Freemasonry is a post-collegiate mostly-all male fraternity dedicated to the social development of the member to form a broader sense of the self and their community.
I had the pleasure to meet a elderly gentleman today who was a neighbor of a family member of mine. He was a very polite fellow, with a good measure of mirth and authority, tempered only by a touch difficulty to hear. In the conversation he dropped that he was 78, but you’d never guess it with the way he handled himself in his yard work.
The conversation started, after a quick exchange of pleasantries, with the innocent question to me of “Who was the Mason?” He had obviously noticed the bold square and compass on the back of my car, and it had intrigued him enough to ask about it.
I replied to him with the short reply that “I was so taken”, something any in the know brother should key in to, but I realized in just a few seconds that he wasn’t so taken, and I replied the it was me, with the elevator speech prepping to roll off my tongue, only to have him interrupt me.
“My dad was a Mason” he said with a fond gleam in his eye. “Yeah, he was a 22nd, or 32nd or something…” “I used to know the handshakes, something he told me never to throw out there, or someone would really lay into me”. I smiled to myself as he said it.
“Yeah, I have his Bible inside”.
“A Blue Masonic Bible?” I asked.
“Yeah, a big one, it was his grand-dads before him, and so on…” he trailed off, wistful again.
“I have all his things from the Masons, I’ve wanted to put into a shadow box for years” he said with a near tone of excitement. “His rings, pins, books, and lots of papers” again with a fond look in his eye.
“He had showed me all of it when I was 5, and he treated it with such reverence.” I could tell he was looking back in time. “I remember it like it was yesterday….” His yesterday trailed off for a few seconds, which I jumped on the memory to ask the question looming over us like a tree.
“So how come you never joined?” It felt like a lead weight on a line being thrown at his feet, but I had to ask.
“Oh, he dropped hints several times over the years, even inviting me to join, but I never took him up on it.” He said sounding almost regretful of the missed opportunities of the path that could of been. “I liked to ride motorcycles and hung with a rough crowd, not the kinds that were the Masons I knew. The Masons were all really good guys, and I didn’t think they would like me hanging with the crowds I ran with.”
“Its funny you should say that,” I said, “there are a lot of guys in the fraternity, including those that have bike clubs.”
“Oh I know, it just wasn’t in my cards to do it I suppose, but I have the fondest memories of my dad being in it.” he trailed off, and turned the conversation to the yard work and other mundane aspects of life.
Besides the obvious pleasure at the conversation, the exchange came to me at a time when I was asking the Great Architect some challenging questions: about life, about the fraternity, and my place in it, and its future. I know the last thing on the list is something bigger than any one person can answer, but its always been a burning question for me as I consider it in the face of my sons who I hope to one day join its ranks.
But what the conversation left me to think about, as I resumed the path of the rest of my day, was rather than simply consider why others would want to join, to take a few minutes and ask myself why did I join? Why did I become a Freemason and did it live up to those expectations? What could I do to make it that way? I’ve personalized it of course, but its a question we can all ask of ourselves. Why did I join Freemasonry?
The man who I had the conversation with didn’t join for what ever reasons, but his father did, and his father’s father did, and they probably had a hope that this, now elderly, gentleman would too. But, he didn’t for what ever reasons he had at the time. His progenitors are not here to ask why they joined, but we can ask ourselves that question.
Masons like to acknowledge its notable membership.
We are constantly reminded of the super stars of Famous Freemasons which include George Washington, Ben Franklin, Mark Twain, John Wayne, and Buzz Aldrin just to name a few. But, Freemasonry stretches much deeper into the soil of Americana and besides the heavy-weights there are many less well known brothers; the un-sung Famous or infamous members of the Ancient and Honorable Fraternity.
Before we meet these distant Masonic relatives, we need to remind ourselves that it was not their gentle association with the fraternity that predicated their particular place in history. No, rather that is the product of their serendipity, morals and ethics, their natural skills and talent, their inspirational calling, and personal character. The man makes the history, not his affiliations. What ever their place in history, their presence still represents an aspect of our many fraternal facets – for better or for worse.
Witness to history Abraham Zapruder
The Russian born American manufacturer of women’s clothing was the only person to document the horrific assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy as his motorcade passed through Dealey Plaza, in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963 which has since come to be the well known as the Zapruder Film.
At the age of 15 Zapruder’s Russian-Jewish family immigrated to the US leaving a 1920’s Civil War torn Russia. Having only four years of formal education, Zapruder settled in Brooklyn, New York, where he studied English and worked as a pattern maker. He later moved to Dallas in 1941 eventually founding a clothing manufacturing company, whose offices were directly across the street from the Texas Book Depository.
I got out in, uh, about a half-hour earlier to get a good spot to shoot some pictures. And I found a spot, one of these concrete blocks they have down near that park, near the underpass. And I got on top there, there was another girl from my office, she was right behind me. And as I was shooting, as the President was coming down from Houston Street making his turn, it was about a half-way down there, I heard a shot, and he slumped to the side, like this. Then I heard another shot or two, I couldn’t say it was one or two, and I saw his head practically open up [places fingers of right hand to right side of head in a narrow cone, over his right ear], all blood and everything, and I kept on shooting. That’s about all, I’m just sick, I can’t…
Zapruder passed in 1970 in Dallas.
Congressmen Charles Rangel
The prominent Democrat, and former chairmen of the House Ways and Means Committee, has been a United States House of Representatives member since 1971, representing the Fifteenth Congressional District of New York, and is the most senior member of that state’s congressional delegation. He is the founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus and a decorated Bronze Star and Purple Heart veteran of the Korean War.
Born and raised in Harlem, he entered the service of the Army where he led a group of soldiers out of a deadly Chinese Army encirclement during the Battle of Kunu-ri in 1950. Following the war, he graduated from New York University in 1957 and St. John’s University School of Law in 1960, working as a private lawyer, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and legal counsel during the early-mid 1960s. He later served two terms in the New York State Assembly from 1967 to 1970, and then was elected to the House of Representatives.
In recent years Rangel was faced with a series of allegations of ethics violations which culminated in July, 2010, where Rangel was charged with 13 counts of violating House rules and federal laws, to which he will face a formal trial in the House to determine his fate.
