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!
The Traditonal Observance Lodge Explained
- Thread starter Bro. Stewart P.M.
- Start date
JJones
Moderator
50 members? That seems like it'd make it hard for new lodges to get formed. I know we talked about bringing OES back to our lodge since we lost it several years ago. I think they needed to have around 50 or so people to help charter that as well. We don't really even have numbers like that in blue lodge, how would they expect us to get that many people?
First, there is a trick to get around those numbers. You can revive a demised lodge with fewer members. I can't find the article, but there's been several such cases in the last decade.
Second, I'm beginning to think it's a bad thing for us to be talking about..."My lodge isn't as cool as I think Masonry can me, so I want to start another one from scratch." Tell me what you like about the TO or EC models, then tell me why you can't have that in your own lodge.
Second, I'm beginning to think it's a bad thing for us to be talking about..."My lodge isn't as cool as I think Masonry can me, so I want to start another one from scratch." Tell me what you like about the TO or EC models, then tell me why you can't have that in your own lodge.
What I envision from a TO Lodge: Less "business" and more "Masonry." By that, I mean that minutes would be printed out ahead of time and approved "as distributed" in Lodge. Degree nights would be held between meetings.
Lodge would meet quarterly and have a Festive Board afterwards, preferably at a nicer restaurant. Seven toasts would be included. Also, a Festive Board after each degree. (Unheard of here!)
Dinner at regular meetings would include some kind of well-researched Masonic presentations.
Tuxes wouldn't be required (I'll never be a believer in that), but highly encouraged, and a suit at minimum. Nothing fancy. Just a suit.
Ritual would be serious and solemn. By this I mean: candles, a Chamber of Reflection possibly (these have been discussed as an addition before any ritual begins), and a general difference in demeanor.
This is all off the top of my head, but there a number of reasons these things can't or won't happen at my Lodge. The primary reason is that the older brothers with a longtime membership in the Lodge don't want things changed, and that's perhaps for the best. I don't want to change their Lodge. I want to form a new Lodge that like-minded brethren will want to join.
You're not upsetting brothers who don't like the concept if they don't join.
Edit:
Let me add one more thing.
For my Knights of St Andrew induction, almost all lighting was provided by candle (exceptions being the altar light and light above the SW and WM's chairs). Walking very quietly into an ante room with very well placed candle light, and then into that Lodge room, it occurred to me that this is how our candidates should feel.
There was nothing ominous about it, either. Some brothers feel like I'm requesting something ooky spooky by asking for a Lodge lit by candles, when honestly it's how our "ancient" brethren of only 200 years ago met.
On an unrelated note: I just finished making a candle stick for Lodge. Two more to go.
Last edited:
I called the Grand Secretary last year asking about this very topic, and he made it quite clear that the then-Grand Master would not want to revive any more demised Lodges, and the DGM had similar feelings.
As for minutes, two thoughts...First, I'm not sure our laws allow furnishing members with copies of the minutes to read at their leisure, unless they are all collected and destroyed after being read. Second, if your lodge is doing interesting things, the minutes are a pleasure to listen to.
As for dress, I recommend you and your friends wear suits to lodge. It will eventually rub off on others.
As for festive board, there is nothing to stop you and your friends from meeting at a nice restaurant before or after the lodge meeting. You can be as formal as you like, and offer toasts to your hearts' content. Unless you for some reason want the lodge to invest money in it, it is a completely voluntary activity, and not really subject to lodge approval. If the master of the lodge doesn't care to participate, an informal master of ceremonies presides.
As for programs, I find it hard to imagine that a master would turn down volunteers who wanted to present programs at lodge. The thing to keep in mind is that you have to consider your audience. People come from lodges all around to hear my programs, because I tell them interesting things they didn't know, or inspire them about their masonry. What I don't do is make them listen to a lecture on something I'm fascinated by but is completely outside their frame of reference. That requires being personally familiar with your brothers...what a concept!
As for ritual, instead of looking for new ceremonies to splice on to ours, start looking for ways to improve our initiations within the framework we already have. Lots of lodges "forget" to provide the preperatory readings to the candidate, or deliver the monitorial talk before the EA degree, or if they do deliver it, it is as an afterthought, without even looking at it before it is time to read it. What condition is your preparation room? Ours had become a sort of closet for storing excess chairs. I bet anyone could make a significant improvement on the preparation room without needing to install a skull or paint a chicken on the wall. What is the condition of the candidate's costume? Ritual solemnity, in my experience, results from ten percent attitude, and ninety percent proficiency and practice. Wanting it doesn't make it happen. We talk about "ritual excellence" being part of the model, but I have observed that in Texas, that does not mean doing a more complete ritual, with the monitorial parts, but rather it means that the officers are wearing tuxedos. Tell me which has more impact on the candidate.
