholarships, all to local high school students based on criteria of academic merit and community involvement. We also participate in a number of fund raisers over the course of the year; relay for life and a polar bear plunge for special olympics are the ones that come to mind immediately.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I don't see the purpose in trying to join more than one lodge though. I belong to two lodges; my mother lodge in Santa Fe and one here in Montana. While I've never belonged to two lodges in the same town, doing so has a number of benefits - if you're interested in being an officer of either lodge or more practically, if you want to vote on any of the lodge business. A brother might also wish to support them both by paying dues. Another thing to consider is that different lodges emphasize different aspects of Freemasonry and that an individual brother might be interested in both. Some lodges focus on charitable endeavors and community involvement, some on fellowship and some on ritual. I'd certainly join a Traditional Observance lodge or a more scholarly one in a heartbeat, without giving up my current memberships.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
Solvent posted:I'm a lodge Secretary, and I heard about this during a request for an address change. I asked around the lodge and got the whole smorgasbord of opinions, most of which pointed square at "Southern Jurisdiction, what do you want?" "How is writing a letter to the Grand Lodge of Florida going to anything other than create disharmony?" I don't want to drag this out - but I'm also a Lodge Secretary and if one of the members of my lodge wrote to or phoned me to say that he'd been refused admission to a meeting of a constituent lodge of a Grand Lodge that our Grand Lodge is in recognition with, I would raise hell with our state's Grand Secretary. And, if he gave me a weaselly response about disharmony, I'd keep bothering him about it, bring it up vocally at the annual Grand Lodge meeting and be happy to be censured about, in order to get it read into the record. Leaving aside the issue of racism for a moment, this is a case of one Grand Lodge violating its agreements with another regarding the right of visitation that all Master Mason's have. This is not a light or trifling issue from the point of view of a Grand Lodge, as it threatens their sovereignty. That one Grand Lodge is able to flout with impunity their agreements to allow visitation is a far greater threat to Harmony than the members of a Lodge receiving a reprimand and being forced to change their ways. The point being that one Grand Lodge can't really afford to allow another to treat it so disrespectfully as to bar its members from visitation without cause. Although it might be unasked for advice, I would tell the brother to complain, in writing, to his Lodge Secretary that his credentials had been refused by a Constituent Lodge of a Grand Lodge in recognition with his own and to request that this be forwarded to the Grand Secretary, asking for an explanation. This needs to be done in writing and read into the minutes of his mother lodge. Really, I can't stress enough that this should be done formally, through channels and in writing. Attitudes aren't going be changed unless they're challenged and a formal letter from one Grand Secretary to another asking about the recognition issue can't be ignored. Unfortunately, if the Brother doesn't make a formal complaint, this process can't start on the Lodge and Grand Lodge level. tldr; Sometimes aiding in someone's reformation in the gentlest possible manner still involves a ten ton hammer. Racism is bullshit and refusal of Brother in good standings credentials is bullshit, but nothing will happen without a formal complaint and the involvement of his own Lodge and Grand Lodge. This sort of thing needs to be brought out into the light, not allowed to fester in the shadows.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:If such a law a truly passed (unlikely to actually happen, as the only reason it seems to be so supported is that most lazy rednecks in the area aren't actively going against it) what would the response of the Masons be? Or to take it a step farther, if at some point this is put into effect in a whole state, or perhaps all of the United States, what would be the implications. Response would vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, within each lodge and the heart of each individual Mason. There would be debate, contention, compromise, schism, protest and acceptance. In some places the new laws would be complied with and a co-ed organization would be created. In others lodges would cease to operate out of protest. In still others there might possibly be a return to regular lodges meeting in secrecy. There would be a great debate about regularity, the ancient landmarks and other issues. Friendships would be strained and all other manner of drama and unpleasantness would ensue. All this is to say that the response would be varied, Freemasonry is not a monolithic organization, nor one with a single strong centralized power structure. KittyEmpress posted:Edit: I ask mostly because I do see a future where sexism and gender based 'clubs' will not be allowed, if not soon then at some point, and I wonder if this is a thing that is discussed. It is certainly something that's discussed among Masons; a wide range of opinions about the matter are held. My own reaction to a new set of laws radically altering the legal ability of private organizations formed by voluntary and elective association to set their membership requirements would be dismay. For the state to do so without the compelling interest of ensuring universal access to a public good, service or right would seem to me to be an overreach. I'm not a legal scholar though and I'd listen to arguments