Congressman Charles Rangel is a member of Joppa Lodge No. 55, in New York
Entrepreneur James Cash Penney a.k.a- J.C. Penney
Born September 16, 1875, J.C. Penney was an entrepreneur who founded the J.C. Penney’s stores in 1902 after working for four years in a small chain called the Golden Rule stores. With an offer of partnership, Penney invested $2000 and opened a store in Kemmerer, Wyoming, with two additional stores in 1907, when be bought out his interest partnership in all three stores. By 1920, Penney had opened 120 stores and by 1929 he had opened 1400. In 1940, in a visit to a Des Moines, Iowa, store where he trained a Sam Walton on how to wrap packages, the founder of Wal-Mart.
With the onset of the Great Depression, Penney was beset by financial ruin but met store expenses by borrowing against his life-insurance policies. He recovered from the financial setbacks but at the expense of his health, to give generously to a number of charities, eventually founding the James C. Penny foundation in 1954, later to be merged into the Oakland, California based Common Counsel Foundation, which partners with families and individual donors to expand philanthropic resources for progressive social movements.
Penney received his degrees in Wasatch Lodge No. 1, Salt Lake City, Utah, April 28, May 19, and June 2, 1911. Buried at Woodlawn Cemetery in the Bronx, New York Penney passed February 12, 1971.
Inventor John Gorrie
This little known father of modern Air Conditioning was a man of many talents, including physician, scientist, inventor, and humanitarian, and the inventor of refrigeration, is also a man who suffered for what he believed in.
Born October 3, 1803 on the isle of Nevis in the Caribbean Sea, John Gorrie grew up in South Carolina, moving to the port city of Apalachicola in Florida in 1833. Being very active in his community, he was resident physician at two hospitals, and at various times a council member, Postmaster, President of the Pensacola’s Apalachicola Branch Bank, founding vestrymen of Trinity Episcopal Church, and served on the founding committee of the Masonic Lodge in 1835, where he was appointed secretary pro-tem on December 28, 1835, later serving as treasurer.
Of his invention, following a Malaria epidemic in 1841, Gorrie resigned from all his civic responsibilities, lowered his patient load, and dedicated his time to the illness. Malaria, it was speculated, was from the rapid decomposition of vegetation and the hot humid air which created a poisonous gas. Gorrie, in addressing these issues, surmised that by filling in the low lying areas and draining swamps would be a way to combat the problem. His second prong to the cure was to develop a means to control his patient’s body temperature and the humidity in their rooms by the introduction of hanging ice above the sick beds.
Ice at that time came by boat from northern lakes which were both inconvenient and expensive. To tackle the problem, Gorrie invented a machine in 1845 to cool air sufficiently to create ice, a patient to which was granted him in 1851. His device (a model of which is on display in Gorrie museum) compressed air in a chamber which then released it to expand rapidly, causing it to absorb the heat from water that surrounded the chamber drawing enough heat away from the water to bring the water temperature down below freezing creating ice.
Despite the significance of his development Gorrie never made a penny from his invention. Instead he and his invention were denounced by Northern Newspapers and he was ridiculed his efforts. This was followed by a strong lobby against him by northern ice suppliers, who monopolized the ice market and feared lost profits. Gorrie fell into financial ruin when he was sued for unpaid debts and the unexpected passing of his only investor having never provided the funds to commercialize the invention.
Suffering a nervous breakdown, Gorrie passed at the age of 54 on June 16, 1855. Modern air conditioning is still based largely on the principals discovered by Gorrie today, and was not re-discovered until 1902 by Willis Haviland Carrier.
Programmer Steve Wozniak
Born August 11, 1950, this co-founder of Apple Computer Inc, is probably not the paragon of why to be a Freemason, but his work outside of the fraternity is every bit reason to take note of his career and accomplishments.
On the heels of selling off his and Steve Jobs possessions, the two collaborated to raise $1,300 to assemble the prototypes of what would become the Apple computer.
Formed in 1976, Apple computer went public in 1980 and made both Jobs and Wozniak multimillionaires. After 12 year of founding his electronic empire and full-time employment with Apple, he ended his career on February 6, 1987 though he still receives a paycheck, and is a shareholder to the company.
Wozniak has since gone on to write his autobiography iWoz, and found several companies in and around electronics and technology.
Describing his impetus for joining the Freemasons, Wozniak says he joined to be able to spend more time with his, then, wife Alice (married 1976–divorced 1980).
I’m not like the other people who are Freemasons. My personality is very, very unlike theirs. To get in, you have to say all this stuff about God, the Bible, words that sound a bit like they come from the Constitution, and none of this ritual stuff is the way I think, you know? But I did it, and I did it well. If I’m going to do something, I always try to do it well. And I did this for one reason, as I said: to see Alice more. I wanted to save the marriage. I would go so far as to join the Freemasons if that’s what it took. That’s how I was. P.234/235
Wozniak was initiated, passed, and raised in Charity Lodge No. 362, Campbell, CA, in 1980.
Reviewing the manner in which Mike McCabe was treated and his Lodge was treated, it is quite evident that U.S. Mainstream Masonry has decided to rule and govern itself using a model which is a cross between the U.S. Army and the Vatican.
The Pope, or General or Grand Master of New Jersey pulled the charter of Trimble Lodge for no apparent reason other than greed. But first it asked the Lodge to vote on its fate. When 95% of the Lodge voted to remain as they were, the Grand Master said, well you didn’t vote the way I wanted you to so I am over ruling your election and taking your charter. You are no longer a Lodge in this jurisdiction. Silly us, we thought that the process as laid out by the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of New Jersey should be binding.
Then when another Pope of New Jersey Masonry goes after McCabe he does so on trumped up charges reminiscent of Derek Gordon’s fate in Arkansas and in one of the charges uses surrogates to file a fake, false charge reminiscent of Gate City Lodge No. 2’s fate in Georgia. All along the way the Grand Master violates the tenants of his Constitution and the spirit of due process. He does so by wanton disregard of his jurisdiction’s most sacred document. Now it no longer becomes the importance of the process but the importance of the leader.
UNCONSTITUTIONALLY CHANGING A CONSTITUTION
The Grand Lodge Oligarchy in New Jersey outlawed its Constitution. You can’t insert a clause in a Constitution that says the leader can ignore any and all statues that he wants to. By doing so you have dispensed with the necessity of having a Constitution. This seems to be the trend in modern Mainstream Masonry. The rule of law has been replaced with the cult of the leader.