If you want to see the TO model of "masonic formation", you had better have a C certificate before you speak to me about it. Mentoring new members as they learn about masonry is more than just teaching the memorization, but that is an indispensable part. The memorization is a framework for teaching the deeper truths. If you're not dedicated to the project enough to become qualified to teach the candiates their catechism, I submit that you haven't got the right to tell people how "masonic formation" ought to be done.
As for dress, I recommend you and your friends wear suits to lodge. It will eventually rub off on others.
As for festive board, there is nothing to stop you and your friends from meeting at a nice restaurant before or after the lodge meeting. You can be as formal as you like, and offer toasts to your hearts' content. Unless you for some reason want the lodge to invest money in it, it is a completely voluntary activity, and not really subject to lodge approval. If the master of the lodge doesn't care to participate, an informal master of ceremonies presides.
As for programs, I find it hard to imagine that a master would turn down volunteers who wanted to present programs at lodge. The thing to keep in mind is that you have to consider your audience. People come from lodges all around to hear my programs, because I tell them interesting things they didn't know, or inspire them about their masonry. What I don't do is make them listen to a lecture on something I'm fascinated by but is completely outside their frame of reference. That requires being personally familiar with your brothers...what a concept!
As for ritual, instead of looking for new ceremonies to splice on to ours, start looking for ways to improve our initiations within the framework we already have. Lots of lodges "forget" to provide the preperatory readings to the candidate, or deliver the monitorial talk before the EA degree, or if they do deliver it, it is as an afterthought, without even looking at it before it is time to read it. What condition is your preparation room? Ours had become a sort of closet for storing excess chairs. I bet anyone could make a significant improvement on the preparation room without needing to install a skull or paint a chicken on the wall. What is the condition of the candidate's costume? Ritual solemnity, in my experience, results from ten percent attitude, and ninety percent proficiency and practice. Wanting it doesn't make it happen. We talk about "ritual excellence" being part of the model, but I have observed that in Texas, that does not mean doing a more complete ritual, with the monitorial parts, but rather it means that the officers are wearing tuxedos. Tell me which has more impact on the candidate.
If you want to see the TO model of "masonic formation", you had better have a C certificate before you speak to me about it. Mentoring new members as they learn about masonry is more than just teaching the memorization, but that is an indispensable part. The memorization is a framework for teaching the deeper truths. If you're not dedicated to the project enough to become qualified to teach the candiates their catechism, I submit that you haven't got the right to tell people how "masonic formation" ought to be done.
Last edited:
I agree with many of your points, Brother Ball, but I guess the best answer I can give is in the form of an analogy (we like those, right?):
It's easier to build a new ship designed for a purpose than to try and "fix" a ship designed in the 1940's.
I say "fix" because I don't see TO as fixing anything, it's just another approach to Masonry. It's an approach that many older brothers and even some younger don't necessarily want to take part in. So we could either try to convince the entire membership of a Lodge to adopt the TO or EC style of Freemasonry (or similar), or we could form a group of like-minded men and create a Lodge.
Someone raised in the 50's or 60's who thinks that memorization and recitation in a fluorescent-lit room is the be all and end all of Freemasonry probably could care less about this approach. That's fine. I'm not asking him to change. I'm asking: Who wants to join the kind of Lodge I've discussed?
Edit:
I would like to add that I especially agree with your points on ritual during the initiation. Someone sporting a tuxedo and stumbling over lines is not my idea of putting our best foot forward, but one of the big concepts I wish I could see realized would be someone being well-practiced and smoothly gliding over any stumbling blocks in the presentation WITHOUT A PROMPT FROM THE SIDELINES.
If you're not sure if a "that" or "upon" belongs somewhere, then pretend it doesn't so that the candidate is impressed with your smooth delivery, rather than your stop-and-go recitation with loudly whispered prompts from the back of the room.
Sorry for the tangent, I just remember seeing this more than once.
It's easier to build a new ship designed for a purpose than to try and "fix" a ship designed in the 1940's.
I say "fix" because I don't see TO as fixing anything, it's just another approach to Masonry. It's an approach that many older brothers and even some younger don't necessarily want to take part in. So we could either try to convince the entire membership of a Lodge to adopt the TO or EC style of Freemasonry (or similar), or we could form a group of like-minded men and create a Lodge.
Someone raised in the 50's or 60's who thinks that memorization and recitation in a fluorescent-lit room is the be all and end all of Freemasonry probably could care less about this approach. That's fine. I'm not asking him to change. I'm asking: Who wants to join the kind of Lodge I've discussed?
Edit:
I would like to add that I especially agree with your points on ritual during the initiation. Someone sporting a tuxedo and stumbling over lines is not my idea of putting our best foot forward, but one of the big concepts I wish I could see realized would be someone being well-practiced and smoothly gliding over any stumbling blocks in the presentation WITHOUT A PROMPT FROM THE SIDELINES.