made for and against such a law before drawing a conclusion. Its certainly possible that Masonry, as I'm obligated to practice it, might be incompatible with the law of the land. At that point I would probably cease to be an active Mason in the sense of belong to and participating lodge activities, rather than violate my oath or break the law. When this subject comes up I'm often interested in learning where people personally draw the line for what is or isn't an acceptable reason for an organization to restrict its membership or exclude individuals from joining. If gender/sex isn't a valid affinity, is political or religious belief, ethnicity, heritage, nationality, profession or sexual orientation a valid basis for voluntary but exclusive association? Why or why not? I don't want to derail the thread, but questions of this nature come up fairly often and seem to come down what each individual believes is or isn't a valid basis for voluntary association. I favor allowing private organizations to restrict their membership; I'm not going to campaign to force the Humanist Society to accept my membership application, try to join an Norwegian heritage association, a Christian church or the alumni association of a university I didn't attend. I don't meet their membership requirements and I don't believe that there is a compelling reason for the state to force them to revise their rules to allow me to join.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
Sub Rosa posted:Women would then be welcome to apply and get unanimously blackballed. So then clearly they aren't being excluded because of their gender, but rather because the organization requires all prospective members to be voted on and members are free to vote their consciences. This as well; there would be quite a bit of this, though I don't think if would be a universal phenomena. KittyEmpress posted:Edit: also, thank you for the reply in the first place. Sure, it's a bit silly to have an A/T thread and not answer questions. While I have some other thoughts I need some time to collect them and they might be best suited to another thread or PM in any case.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I'll be completely non-PC here and admit that I'd black ball every female applicant. I don't think this would be a good way of handling the issue. Were I in a lodge faced with this situation I'd propose a motion that all new petitions for membership be declined until the issue was resolved. I find value in belonging to a Fraternity and I don't believe that the membership requirements should be changed in this way. But I also think it would be dishonest for a lodge to accept a petition that stood no chance of passing. To be clear, I know that this happens - I don't approve of it. No petition should reach the point of a ballot if it is known that Brother has objections to the petition. Concerns about a petition should be brought either to the investigative committee or the Master, and addressed before it is brought to a ballot. In the case of a conflict between membership requirements and a legal mandate, not accepting petitions until a resolution to the conflict is the only valid course of action, in my opinion. I take my the portions of my obligation requiring me to be a just citizen as seriously as I take the ones concerning whom I can grant consent to be made a Mason.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:Because just maybe, one of them would be a harder working, more supportive secretary than the rear end in a top hat I currently have in the job. I'd be hard pressed not to vote favorably on a petition from the devil if it meant they'd be taking over as lodge secretary. Every Master I've worked with, including myself during my year in the east, seems to think the Secretary is William Riker and that "Make it so." is a sufficient command to move mountains. But I kid, its a rewarding position that can be a lot of fun, but it is a lot work.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
Congratulations and welcome to the new Brothers in the thread. I'll make the same pitch I make to new Brothers in person - take a couple of years after your 3rd degree to savor, appreciate and participate in your Blue Lodge before you join any of the appendant bodies. The Lodge is the foundation of Masonry and without its health the other bodies cannot survive as Masonic organizations. Moreover, the while different elements of the lessons presented in the blue lodge are refined, amplified and expounded on in the degrees of the appendant bodies, they are never replaced, and a firm grasp of them must be acquired for further learning to be meaningful and useful. On a practical note; having a meeting to go to every night of the week is for
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:One thing I've found in my travels, is Masons that act like fundamentalist bible thumpers, Mackey's "Masonic Parliamentary Law" is a book I'd like to thump upside the head of certain Brethren. Suffice it to say the Lodge I currently attend is a little more relaxed about matters of protocol than i'd prefer. That said I'll add my vote to the recommendations for "The Craft and Its Symbols", the NM Lodge of Research sent one to every new initiate in the state and it was a wonderful thing to have arrive in the mail unsolicited.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