But it wasn’t always this way. In fact that is far from the tradition of Masonry. For centuries a Grand Master’s power was delineated in the Constitution which spelled out exactly when and how he could interfere in the affairs of a local Lodge. Under the Constitution local Lodges as well as individual Brothers had rights too and spheres of influence that a Grand Lodge could not violate without permission. Just as in the civil separation of church and state we had separation of Grand Lodge and local Lodges. And Grand Masters adhered to the letter of the law.
But that has gone by the boards in today’s Masonry. And that is precisely the problem that has infected Mainstream Masonry today. Grand Lodges have become like civil governments, jealous of their power and taking extraordinary measures to keep, preserve and protect that power while constantly adding to it. In the process Grand Lodge’s have trampled on the civil rights of its members and overridden their own Constitutions which were written to limit their powers.
Instant Suspensions and Instant Expulsions without a Masonic trial by Grand Masters are not in the tradition of Masonic jurisprudence. Neither is pulling charters and closing down Lodges that are vibrant and healthy for purely political reasons. There has to be some recourse to the Brotherhood for relief from out of control Grand Masters who have eliminated all limits on their power. And that recourse has to be something beyond dumping the problem back on the individual members to correct. If a Grand Master can over ride and negate any vote taken by the Grand Lodge acting as a body then he is as entrenched in power as Castro is in Cuba.
Here are four suggestions. Pick one, or suggest another.
A Congress of elected Masons in every Grand Lodge who write and interpret Masonic law
Abolish the Grand Lodge system altogether
The sad fact is that that the Frank Haas story in West Virginia, the story of Halcyon Lodge in Ohio, the Gate City Lodge No.2 story in Georgia, the Derek Gordon story in Arkansas and the Mike McCabe story in New Jersey are all the same peas in a pod. And tomorrow there will be another story somewhere else, and another and another and another until American Masonry decides to reform and police itself deciding that it is an American institution not just a state body with a states rights attitude and a Confederate mindset.
The topic comes from a link picked up in a message board on the ever swirling definition of Regularity between Masonic bodies. Setting aside the idea of Territorial Exclusivity prevalent in the U.S., the message board linked to an interesting inclusion to a Wikipedia entry on the European question of recognition and the 11 defined Ancient landmarks that makes Masonry Freemasonry. Simple called “The Aims and Relationships of the Craft Freemasonry” this document is the Magna Carta, if you will, of who, how, and when, a body is recognized and the trump to why English Masonry (UGLE and its Home lodges of Ireland and Scotland) is the arbiter of what is, or what isn’t recognized Masonry.
What I find most interesting is that there is no mention of the “Antient” Landmarks as such that most are familiar with from Anderson (that rang from 11-25 depending on the source which you can read on Paul Bessel’s site). Some states have NO codification of any these past landmarks, rather deferring, it would seem, to the document below as their institutional operating parameters.
These are more Corporate Landmarks, in that they spell out what the essence of regular Grand Lodge Freemasonry is, saying at the end of the document that “The three Grand Lodges are convinced that it is only by this rigid adherence to this policy that Freemasonry has survived the constantly changing doctrines of the outside world, and are compelled to place on record their complete disapproval of any action which may tend to permit the slightest departure from the basic principles of Freemasonry.” and that if any deviation were to take place “that [they] cannot maintain a claim to be following the Antient Landmarks of the Order, and must ultimately face disintegration.”
It’s a pretty extreme position, and probably true, just as adding any new ingredients to a particular recipe changes it into a new one. It is impossible to make a singular change to a thing and see it as the same as it was before the revision.
With that in mind, I’m struck by the idea that the document then places some very interesting caps onto the fraternity dictating what exactly IT is and what IT isn’t, despite what the ritual implies, or what it imparts.
The most notable point in the document is that the institution is essentially a thoroughly Christian institution as indicated by paragraph 4. I say this as it instructs to place the Bible into such a position of prominence above (read in-place) of all others which excludes entirely other faiths. On its own merit, this isn’t bad, but does it does not take into account the faiths of other members, whether in majority or minority of a lodge.
What does this mean? At a surface brush it leaves open the question of oaths and obligations of those who are not of that particular faith. Would the oath sworn by a Christian hand upon a Koran be the same as an oath taken upon the bible? Or, in a less inflammatory tone, would the oath of a Jewish brother taken on the Holy Bible be held to breast as close as an oath taken on the Tanakh, the Hebrew holy writing, called the Old Testament in the Christian church. But, taken a step further, does it truly permit a lodge of mixed faith brothers to exist, putting each members on equal footing, or does it place deference towards the Christian faith at the sake of any others?
Paragraph 3 does seem to address this in stating that the condition of being a Freemason is predicated upon the belief in a Supreme Being, with no declaration of which Supreme Being, but does this square with the idea that the Holy Bible as the Volume of the Sacred Law that MUST be on the alter? Does that very book dictate the order as being exclusively a Christian body? Could, in light of the requirement of books on the alter, a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, or other non-Christian truly become a Freemason under the United Grand Lodge of England or its Home Lodges of Ireland or Scotland?
Albert Mackey‘s Landmarks, recorded in 1835, say nothing of which Holy Book, saying rather in Landmark 21 “A “Book of the Law” is indispensable in every Lodge” but not saying in the list what that book of Law is. Pounds Landmarks say too A “book of the law” as an indispensable part of the lodge” but does not indicate which book. Mackey, in an expanded look says: I say advisedly, a Book of the Law, because it is not absolutely required that everywhere the Old and New Testaments shall be used. The “Book of the Law” is that volume which, by the religion of the country, is believed to contain the revealed will of the Grand Architect of the universe. Hence, in all Lodges in Christian countries, the Book of the Law is composed of the Old and New Testaments; in a country where Judaism was the prevailing faith, the Old Testament alone would be sufficient; and in Mohammedan countries, and among Mohammedan Masons the Koran might be substituted. Masonry does not attempt to interfere with the peculiar religious faith of its disciples, except so far as relates to the belief in the existence of God, and what necessarily results from that belief. The |”|Book of the Law|”| is to the speculative Mason his spiritual Trestle-board; without this he cannot labor; whatever he believes to be the revealed will of the Grand Architect constitutes for him this spiritual Trestle|-|board, and must ever be before him in his hours of speculative labor, to be the rule and guide of his conduct The Landmark, therefore, requires that a |”|Book of the Law,|”| a religious code of some kind, purporting to be an exemplar of the revealed will of God, shall form in essential part of the furniture of every Lodge. -From The Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon
Anderson’s Constitution speaks to the obeying of the “Moral Law” but offers no leaning towards what that means. Used in context, one could debate its meaning as coming from a religious implication stemming form the Bible or a Humanist one based on the work of John Locke.
