How Not to Run The Club
Nov. 24th, 2003 09:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jducoeurSo I just got around to posting a response to an old message from ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
siderea, and it occured to me that I haven't had this rant yet. So herewith, a digression on The Imminent Death of Freemasonry.
This month marked what may prove to be a critical moment in Masonry, at least in this state. After years of debate, the One-Day Class finally happened.
Understand, what floats my boat in Masonry is the ritual. Masonry has a concept of immersive inductive ritual that I find fascinating. There are three central degrees (Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason). These are taken separately, usually on successive months, at least in this country. In each degree, the candidate is walked through the ritual, entering in darkness and having the light of the lessons imparted to him. When done well (which is, sadly, not often enough) it can be powerful and moving, inspiring both wonder and curiosity. It's a distinct bonding experience between the candidates and the Lodges they enter, forging some remarkably enduring friendships.
But it takes time. The candidate has to commit to those three successive months. He has to dress in funny clothes, and gets taken through ritual that is intentionally esoteric. And as I said, most Lodges aren't very good at it. Many of the guys don't understand the ritual, and they are consequently embarrassed by it, and you cannot do ritual well if you're embarrassed by it.
So this month, Grand Lodge decided to try an experiment. Instead of requiring each candidate to go through individually on three successive months, they did an enormous group presentation. The rituals were performed as playlets, rather than being done immersively. All three degrees were done in quick succession. Instead of being a personal and intimate experience, they had something like 500 guys shown the ritual all at once, with only the slightest personalization. The candidates are technically members of specific Lodges, but not really due to starting there -- they were assigned Lodges by Grand Lodge, and are only obligated to stick with those Lodges for one year. (And since there is no particular bond of ritual, I don't expect many to stick with their mother Lodges.)
The hell of it is, the experiment may in fact have been a great success. Grand Lodge is deeply concerned about the decline of the Fraternity -- the membership rolls are falling rapidly, and they need to recruit somehow. They decided that the ritual mechanisms are too high a barrier to entry, and chose to do something different. They employed all of the resources of Grand Lodge, in ways that individual Lodges really can't, doing things like taking out radio ads for the session. They got a lot of new recruits, whose view of Masonry is undoubtedly going to be shaped by the way they were inducted. I won't be surprised if it happens again next year.
(Mind, it's very controversial, and it's by no means certain that it will happen again. Some other Grand Lodges are talking seriously about declaring Massachusetts to be schismatic over it. But I only expect that to slow things down. Much though I dislike it, the One-Day Class is very consistent with the direction that the Fraternity is heading in general.)
I mourn the change, though, because I find it very symbolic in and of itself. The ritual is what got me into Masonry. No, my Lodge isn't perfect, but we make a real effort to do it well, and give the candidates a taste of the potential there. The One-Day Class, though, marks the moment at which Grand Lodge lost its faith in the constituent Lodges, saying, "We can do this better than you can."
But these rituals weren't designed to be done en masse. Without the immersive element, I fear that they will become pointless, and quickly mutate beyond recognition. This isn't an idle fear -- it's pretty much what has happened to Scottish Rite. This is one of the adjunct Orders: when people talk about "32nd degree Masons" (and the other degrees from 4th through 31st), they're usually talking about Scottish Rite. This went through just this change many years ago, becoming a mass organization instead of a personal one. It isn't a bad club, but the ritual has increasingly gone by the wayside.
I've spoken on this before -- I think Masonry is mutating from an organization whose principal focus was on spiritual and moral self-betterment to one that is principally a charity. The end result is likely to be a club that is a social good, so I can't wholly condemn it. But I still regret the quiet loss of the society I thought I was joining.
And yes, you should all continue to hassle me about the Mysteries project. I have neither forgotten about it nor despaired; I've just been desperately pressed for time. With one possible specific exception (which either will or will not happen in the next month or so), I'm planning on declaring a moratorium on Small Projects after Celebration happens, so that I can find some time to work on the Big Projects...
siderea, and it occured to me that I haven't had this rant yet. So herewith, a digression on The Imminent Death of Freemasonry.This month marked what may prove to be a critical moment in Masonry, at least in this state. After years of debate, the One-Day Class finally happened.
Understand, what floats my boat in Masonry is the ritual. Masonry has a concept of immersive inductive ritual that I find fascinating. There are three central degrees (Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason). These are taken separately, usually on successive months, at least in this country. In each degree, the candidate is walked through the ritual, entering in darkness and having the light of the lessons imparted to him. When done well (which is, sadly, not often enough) it can be powerful and moving, inspiring both wonder and curiosity. It's a distinct bonding experience between the candidates and the Lodges they enter, forging some remarkably enduring friendships.
But it takes time. The candidate has to commit to those three successive months. He has to dress in funny clothes, and gets taken through ritual that is intentionally esoteric. And as I said, most Lodges aren't very good at it. Many of the guys don't understand the ritual, and they are consequently embarrassed by it, and you cannot do ritual well if you're embarrassed by it.