runupon cracker posted:Brethren, last night I was voted in as WM-elect for my Lodge. I am honored, excited, and nervous as hell. Got any advice for a first-timer in the chair? You have the ability to set the tone for Lodge meetings and functions, make use of it. Understand that your executive authority is balanced by tradition and custom and if you anger the brethren, they may choose to wait out your year in sullen silence or stop attending. This may be a different and less direct kind of feedback than you're used to in other organizations - but do not ignore it. There is a cabal of old timers in your lodge who are really in charge of things. They don't actually want the work of running things though, so rely on their wisdom, but remember that they're not actually elected officers. If you appoint a committee, require them to regularly report on their progress. The proper response to a suggestion from a Brother that entails a great deal of work is to thank him for volunteering to chair a committee. It is not to look at the Secretary and say "Make it so." Having been both a WM and Secretary; He's got enough on his desk with the organizational minutiae of running the Lodge - appoint a committee to handle things like small things like collecting signatures on birthday and sympathy cards and mailing them. A good investigative committee makeup is one old guy, one new guy and one really reliable brother. Read your lodge's by-laws; if you don't I can almost guarantee someone will be quoting them at you during a meeting. Plus, there is probably some really useful stuff in them that you can quote at them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2013 19:49
|
|
|
SylvainMustach posted:...but any kind of leadership tips would be appreciated. Be prepared for the possibility that you will have to miss a meeting and make sure that those down the line from you have at least a basic understanding of the ritual for the next higher chair. Also, coordinate a basic agenda for the meeting in advance with your Secretary, even if you plan on being there. Try to encourage communication between your officers, even if you know they don't like each other. Maybe especially if they don't, if you can mediate. Hmm, lots of other thoughts, but I just got out of a meeting and need a bit of time for reflection and for my temper to cool off.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:1. Are there favored philosophers that are on the general reading list? 1. The Greeks and not the Romans. Which is fine, although in my own practice I more often refer to Seneca the Younger's writings than to Zeno of Citium's. 2. Meh. I haven't read enough of the Red Book or Seven Sermons to the Dead or other Jung to have a solid opinion. I've met Masons who professed Gnostic beliefs and did not express that they had much trouble in reconciling those with our ritual. 3. Neither of those are my thing really. As I understand it Classical Epicureanism resolves the problem of evil in ways that might could potentially be considered problematic by some. It's also rather determinedly materialistic, isn't it? 4. The dice I roll on the astral plane are no one else's business. Though they're generally 20+. Although off hand I can think of at least one metaphysical solid we're very concerned with getting in the proper shape for use. Hope that helps. We really are serious when we tell people they aren't dogmatic answers to most questions regarding Masonry. Another Brother's answers will rightly vary from my own.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I'm pretty sure you guys are still anti commie. Some of us individually hold anti-communist opinions and we'd all of course have difficulties with state sponsored and enforced atheism. Personally I'm a little bit to the right of Lenin.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
To put it another way Sithsaber, you're sort of like Manley P. Hall circa 1923 - and while he had a few... interesting things to say about Freemasonry at that point, most Freemasons, to the extent that they take his work seriously at all, look on his opinions on the craft from 1954 onward somewhat more favorably. If like Brother Hall, you choose to take the steps of making sincere petition to a lodge, joining our number and performing the work, all involved would most likely benefit from the experience and we'd likely be more open to your opinions. That said I do appreciate your contributions to the thread insofar as they've spurred some discussion about what contemporary mainstream Freemasonry in North America is not. You've mostly been clear on the fact that you are not a Freemason and so are unqualified to answer questions regarding the experiential component of the fraternity. Personally I would bookmark an A/T thread by you entitled "Ask me about belonging to groups that I don't belong to." in a heartbeat, as I think it would be quite entertaining and possibly informative. If you do so, I have some burning questions about the Chamber of Commerce, the Temple of Set and Sea Org that I've always wanted an outsiders perspective on. Sithsaber posted:That's why I called it a mystic moose lodge. On second thought, perhaps you could kindly; 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
LivesInGrey posted:Is anyone here knowledgable about the lodges in Albuquerque? Reading this thread has made me very interested in at least talking to masons at a time when things are open to the public and to hopefully find one that'll accept a trans guy. New Mexico's a poor state, which makes me hope that dues are relatively low. Those are my two biggest stumbling points now that I know masonry requires curiosity rather than invitation. I didn't want this to pass unremarked, even though I don't live in NM any more and when I did I lived in Santa Fe, not Albuquerque. My personal impression was that the Albuquerque lodges are on the conservative side. I think your best bet might be Temple Lodge No. 6, but I'm solely going off my recollection of their having more younger members than average the last time I visited, which must have been 2007 or so. I believe there is a Brother who lives in Albuquerque or Rio Rancho, but I've never gotten around to getting archives and don't see any of his posts in this thread. I think he had a 40K avatar. I'm not aware of the Grand Lodge of NM taking an official stance on the issue trans folk being members/applying. Something may have been issued in the three years I've been away though. This is still new territory for a lot of Masons and Grand Lodges and I can't predict what response you would get. A lot of lodges would have members too conservative and set in their ways to accept it, while others would see it as less of an issue.