American Masonry has this same prohibition as the Holy Bible is the undisputed Volume of Sacred Law upon every alter in every lodge, with some states allowing for shared space with other books, usually at the will and pleasure of its membership to allow its use.
Another aspect of the document is the prohibition of Masonry taking a position “to express any opinion on questions of foreign or domestic policy either at home or abroad, and it will not allow its name to be associated with any action, however humanitarian it may appear to be, which infringes its unalterable policy of standing aloof from every question affecting the relations between one government and another, or between political parties, or questions as to rival theories of government.”
While this alleviates the shift of balance, it also preserves the harmony of the membership from leaning the fraternity in any particular way. In some respects, this seems characteristic of the first prohibition, making the fraternity a predominantly Christian body to ensure its cultural heritage which worked in an era of Christian dominance. Peace and harmony of the lodge being the principal aim of the Landmarks. the difference in these two very definite points is that in the column of no politics it makes no declaration as to which political party it drapes onto its alter in the manner it does with religion.
The full document of The Aims and Relationships of the Craft Freemasonry as crafted by the Masonic High Council the Mother High Council in 1939 has some other interesting aspects that dictate regularity, and make for an interesting consideration as to the shape and composition of Masonry in the 21st Century now. The MW Pro Grand Master-Most Hon. Marquess of Northampton Iain Ross Bryce, TD, DL presented a speech in 2007 on the subject and reaffirmed the importance of the document to European Masonry and the role of the UGLE in recognizing them, which lends itself even more to the authority, within Masonic circles, of the High Councils Document.
The full points of the document:
1. The MHC has deemed it desirable to set forth in precise form the aims of Freemasonry as consistently practiced under its Jurisdiction and since the premier Grand Assembly it come into being as an organized body at York in 1705, and also to define the principles governing its relations with those other Grand Lodges with which it is in fraternal accord.
2. In view of the distortion by some so called world Masonic powers, and the deviation from the core values principles and aims of Ancient Craft Freemasonry, it is once again considered necessary to emphasize certain fundamental principles of the Fraternity.
3. The first condition of admission into, and membership of, the Order of Freemasons is a belief in a Supreme Being. This is essential and admits of no compromise.
4. The Bible, referred to by Freemasons as the Volume of the Sacred Law, is always open in the Lodges. Every Candidate is required to take his obligation on that book or on the Volume, which is held by his particular creed to impart sanctity to an oath or promise taken upon it.
5. Everyone who enters Freemasonry is, at the outset, strictly forbidden to countenance any act which may have a tendency to subvert the peace and good order of society; he must pay due obedience to the law of any state in which he resides or which may afford him protection, and he must never be remiss in the allegiance due to the Sovereign of his native land.
6. While English Freemasonry thus inculcates in each of its members the duties of loyalty and citizenship, it reserves to the individual the right to hold his own opinion with regard to public affairs. But neither in any Lodge, nor at any time in his capacity as a Freemason, is he permitted to discuss or to advance his views on theological or political questions.
7. The MHC will always consistently refused to express any opinion on questions of foreign or domestic policy either at home or abroad, and it will not allow its name to be associated with any action, however humanitarian it may appear to be, which infringes its unalterable policy of standing aloof from every question affecting the relations between one government and another, or between political parties, or questions as to rival theories of government.
8. The MHC is aware that there do exist Bodies, styling themselves Freemasons, which do not adhere to these principles, and while that attitude exists the Regular Grand Lodge of England refuses absolutely to have any relations with such Bodies, or to regard them as Freemasons.
9. A Regular Grand Lodge is a Sovereign and independent Body practising Freemasonry only within the four Degrees and their complement within the limits defined by the Grand Assembly at York 1705 as pure Antient Masonry. It does not recognize or admit the existence of any superior Masonic authority, however styled.
A) A Regular Grand Lodge has sole Jurisdiction over the Craft Freemasonry including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch, and confers the degrees of: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason and employ the ceremony of the Board of Installed Masters in which the Worshipful Master of a Lodge is installed and invested, it confer the; Mark Man/Mason degree on Master Masons in a regular craft lodge of Master Masons lowered to the Fellow Craft degree.
B) The degrees controlled by the Grand Royal Arch Chapter are: Royal Ark Mariners, Excellent Mason and Most Excellent Master, Royal Arch, including the Ceremony of the Veils and inner workings of Royal Arch Freemasonry as practiced in the Crypt of York Minster.
10. The MHC will refused to participate in Conferences with so-called International Associations claiming to represent Freemasonry, which admit to membership Bodies failing to conform strictly to the principles upon which the MHC is founded. The Grand Lodge does not admit any such claim, nor can its views be represented by any such Association.
11. There is no secret with regard to any of the basic principles of Freemasonry, some of which have been stated above. The MHC will always consider the recognition of those Grand Lodges, which profess and practise, and can show that they have consistently professed and practised, those established and unaltered principles, but in no circumstances will it enter into discussion with a view to any new or varied interpretation of them. They must be accepted and practised wholeheartedly and in their entirety by those who desire to be recognised as Freemasons by the Regular Grand Lodge.
How do you read them and how do you see them relating to your jurisdiction practice of Freemasonry? Do you see Freemasonry as principally a Christian organization?
One might be inclined to ask why Mike McCabe is being so persistent in trying to get an appeal for his case, an appeal the Grand Lodge of New Jersey is trying to stonewall? Why doesn’t he just let it go?
“I once sat in a Camden County courtroom and heard the attorney representing the Grand Lodge successfully argue that neither a Masonic Lodge nor the members of a New Jersey Masonic Lodge were entitled to be treated fundamentally fair by the Grand Lodge. I sat there and wondered what type of organization had I devoted 20 plus years of my life to, to find out that is how they view me? No Brother I know ever knocked on the inner door, expecting to be treated as a second class citizen.”
Another good reason would be the actions of his Grand Master in regards to his Lodge, Trimble Lodge. That Grand Master forced the three Lodges which met in the same building (worth several million dollars and co-equally owned) to merge. Trimble Lodge was one of the three and was very well endowed thanks to the generosity of several of its deceased members.
