Along with a conflict resolution class? The current system reeks of "Good Ole' Boy" antics. The past few DDGM's in my district know/knew so little about what they represent that they make up their own version of the law when cornered. This has to stop... Perhaps a selection panel made up of Past Masters of the District could make the decision, and base it upon the prowess of a DDGM candidates ability to actually represent the Grand Lodge. There's more to being a DDGM than getting a pretty apron, having dinner with the Grand Master and being received.
My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Should DDGM Candidates Be Required To Pass A Grand Lodge Law Proficiency?
- Thread starter masada
- Start date
This is kind of a mixed bag in my opinion. I believe that all DDGM's should be able to interpret the Law as presented to them (by the book). However, I think that it might be too much to ask of most Brothers to have a "working knowledge" of the entire law book.
BTW, is it not the Junior Warden's responsibility to interpret the law for the lodge?? Of course if the JW can not answer the question I would think that the Masonic Jurisprudence Committee would be the next step...
BTW, is it not the Junior Warden's responsibility to interpret the law for the lodge?? Of course if the JW can not answer the question I would think that the Masonic Jurisprudence Committee would be the next step...
Thse are good points, however if the law book is overwhelming to the individual, then it would probably be safe to say that the individual is most likely unable to fulfill a DDGM position. Yes the JW is the keeper of the law book in the lodge, so shouldn't we assume that the DDGM has held this position at least once? It simply goes back to a popularity contest, and not really a position of reverence. This is what really makes the joke out of the position. The law book is not overwhelming, it was really written on a 5th grade level and is an easy read. It's all spelled out there for us, you just have to be familiar enough with it to find the answer. That's why my experience with DDGM's is a book of bad humor. They seem to have no clue as to how to look up an issue, so they just make up some random boloney.
RTidwell
Registered User
I have noticed that not only is it a "Good Ole' Boy" system but that some lodges hold the "power" to control the position. I think it would be a good idea if the DDGM was set on a rotating lodge basis as well as having a panel of PM to grant approval. After all they represent the district not just a lodge. I think the DDGM should also have a working knowledge of lodge proceedings and ritual.
As far as the law goes the JW has the option to request a rep from GL in case of a trial. In reality when problems related to law occur they are brought to the attention of the WM and Secretary first. By the time it gets to the JW, GL is more than likely aware of it. We can talk about who's responsible for knowledge of the law all we want but how many members of their lodge can claim knowledge of their own bylaws?
As far as the law goes the JW has the option to request a rep from GL in case of a trial. In reality when problems related to law occur they are brought to the attention of the WM and Secretary first. By the time it gets to the JW, GL is more than likely aware of it. We can talk about who's responsible for knowledge of the law all we want but how many members of their lodge can claim knowledge of their own bylaws?
Last edited:
fairbanks1363pm
Registered User
i agree with it having to rotate