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:"Bullshit" And remember dear readers, Freemasonry isn't a monolithic organization with dogmatic answers to every question, and in fact has no Pope, despite Sithsaber's attempts to position themselves as an infallible authority on all things, masonic or otherwise. With that out of the way, Masons are still evaluating what the requirements for membership laid down by individual Grand Lodges mean in the context of the contemporary world. With regards to issues of gender, sex and identity, the opinions of the membership run the full spectrum. Some are hard line against admitting anyone who wasn't born with male sex organs and doesn't continue to identify and present as a male in terms of gender. At the other end you have Brothers who'd like to see membership opened almost completely and find the requirement to be male as antiquated and irrelevant as some of the other ancient landmarks which are no longer rigorously observed. My own beliefs are most likely more liberal than most, but more conservative than might be wanted by those with a serious investment in such matters. I personally take a candidates answer to the question "Do you believe in God?" on faith. Similarly, I'm not going to perform a physical and mental evaluation on someone who tells me that they believe themselves to be a man. If they're honest and can't honestly affirm that they are, then they won't pursue membership.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
7thBatallion posted:And a good friend of mine has bone cancer. Just found out. I've got more important poo poo to deal with. Cancer loving sucks. My mom is a melanoma and thyroid cancer survivor, so treatment can work. My Lodge here does fundraising for and walks in the annual Relay for Life event for the ACS. I hope that your friend is able to walk at one as a survivor this time next year and you with them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Membership is generally in decline, many lodges are struggling, and they should be. After the War, Masonry grew a whole lot, and is due for a correction. Things like those goofy advertisements are a result of narrow minded Grand Lodges focusing on a very capitalist growth paradigm. It's not necessarily the best way for the fraternity to continue on. I would rather like to see a return to form. For a spell, one in ten American men were Masons. That's simply too many. It's okay for the order to shrink. Seconded. I wish Brethren in general were more comfortable with the idea that a lodge going dark or merging with another can be a natural occurrence as much as the result of a set of problems. It's never going to be a happy thing for the people involved, but it is better overall if we have fewer, healthier, lodges than ones struggling along or chasing quantity over quality.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:This is probably going to be a controversial question. Not really. Noctis Horrendae posted:Blacks aren't allowed to join regular, run-of-the-mill lodges, correct? Incorrect.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
The Proc posted:Since it came up, has there been any progress on the handful of states that still don't recognize Prince Hall lodges? I'm in SC and this thread has piqued my interest in masonry but I'm reluctant to explore it while that's an issue. Interesting, I'd never actually thought through the ramifications of sitting in lodge in a another jurisdiction who'd recognized another GL that my own hadn't. Since I hold membership in two jurisdictions, there are probably some scenarios where I'd run afoul of this myself. Ignorance being a good defense, I'm not going to compare MT and NM's recognition books side by side unless I have to. My gut reaction is that while you're a guest in a lodge of another jurisdiction, you'd take your cues from them and their GL, at least for the duration of a single meeting. This puts you in the bind of violating the letter of your obligations though and excusing yourself from the meeting would be proper, if inescapably rude. You'd have the cold comfort that you were doing the right thing. In a perfect world the issue wouldn't come up - there shouldn't be a set of circumstances where Grand Lodge A recognizes Grand Lodge B & C, but B & C don't recognize each other, allowing for things like newly formed Grand Lodges and the time it takes for recognition proceedings to work through the bureaucracy. The GL of MT just recognized the PH GL of Maryland, and already recognizes several others, so the situation is improving in some places, albeit slowly and incrementally. Hopefully it's something no one has to worry about in a few decades. You could also use the possibility of the scenario as a reason to proactively pester your GL about recognition? I understand that that might be an unrewarding and unpleasant labor though. I always figured that if work takes me to the south east I'd affiliate with a Prince Hall lodge instead of an A/F&M, if they'd have me. Edit: Which I know doesn't help you any, sorry. Glorified Scrivener fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Aug 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 03:17 |
|
|
legsarerequired posted:Is anyone here in co-masonry? I don't recall seeing anyone post to the thread who was involved in co-masonry. I think we're mostly stuffy old UGLE recognizing types.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2014 15:34
|
|