Each of the Lodges held meetings and votes were taken. The members of Trimble Lodge and one of the other Lodges voted overwhelmingly against the forced consolidation. After the results of Trimble’s vote was announced, 49-2 against the proposal, the District Deputy acting under the instructions of the then Grand Master, walked up to the East, picked up the Lodge’s Charter and stated that Trimble Lodge was closed.
He left with the charter while the meeting was still in progress.
McCabe then provides us with an explanation of why he thinks that the Grand Lodge of New Jersey is out of control.
On December 1, 2004, Trimble Lodge went to court to obtain an injunction against the Grand Master and the Grand Lodge to prevent this forced merger. This legal action was only taken as an act of last resort, so as to permit the affected lodges the time needed to attempt an amicable resolution of the underlying issues with some members of Ionic Lodge (and Grand Lodge). It would have also afford those lodges the time needed to present the another side to these issues at the appropriate Grand Lodge forum, where actual facts could be presented and hearsay, distortions and misrepresentations could be refuted.
During the course of the court hearing, the presiding judge asked the attorney representing Grand Lodge a question something along the lines of Is a Masonic lodge entitled to be treated fundamentally fair (by either the Grand Lodge or Grand Master)? The Grand Lodge attorney’s reply was NO. The judged then asked If the members of a Masonic lodge were entitled to be treated fundamentally fair? The Grand Lodge’s attorney responded that the members of a Masonic Lodge “Are not entitled to be treated fundamentally fair”.
As to the motivation of New Jersey Grand Lodge in acting this way it could be pointed out that the Grand Lodge had committed itself to donating a significant amount of money towards the upkeep of the Battleship USS New Jersey of which Grand Master Ryan is a Trustee) Also it appears that the Grand Lodge was taking heavy losses in its various financial investments. It could be speculated that Trimble Lodge’s money was Grand Lodge’s financial bailout.
One thing was for sure, the fact that the Grand Master over ruled the votes taken by the Lodges and mandated a merger by edict requiring all Lodges to turn in their Charters with one new Charter granted for the creation of a new Lodge also contributed to McCabe’s persistence in battling Grand Lodge. Once again he tells us:
“An American’s most precious Civil Right is the right to vote and the right to have the results of that vote recognized, regardless of the final outcome.”
Keeping all this in mind, McCabe started to do some deep digging which has continued after his expulsion. And what he found explains how the Grand Lodge of New Jersey can get away with acting as it does.
He found that in 1902 the Grand Lodge of New Jersey’s committee on Masonic Jurisprudence (the Wallis Committee) was charged with identifying “the ancient landmarks of Masonry” and reporting “what those landmarks are, as applicable to the Masonic law of New Jersey”. The Wallis Committee submitted a report that borrowed from MacKey’s 25 landmarks, ignoring some and combining others. It submitted 10 Landmarks for consideration by the Grand Lodge, one of which was entirely new and not found elsewhere in Masonic tradition. Landmark No. 3 stated:
“The Grand Master…may suspend, at his pleasure, the operation of any rule or regulation of Masonry not a ‘landmark’…suspend the installed officers of any Lodge, and reinstate them at his pleasure, and is not answerable for his acts as Grand Master.”
In one stroke of the pen the Wallis Report vastly expanded the scope of a Grand Master’s authority while at the same time making much of the Grand Constitution worthless, null and void. Nowhere in the entire text of Mackey’s seminal work, “The Landmarks, Or The Unwritten Law,” or in his complete 25 Landmarks, is any language found that remotely suggests that a Grand Master has that type of unrestricted authority granted by the “Landmarks.” Nor can one find this Landmark in any other Grand Lodge in the United States.
The acceptance of a Landmark should not be taken lightly. For something to be a Landmark it must me universal and have existed since time immemorial. Something dreamed up in 1903 to increase the power of Grand Masters does not meet the criterion of being a Landmark.
Sometime after 1903 these 10 Landmarks were inserted into the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of New Jersey and for any number of years Grand Masters have used Landmark No. 3 to do whatever they wanted and to rule and govern in whatever manner they so desired.
Application of Landmark No. 3 over rules provisions in the Grand Constitution that were there long before it was.
“The Grand Lodge shall have power…to make all by-laws, rules and regulations not inconsistent with this Constitution.’ (Section 2-18).
“A Lodge cannot deprive a Brother of his Civil rights.” (Section 29-27).
But Landmark No. 3 is inconsistent with the Constitution and does deprive Brethren of their Civil Rights.
How is this Landmark reconciled with the General Regulation?: “You admit that it is not in the power of any Man or Body of any Men to make innovations in the body of Masonry.”
It can’t and it has increasingly been used to deny due process, suspend or expel members at will, and overturn the results of votes taken by the Brethren.
McCabe remarks, “That one important issue that has been completely ignored is the primary purpose for any Constitution. That is to limit or restrain arbitrary authority. Landmark No. 3 eliminates that restraint.”
In 1983 Past Grand Master Rutledge, an attorney, was brought up on charges of theft, tried and found guilty at his local Lodge. However, the Grand Lodge stepped in and said that a local Lodge cannot decide the punishment process in the case of a Past Grand Master, and moved the penalty sentencing phase to the Grand Lodge level. Rutledge objected and took his case to the civil courts, all the way to the New Jersey Supreme Court. On May 10, 1983 the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in Rutledge v. Gulian that “Landmark 3 explicitly authorizes the Grand Master to intermit any rule or regulation other than a Landmark.”
The court’s precedent setting ruling, upheld both the primacy of New Jersey’s 10 Landmarks, and the Grand Master’s authority in dealing with the organization’s internal controversies.
If that was the end of the story it would be bad enough and perhaps prompt us to suggest that the Brethren of New Jersey meeting in Grand Session should change their Constitution. That’s not an easy thing to accomplish with a Grand Master who rules with an iron fist and who has the power to overrule and negate any votes taken by the Brethren.
But that is not the end of the story. McCabe dug deeper and he found New Jersey Grand Lodge’s dirty little secret.
In July of 1983, only two months after this Supreme Court case had been decided, the Masonic Service Association of North America (MSANA) published its revised Sixth Edition of Ancient Landmarks of Freemasonry – As Adopted, Followed or Undecided by the Fifty-One Grand Lodges of the United States.