So this month, Grand Lodge decided to try an experiment. Instead of requiring each candidate to go through individually on three successive months, they did an enormous group presentation. The rituals were performed as playlets, rather than being done immersively. All three degrees were done in quick succession. Instead of being a personal and intimate experience, they had something like 500 guys shown the ritual all at once, with only the slightest personalization. The candidates are technically members of specific Lodges, but not really due to starting there -- they were assigned Lodges by Grand Lodge, and are only obligated to stick with those Lodges for one year. (And since there is no particular bond of ritual, I don't expect many to stick with their mother Lodges.)
The hell of it is, the experiment may in fact have been a great success. Grand Lodge is deeply concerned about the decline of the Fraternity -- the membership rolls are falling rapidly, and they need to recruit somehow. They decided that the ritual mechanisms are too high a barrier to entry, and chose to do something different. They employed all of the resources of Grand Lodge, in ways that individual Lodges really can't, doing things like taking out radio ads for the session. They got a lot of new recruits, whose view of Masonry is undoubtedly going to be shaped by the way they were inducted. I won't be surprised if it happens again next year.
(Mind, it's very controversial, and it's by no means certain that it will happen again. Some other Grand Lodges are talking seriously about declaring Massachusetts to be schismatic over it. But I only expect that to slow things down. Much though I dislike it, the One-Day Class is very consistent with the direction that the Fraternity is heading in general.)
I mourn the change, though, because I find it very symbolic in and of itself. The ritual is what got me into Masonry. No, my Lodge isn't perfect, but we make a real effort to do it well, and give the candidates a taste of the potential there. The One-Day Class, though, marks the moment at which Grand Lodge lost its faith in the constituent Lodges, saying, "We can do this better than you can."
But these rituals weren't designed to be done en masse. Without the immersive element, I fear that they will become pointless, and quickly mutate beyond recognition. This isn't an idle fear -- it's pretty much what has happened to Scottish Rite. This is one of the adjunct Orders: when people talk about "32nd degree Masons" (and the other degrees from 4th through 31st), they're usually talking about Scottish Rite. This went through just this change many years ago, becoming a mass organization instead of a personal one. It isn't a bad club, but the ritual has increasingly gone by the wayside.
I've spoken on this before -- I think Masonry is mutating from an organization whose principal focus was on spiritual and moral self-betterment to one that is principally a charity. The end result is likely to be a club that is a social good, so I can't wholly condemn it. But I still regret the quiet loss of the society I thought I was joining.
And yes, you should all continue to hassle me about the Mysteries project. I have neither forgotten about it nor despaired; I've just been desperately pressed for time. With one possible specific exception (which either will or will not happen in the next month or so), I'm planning on declaring a moratorium on Small Projects after Celebration happens, so that I can find some time to work on the Big Projects...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 07:12 pm (UTC)People are indeed embarrassed by ritual, and I don't know why. It's very clearly an emotionally satisfying thing for most people, as well... hence most religions include rituals or rites of some sort. I fear that one of the reasons fundamentalist religions are gaining ground is that the ecstatic experience is unavailable elsewhere.
Of course, being a chick, I'm not eligible for *real* Masonic orders. But I get to play at Thelema all the time.
Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 07:15 pm (UTC)Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 07:57 pm (UTC)Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 10:06 pm (UTC)t
Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-25 06:08 am (UTC)The result is the absolute model of stability. It's a finely-tuned balance of top-down structure and bottom-up democracy, designed to tick over as nicely as a well-built clock. And to be fair, it's survived in its current form for nigh 300 years, which is a pretty impressive record.
But it has very little flexibility, and virtually no room for grassroots experimentation except within rigidly defined parameters. So as society changes (probably more than the founders originally believed possible), it has slowly disconnected from the realities of the day. The absolute male-only thing is the most conspicuous aspect of that...
Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 07:16 pm (UTC)Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 07:25 pm (UTC)Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-24 10:04 pm (UTC)1) It's observance. It is required by the cultural observance of a tradition (e.g. costumes at Halloween parties) or religion (e.g. choir robes in church).
2) It's art. It is a play, or a fashion show, or performance art, or a parade, or other artistic expression. (This one is a little dodgy.)
3) It's play. It is part of playing a game, or playing in general.
4) It's more important than the judgment of the mainstream. If you feel that what you are doing is clearly more important than being socially acceptable -- achieves something so necessary -- then you will be OK with doing "weird" things that break cultural norms.
Masonry's rituals were in that last category. They served a communicative purpose which did the primary work of the organization: imparting a moral understanding and bonding the group.
Then they evolved into category #1, sort of. People did them even while not understanding why they were important, because they were traditional. But the frisson between the mainstream and the traditions of Masonry wore away at the member's confidence in their traditions.
Now, any given Mason who doesn't feel #4 to be true is likely to feel he has no reason to be participating in wearing strange clothes and doing strange acts. Considering that clubs like Masonry tend to attract people who by their natures are joiners and particularly sensitive to conformist pressures, it must make a lot of them feel quite embarrassed to be caught doing such out-of-the-mainstream things.
