Post by Doug FreyburgerIt is not in his
purview to change the ritual, but it is in his purview to remember
details of it differently from time to time so long as he calls such
changes corrections.
As Masons we are taught to respect truth. Truth never needs to be
worked or spun, or puffed. It is important all by itself. Many a young
aspiring officer or even our candidates are directly told that the
work by their Mentors that what they are learning has been passed down
between generations without change. They are given it as a charge not
to make changes. Yet, once a little experience is had they realize
that alteration does occur often at the hands of those who are most
responsible to keep it. In some jurisdictions, the modifications are
actually quite frequent. Soon the speculative sorts extrapolate that
over decades these variations add up to making the experience of our
generation quite different from that enjoyed by our Grandfathers and
Great Grandfathers. If that is so, then, we must ask if what we are
doing is the best method or an inferior one? Think of the caliber of
the keepers and their capacity to keep and perform the same. Are
they the sort who equivocate, reservate or evade? What sort should we
put in the position as keepers for this century and who, ultimately,
should control its content?
Post by Doug FreyburgerSince the
cypher could be interpreted differently from time to time there
could be tiny word changes but that didn't happen during the
time I resided in California.
What of the innovations in Masonry that we have experienced over our
Masonic lifetimes? When I started out in the mid-1980s the Illinois
Board of Grand Examiners would not recognize that lodges occasionally
do multiple candidate degrees. The teaching insisted that the Standard
Work, written for a singular candidate, be adhered to despite how many
initiates were sharing the experience. I remember one candidate
quipping to me during a lecture, Which of us are you talking to? If
it is him (pointing to the other candidate) then I would like to sit
down.
Post by Doug FreyburgerShould the Grand Lecturer wish to make a larger change in the
ritual he would have to propose legislation at an annual
communication.
When Grand Master Delmar Darrah took the Illinois ritual out of the
Grand Masters hands and put its control in the hands of the Grand
Lodge, the Grand Lodge soon realized that this procedure would not
work. The ritual is not a By-law or Constitutional Article capable fit
for arguement and the de facto conditions in lodges, at the time
Illinois permitted foreign languages with German being the most
prevalent, the work was just not something that lent itself to a
legislative process. Enough time was wasted in Local Lodges with Past
Masters quibbling over singular definite articles. The notion of
traveling from downstate to, at the time, Chicago to continue such
squabbling proved to be an unworthy distraction.
Post by Doug FreyburgerHe
wanted to put in its place a linear officer march like a grand
lodge opening that symbolically represents authority.
Some Grand Masters in my lifetime, thinking that the provision that
they decide matters of usage, sought similar alterations. For one year
in the early nineties, for instance, the Officers assembled in the
foyer at the start of every meeting and then paraded into the lodge
dropping off at their seats before the pledge was given. This is an
old working that actually, historically, began at my lodge, Auburn
Park No. 789. During World War I, the Officers entered lodge in this
manner followed by the colors being presented to the altar before
finding its place in the holder. The lodges rejected the innovation
then and that Grand Master left it up to the individual lodge to
decide what to do about the pledge and colors. Neither the pledge or
any presentation of the colors is part of Masonic Lodge work, though a
recent Grand Master, Noel Dicks, complained to me in a letter that my
assertion was incorrect because there is a notation in the 1986
Standard Work Book that the pledge will be given. Of course, I
responded with the details of the 1920 discussion on the matter.
Post by Doug FreyburgerSince
numerous elected grand offices have been filled by AGLs over
the years this gives the Grand Lecturer a subtle long term
influence over grand lodge of the sort that brother Torrence
objects.
Right. For best results, Local Lodges must reassert their immemorial
right with the control of all matters being firmly decided by the
sitting Principle Officers of the Lodges and no others. The rest can
continue employment as administrators; but their number needs to be
scrutinized and restored to a level consistent with our old standards.
Post by Doug FreyburgerAt the lodge level there is an Officers Coach appointed by the
Inspector from among the PMs of the lodge.
The students should elect their coach with only a nod to the
sensibilities of us PMs.
Post by Doug FreyburgerEffectively the Inspector
takes the OC's word on line proficiencies.
The Lodge Masters judgment should be all that this evaluation
requires.
Post by Doug FreyburgerHow fluid the ritual is - During the time I was in line a Spanish
translation was approved and demonstrated for the degrees
but not for the stated meetings.
The prohibition on foreign languages foisted upon Local Lodges at
the start of World War I is, IMHO, a barbaric bigotry. Naturally Local
Lodges in this century will reintroduce languages suitable to their
own members. So again, we have an issue here with which Illinois can
either be the first or the last to get on board.
Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Senior Deacon Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 Crete, Illinois
PM Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 Lansing, Illinois