New Jersey’s then Grand Secretary supplied the information to MSANA and McCabe checked with Richard Fletcher, director of MSANA, to ascertain that no additional information had been added since 1983 nor any revisions made. After listing New Jersey’s 10 Landmarks the Grand Secretary of New Jersey added this note:
“Our records from 1903 show that the report of the Committee was received and adopted, but nothing in the report recommends that adoption of the ten Landmarks reported. We have adhered to them even though there was no official acceptance by the Grand Lodge.”
So New Jersey’s 10 Landmarks including Landmark No. 3 were never voted on and thus were never legally accepted by a majority vote of the members of the Grand Lodge meeting in Grand Session as required by its Constitution. They were just inserted into the Constitution without approval.
Section 2-23 of the Grand Lodge’s Constitution stipulates that “no alteration or addition shall be made to this Constitution unless proposed in writing, and supported by representatives of five Lodges: and a fair copy thereof, certified by the Grand Secretary, shall be forwarded to all the Lodges under the jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge for their consideration, until its next annual communication, and such proposed alteration or addition shall not take effect unless there shall be thereof the votes of two-thirds of the members present.”
Considering that the MSANA probably took a number of months to compile the data for its publication it is fair to say that the Grand Lodge of New Jersey knew that its 10 Landmarks were not legally adopted while the New Jersey Supreme Court was hearing Rutledge v. Gulian and which was decided favorably for the Grand Lodge of New Jersey based on the validity of Landmark No.3.
McCabe put it this way, “The funny thing is that the Rutledge decision was handed down only a couple of months before the MSANA pamphlet was published (The Grand Secretary along with the elected Grand Line were defendants). I believe that this information would have (could have) changed the entire outcome of the decision had the court known the information divulged in the MSANA Publication 2 or 3 months later.
Having looked at the past 100 years of the Boy Scouts, it is important to spend some time on their organization so as to put into perspective how it operates and perhaps take a lesson for how a member centric organization functions with a national leadership while still retaining its local focus. The value of having a national organization is easy to see when you look beyond the titles and examine the work being performed in service to the organization. Rather than platitudes and titles, an engine of progress and motion is working behind the scenes to grow, nurture, and build the overall brand, something that Freemasonry does not have in a way comparable to that of the BSA.
An initial aspect of interest with the Boy Scouts as a body is that the national organization structure removes the diversity of individual states from practicing Scouting in their own manner and sets a national standard by which the entire body adheres to. Further it delegates down from the top to the increasingly more local organizations the management and practice down to the Troop level through committees and charter councils. At the lowest rungs the troop becomes, like the lodge, the local corporate unit, still broken into patrols which function within the troop. This seems to have allowed for the troops to retain a diversity of its local community from which the members reside.
An interesting aspect of juxtapose is to look at the Scout Troop to a system, more familiar to readers, of the Masonic lodge. Troops are made up of members from the local community, staffed by their parents and guardians, and chartered by an organization (church, civic group, business, etc) to operate. The group meets in weekly meetings for the purpose of training, planning, rank progression, with a variety of activities taking place at any given time. The meeting has leadership that directs it (similar to a Worshipful Master) with junior officers (like the Wardens) who assist where and when necessary. The meetings have a distinct purpose however, and like a corporate business meeting, it breaks out into teams to accomplish its various tasks, something unlike a Masonic Lodge meeting.
The U.S. Postal Service recognized the Boy Scouts of America on July 27, 2010 at the National Jamboree with the release of the Scouting stamp, recognizing 100 years of Scouting in America.
To appreciate the local operation, we should look at how the Scouts operate from a national level that makes its way to the troops.
First Masonry, as most readers will know, is based on a lodge system with each local lodge reporting loosely to a regional management (or District Inspector) but directly through its charter reports to a state level governance, called the Grand Lodge. In North American Masonry, the reporting structure stops there as directives, edicts, publications, and announcements come from it. The Grand Lodge also functions as the state point of contact for marketing, brand protection, and broader national communication. In a direct line, the individual Mason reports to a lodge, and the lodge to a Grand Lodge. In this line of succession there is some blurred lines of responsibility as to public interaction and marketing go (if any exist at all), and practice is set by the Grand Lodge based loosely on its custom which varies in nuance from state to state in dress, recognition between bodies, landmarks of the institution, and custom. At a high level lodges have similar practice, but custom and dress has a great degree of variance from local lodges between states, because of a lack of standardization. Observational, this has created silo’s of Freemasonry rather than a unified national body as with the Boy Scouts. Perhaps in its founding this was an organizational hazard and part of its planned incorporation to cultivate a unified message and purpose.
Structurally, the Boy Scout’s are localized at every level so as to meet the needs of its constituency. Diagrammatically, the troop reports to a unit committee, which reports to the Chartered Organization which then reports to a District, and then a Local Council. The Local council in return reports up to an Area Committee, which then report to a Regional who in turn reports to a National Council.
By reporting level this looks like:
National Council, BSA
This level is the overall leadership in the Executive Board and sets the general direction of the of the work of the Scouts. This Board is entirely volunteer except for the National Commissioner, International Commissioner, and the Chief Scout Executive. The Council develops programs; sets and maintains quality standards in training, leadership selection, uniforming, registration records, literature development, and advancement requirements. It does not directly administer to the troops, packs, venturing crews, etc, rather it delegates downward.
Regional Council (Committee and Board)
The country is broken into Regions for better management and governed by a Regional Committee and Council. The Council exercises the authority and responsibility of the Regional Committee whenever the Regional Committee is not in session but both function to implement national BSA policy and programs. Additionally it plans events and activities for its specific region and to train members of the various standing committees. All members at this level are also volunteers.
The Regional Board conducts the affairs of Scouting in the region on a day to day basis in conformity with regional committee and board policy
Area Council
Regions are further broken into areas where the Area council functions similarly o the Regional in setting, managing, and implementing local activities.
Local Council
Local councils are usually not-for-profit private corporations registered within the State in which they are headquartered, they administer any program they wish in the BSA portfolio through an annually issued charter to administer the BSA programs in their area. To hold the charter the Council adheres to certain program, financial and accounting standards. Local councils are privately funded and are not financially linked to the National Council or local units. Funding comes from donations, corporate sponsors, and special events. The local council is led by volunteers, with administration performed by a staff of professional Scouters. The Council President is the top volunteer; the Scout Executive is the top professional. In many ways this appears as essentially a franchise from the national body.