Re: Ritual
Date: 2003-11-25 06:03 am (UTC)The creeping death of the ritual shows up less in overt discomfort than in an unwillingness to really embrace the performance on its own terms. The key problem is that the guys aren't willing to get enthusiastic about it. (Were you the one decrying the death of enthusiasm in our society? I forget.) But ritual becomes bloodless if you don't do it with a whole heart, and you wind up with a death spiral of less-inspiring performance causing less and less attachment.
Mind, I think your analysis is exactly correct. But it's a bit subtle and nuanced in reality, which makes things even worse, because there isn't even something to argue with. If the guys were admitting their embarrassment, I could engage them about it on an intellectual level. But these are guys who are performing the observances. They just don't do it with spirit and fire, and those are hard to impart if you don't already feel the spiritual depth there...
(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-24 10:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-25 04:32 am (UTC)A more cynical poetical take
Date: 2003-11-28 09:19 am (UTC)Save ceremony, save general ceremony?
And what art thou, thou idle ceremony?
What kind of god art thou, that suffer'st more
Of mortal griefs than do thy worshippers?
What are thy rents? what are thy comings in?
O ceremony, show me but thy worth!
What is thy soul of adoration?
Art thou aught else but place, degree and form,
Creating awe and fear in other men?
Wherein thou art less happy being fear'd
Than they in fearing.
What drink'st thou oft, instead of homage sweet,
But poison'd flattery? O, be sick, great greatness,
And bid thy ceremony give thee cure!
-- Henry V, IV i
Not that I endorse either viewpoint completely, but when reading the previous comment, I just started hearing Kenneth Branagh in my head...
Re: A more cynical poetical take
Date: 2003-12-06 09:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-24 10:28 pm (UTC)they did an enormous group presentation. The rituals were performed as playlets, rather than being done immersively. All three degrees were done in quick succession.
I'd be livid. I'd be absolutely livid.
I think Masonry is mutating from an organization whose principal focus was on spiritual and moral self-betterment to one that is principally a charity.
Uh, I hate to say this, but reality isn't going to cooperate. You can't amputate the part which inculcates moral values and expect people to continue being interested in moral acts like charity. Interest in hanging around doing charitable works goes right down when (1) there's no inculcating of the values in new members and (2) the same moral values don't get imparted to everyone, so there can be some consensus as to what sorts of charity the group will work on.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but if the memes that foster charitable behavior in members are no longer being transmitted (because you lost the mechanism of inculcation), you aren't going to be a charitable organization for long, either.
Charities have been fleeing the membership model for decades now, because except for religious ones which come with moral teaching they don't work. So now they're professionally run services which have donors (people who send money) and participants (e.g. people who do their charitable 10k), but they don't have members of any social unit.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-25 06:15 am (UTC)Oh, Steffan's been chewing nails ever since it was announced. It was all I could do to help calm him down enough to not go totally ballistic, and instead focus his anger on some statements that might actually get noticed, instead of simply getting him kicked out.
I'm somewhat less angry than melancholy. It's a change that is so utterly in keeping with the directions I see the Craft moving that it didn't actually surprise me at all. And I fear that I've never developed quite enough emotional attachment to the club to get the truly rich burn I do when the SCA does something idiotic.
The analysis of the charitable thing is interesting, and you could well be correct. Certainly, one reason that Masonry has been such a successful charity over the years has been the way it intertwines with the teachings. It wouldn't surprise me if it all falls to ash; we'll see...
(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-25 08:29 am (UTC)Ritual needs to be rooted in something, and it sounds like that's part of the problem. To come at this from a religious perspective, there are definitely some rituals that I do that I know seem a little goofy, and that maybe I'd be embarrassed to do in front of people who are not co-religionists, but I do them because (1) I believe they are required of me and (2) alone or among believers, they make a difference to me. But if the current crop of Masons aren't seeing their ritual rooted in something as important to them as God is to me, then things are going to fall apart as people become more socially conscious.
You and
I was sad, too...
Date: 2003-11-25 02:23 pm (UTC)As Masonry declines, so does Eastern Star. Msmemory's calculations put the Mass. Grand Chapter at having no one left to turn out the lights in less than 20 years.
For those of us who are new to it, and love the ritual despite it being performed sometimes without the joy (more often with intense concentration of getting the words correct, no matter how you get them out), it's just a question of acknowledging that the beast is dying, it's too late to save it, and decide what I want to do on the way down.
Th. thinks I am nuts to put any energy in something that simply can't survive 8-)
I don't agree. While I can't fix the whole problem, for as long as the beast still has some life left in it, I intend to bring the most I possibly can to the ritual, learn as much as I can from the leadership (and there are still some fine leaders to provide mentorship), enjoy contributing to chartible causes (not previously a big focus of my life), and make happy memories, while keeping my expectations carefully in check. I expect to outlive the origanization, sigh.
Re: I was sad, too...
Date: 2003-11-25 08:50 pm (UTC)(Although I suspect that, whenever my Lodge dies, as it someday will, I'll probably allow myself to fade into the shadows and move on to other things. Having done a dozen or so years as an officer, I think that both Masonry and I have gotten most of what we're going to get out of each other as things now stand. Most of what keeps me in now is the friendships, and the desire to do the best I can by my own Lodge, helping them keep the ritual as sharp as we can get it...)