If you're not sure if a "that" or "upon" belongs somewhere, then pretend it doesn't so that the candidate is impressed with your smooth delivery, rather than your stop-and-go recitation with loudly whispered prompts from the back of the room.
Sorry for the tangent, I just remember seeing this more than once.
Last edited:
JJones
Moderator
I agree that it'd be hard in many lodges to get the brethren to accept the TO approach right off the bat. What I don't think I'm seeing discussed however is the possibility of slowly introducing it to a lodge.
Is this something that you don't believe is feasible? The only drawbacks that immediately come to mind for me would be the time involved but I think, in the long run, it would be simpler to slowly change an existing lodge than to start one from scratch.
I'm just asking because this TO concept sounds very appealing to me and I'm wondering if aspects of it could gradually be implemented with positive results.
Is this something that you don't believe is feasible? The only drawbacks that immediately come to mind for me would be the time involved but I think, in the long run, it would be simpler to slowly change an existing lodge than to start one from scratch.
I'm just asking because this TO concept sounds very appealing to me and I'm wondering if aspects of it could gradually be implemented with positive results.
I definitely think it could be instituted over a few years, but I'm only going to be in this area for the next two or so years. I was hoping to get a group in this style off the ground and self-sufficient rather than spending the two years meeting with opposition.
The interest voiced in this thread, and similar threads across the internet, indicates that there is a want for more than a reading of the minutes and sterile recitation of ritual. There are always different approaches to problems. In my opinion, the minimum number required should be lowered from 50 to maybe 25. These Lodges are not about numbers, they're about the quality of presentation. If a brother hates even the idea of a Lodgeroom lit by candlelight, then he doesn't have to join and sit on the sidelines offended, or complain about it at dinner.
Peace and harmony are our chief strength and support, and some brothers don't want to do things a certain way, for such is their right. I just wish it was easier for those who do want to pursue the EC/TO/similar style of Freemasonry to do so.
The interest voiced in this thread, and similar threads across the internet, indicates that there is a want for more than a reading of the minutes and sterile recitation of ritual. There are always different approaches to problems. In my opinion, the minimum number required should be lowered from 50 to maybe 25. These Lodges are not about numbers, they're about the quality of presentation. If a brother hates even the idea of a Lodgeroom lit by candlelight, then he doesn't have to join and sit on the sidelines offended, or complain about it at dinner.
Peace and harmony are our chief strength and support, and some brothers don't want to do things a certain way, for such is their right. I just wish it was easier for those who do want to pursue the EC/TO/similar style of Freemasonry to do so.
"memorization and recitation" are among our earliest landmarks. Take the career of William Preston for example. Or Thomas Smith Webb. And they were working from the classical example of ancient scholars like Cicero, who considered memory to be an integral part of Rhetoric. And we all know how important rhetoric is. How to have a powerful memory is one of the "ancient mysteries" we used to jealously guard.
Brother Ball, I think this thread serves as a good indicator that there are indeed two legitimate sides to this debate, and there is no "one size fits all" Lodge. We find the Lodge that best suits us. I simply propose that it be made slightly easier for someone to establish a Lodge if there be enough interest.
I should point out, though: I would still have potential Lodges get the approval of the other Lodges in the area before getting their UD status. All I'm asking for is a reduction in the minimum number of charter members. Masonry as a whole appears to be shrinking (based on membership numbers), so to expect 50 people to sign on is ludicrous, especially in areas where you never see 50 Masons at any one Lodge's functions.
I should point out, though: I would still have potential Lodges get the approval of the other Lodges in the area before getting their UD status. All I'm asking for is a reduction in the minimum number of charter members. Masonry as a whole appears to be shrinking (based on membership numbers), so to expect 50 people to sign on is ludicrous, especially in areas where you never see 50 Masons at any one Lodge's functions.
I believe St. Albans Lodge in College Station is a Traditional Observance Lodge.
Bump
dreamer
Registered User
I have attended one and must say I have found it refreshing. I am more inclined to include a TO Lodge to the Lodges that I belong to. I enjoyed everything about it and will be considering joining in the near future. Perhaps more people should attend and get a feel for the difference. Might find more people who prefer this.
Frater Cliff Porter
Premium Member
I am a founding member of a Traditional Observance lodge and can say without a doubt, it is one of the best experiences in my life. It was extraordinary and life changing to form the lodge and has been fulfilling ever since.
dhouseholder
Registered User
So a handful of brothers wanted to go and start a TO lodge? Do you think they are getting the most out of Masonry there?
http://www.masonsoftexas.com/general-freemasonry-discussion/16326-membership-statistics.html
http://www.masonsoftexas.com/general-freemasonry-discussion/16326-membership-statistics.html