Local Councils promote the Scouting programs, register units and personnel, provide facilities and leadership for year-round outdoor programs and summer camps, and insure the general principals of scouting are adhered to. Additionally they insure the integrity of the merit badge system, ensures badges-and insignia are protected, and provide training to the Local Units and community groups using the Scouting program. Most importantly the Local Council sets the standards in Scout policies (locally).
Local Councils report to Regional Councils on finances, scouting membership, numbers of scouts attending camps and on their review of charter renewal applications for the Troops and Packs.
District
The District is an optional add-on to mobilize resources in the growth and success of Scouting units in the area. Traditionally they are composed of volunteers, and provide training, and programs for Scouts.
Chartered Organization
This is the sponsoring body that owns and runs a particular Scout Troop granted as a franchise of sorts) to operate a Boy Scout unit. Typically the chartered organization has goals similar to the Scouting organization such as a school, church, civic organization, business, etc. The chartering organization provides a meeting place for the Scouts, selects a Scoutmaster, approves unit leadership and provides a representative to liaise with the Troop.
Unit committee
The Unit committee is three composed of three or more qualified adults selected by the chartered organization who’s responsibility is to deliver quality unit programs, manage unit administration, and utilizes programs to accomplish the Troops goals and development.
Individual Unit – Troop
The Unit is composed of the Scouts themselves, which are broken into patrols which have their own structure of operation including Scribes, Quartermasters, Librarians, Chaplin, Guides, Historians, Assistant Patrol Leaders, and instructors, as well as many others. This is the essential functioning component of the Scouts and the most fundamental expression of the Boy Scouts purpose.
At the Troop level, then, is the foundation of the Scouts life, like the Lodge for the Mason. The Troop is a fluid body of new and returning members which functions to facilitate the Scout experience. Meetings consist of training on the basis of First aid to the types of lashings to affix two or more poles together. A function of the Scout meeting is the individual progress of the Scouts. Unlike Masonry, the Boy Scouts have a variety of testable points by which the candidate progresses. These points, spread between merit badges, knot tying, projects, teaching, and memorization. These processes serve to bring the Scout into a tight relationship with the corporate body, progressing through a series of ranks demarcated with each subsequent achievement. It’s in these progressions that a highly valuable lesson is taught to the member , lessons retained for the rest of their life. For example the Scout learns the fundamentals of first aid, how to tie a knot to secure materials in place, conservation, leadership, and even how to plan a complex and multi thousand dollar project. All of this takes place weekly at the recurring troop meeting.
As you can see, the organization is deep in that there is a tremendous infrastructure to protect its purpose and product. One of the most notable elements in recent history is the close and careful cultivation of the Boy Scout Brand which is one of its strongest corporate properties and essentially the product itself which is licensed or franchised to the Chartering body.
This level of brand development/protection is outside the capacity of Masonry at present and likely the cause of its slip in public awareness (especially when contrasted in the work of the Shrine which has a highly cultivated presence and brand). The model of the Scouts organization is something that Masonry can take a lesson from in several ways. First to disassociate the idea of the Lodge as the focal point for the group activity which allows the attention instead to be focused on activities, projects, and community engagement rather than utility bills and infrastructure management. The importance of the body of work performed out shines the landed importance on the place in which the work takes place. This is not to suggest a franchising, but the experimentation of an un-landed lodge (like a traveling lodge) that can focus on its community involvement by literally being in the community.
Also, having a National Organization, unlike the Masonic Grand Lodge system, allows for a specific set of standardized processes that can be made universal so that each operating lodge has a basis of operation integrity especially when coupled with a leadership structure which allows the adoption of locally flavored practice and preferences with permutations built into the foundational rules local users. In essence, the infrastructure allows for the BSA Troops to operate without worry as to what they are in operation of, they have a National Standard of material and an activity chain of National command supporting and growing the organization. We can see this in the basic principal of the Boy Scout Handbook where essentially the codex of Scouting resides.
Responsibility still ultimately falls on the local body, but with an arsenal of tools, training, a strong stable brand, and a national level of marketing the work of the local can more specifically focus on the work of building Boy Scouts.
In conceiving the organization, its easy to say that it is a complex model of operation. Boy Scout Troops are thriving across the country (and world) and continue to offer programs for young people. A Wikipedia article on recent Boy Scout Controversies places numbers just over 2.7 million members (in all Scouting groups) as of 2009, with a similar downward trend that Freemasonry is experiencing (roughly a 22% average per decade loss).
Without a doubt there are many lessons to take away from the Boy Scouts, from their history, their operation, and their organization. Unlike most century old institutions, looking at what has taken shape in the last 100 years to coalesce into what it is today, an outsider can be encouraged to imagine what the Boy Scouts of America will become in its next century. Strong leadership from early visionaries and a strong organizational foundation has allowed for the progression of a clear vision of purpose to promote “patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred values”, all of which the Boy Scouts have cultivated. They are truly an American institution and an asset to the spirit of young people everywhere. Being Prepared is every bit the noble endeavor it seems and on so many levels the very basis of shaping young men for the ideal of civic engagement to become good men.
All in all, the Boy Scouts have had a stellar century and this centennial celebration is a milestone in American culture and a monumental achievement for American youth, to which the only thing to say is congratulations on a terrific organization. It is absolutely one that Freemasonry should take note from in both its operation and its outlook. The Scouts sprang up in the minds of those who saw the need for action in the face of a rapidly changing nation, foreshadowing the national call to instill values in children, and it still blazes a trail to educate, motivate, and activate the imagination and active civic expression in fast maturing boys. Despite recent controversies, the Boy Scouts is still a member run organization operating in a manner to uphold its principals which perhaps puts it at odds with the present day zeitgeist of multiple perspectives and ever shifting outlooks. But, just as it adapted to a changing world in 1910, so too have the Scouts emerged to embrace the 21st century at its 2010 centennial.
If you want to support your local Scouting body, I encourage you to visit the Boy Scouts of America web site. Or, with your donation, help support scouting through their fund raising which supports their camps, equipment, and uniforms.
Or, if you have a young man looking to improve himself, I recommend joining the Scouts today.
We stand, as it were, on the shore, and see multitudes of our fellow beings struggling in the water, stretching forth their arms, sinking, drowning, and we are powerless to assist them.
Felix Adler
We Will Never Forget
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
NOTE: This paper was originally developed for my consulting practice, but there is some advice in here that is also applicable to running a Masonic Lodge. Hope you find it useful.
I’ve been thinking about how we motivate people lately, be it in the work place or in a volunteer organization and I’m of the opinion there is no single approach that is universally applicable. It’s a matter of finding each person’s hot button and knowing how to push it. I think the reason for this is because people today are more ruggedly independent and competitive, rather than cooperative and working as a team. Unfortunately, this complicates the life of the manager who must somehow get a group of people working towards common objectives.
I’ve classified the various motivational techniques into “Soft” and “Hard.” Soft motivation techniques are used to encourage people to think and act in certain ways primarily using the art of suggestion. Some techniques in this category are direct, but most are subliminal as we appeal to the worker’s intellect, that it would be in their best interest to work or act in a certain manner. Managers may use one or more of the following techniques depending on the person and situation:
“Soft”
Salesmanship – if the business problem or objective is properly stated and the benefits clearly defined, most people will respond accordingly, but a lot depends on how the message is presented. A word out of place or spoken without conviction and your message may be misinterpreted. It’s very important to solicit understanding and get your audience shaking their heads in agreement with you thereby confirming they comprehend your message.
Brainwashing – do not underestimate the power of repetitive messages, be it on the computer, on printed signs, audio sound bites or whatever. Repetition represents a subliminal way to motivate people. Keep your message short and sweet; also make it iconic so it triggers certain responses from your workers.
Rewards – financial compensation, benefits, time off and even a simple luncheon represents a carrot and stick approach to motivating people. To me, this approach was more effective 20-30 years ago than it is today where employees fully expect to enjoy all of the perks a company has to offer regardless if they earned it or not.
Elitism – creating an esprit de corps among workers has at times proven very effective. Over the years there have been several reports describing how workers who are given special preferential treatment respond enthusiastically. Giving such treatment implies promoting a worker’s social standing in the company (it’s a “class” thing). Elitism can take many forms, be it new facilities, use of special technology, more freedom in the workplace, more participation in project decisions, etc. If workers believe they are working on a “state of the art” project or are given star status, they tend to develop a swagger and work more earnestly as they wish to maintain their perception of self-worth. Occasionally workers abuse their stardom, at which time it is necessary for the manager to burst their bubble and bring them back to Earth.
Interpersonal Relations – This is much more than salesmanship as it requires the use of all of a manager’s rhetorical powers being applied spontaneously. Here, the manager must interact with each worker individually and thereby must know each person’s hot buttons. Consequently, a manager must be able to quickly shift from being friendly and kind one moment, to satirical in the next, to consoling, to some friendly bullying, to kidding and friendly teasing, etc.
Inspiration – this can be a very handy technique for motivating people who can be inspired through a talk or an article. If workers truly believe in their leaders, they can move heaven and earth. This of course means the development of positive role models for others to emulate. It can also be through some act a person has performed, such as some special achievement or award received. People tend to respect others they know to possess special qualities.
Mentoring – here, the older workers offer wise counsel to younger workers and guides them through their professional development. Although mentoring was at one time a popular technique used in business, it fell into disuse for several years in the late 20th century. Only now is it beginning to make a comeback.
Teaching – simple education through classes or seminars can inculcate important lessons and leave an indelible impression on workers.
Aside from these “Soft” motivational techniques, there are some workers who are just plain “thick” and do not take hints well. Consequently, a manager must make use of “Hard” techniques, such as:
“Hard”
Criticism – sharp criticisms and insults regarding workmanship can sting, particularly if coworkers learn of it. Unfortunately, the only way to get some workers’ attention is by questioning their professional integrity. Sometimes bullying can produce remarkable results, but I do not recommend it as a regular diet. Beware of embarrassing employees who may respond by subverting your plans. It is also a good way to create enemies. Then again, do you really care?
Ranting and raving – loud and obnoxious outbursts demonstrate your displeasure with something and acts as a warning to all in earshot that you mean business. Most people like to avoid losing their cool, but sometimes it can really rattle the cages of workers. Think of it as an occasional stick of dynamite to move a stubborn problem out of the way.
Threats – nobody likes to be threatened but regrettably sometimes it is necessary and certain people respond positively to it, be it a threat to employment, a cut in pay, or whatever. By putting the fear of God into someone, it’s amazing what they can produce. One caveat though, check the person’s work carefully as they may have cut corners or even sabotaged their work.
Placebos – represents simple trickery, be it offering a magical pill, changing the clock, or whatever. Through simple misdirection you can induce people to produce the results you want in spite of their inclinations.
Micromanagement – representing close supervision of the worker activities. This is primarily used in situations where the boss does not trust the judgment of the workers and finds it necessary to direct all of their activities personally. The only problem here is the manager spends more time supervising and less time managing. Further, workers no longer feel responsible for workmanship and rightfully blame the manager for any errors made.
It bothers me that we have to use “Hard” motivational techniques to produce the results we want as managers. I am the type who just needs to believe in what I am doing in order to tackle an assignment (just a little “Salesmanship”). However, not everyone is the same and it is necessary for a manager, regardless of the organizational entity, to use whatever techniques are available to get the job done. It is not surprising to see some people take on a chameleon approach to management where their disposition can change from kind and gentle to harsh and tyrannical in order to suit the moment. In fact, a good manager must possess the ability to change his/her deportment. If a manager is nothing more than a simple easygoing person, workers may be inclined to abuse him as they do not take him seriously. In contrast, if a person is a tyrant, he runs the risk of mutiny or abandonment. The manager must be willing to change his disposition to suit the situation and get the results desired. In the end, it’s a matter of knowing how and when to push the hot buttons of our workers.
Keep the Faith!
Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.
Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M. Bryce & Associates (MBA) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com
The ugly hand of unbridled power has once again been unleashed by another dictatorial, tyrannical, oligarchic Grand Lodge. This time it is New Jersey. And the recipient, six time Past Master Mike McCabe, is not taking it lying down.
McCabe found that an unauthorized member of his Lodge was writing checks to the tune of $10,000 and not turning over $7,000 in receivables to the Lodge Secretary, but instead was depositing those funds into a Lodge checking account neither the Lodge Secretary or Treasurer knew existed. When he called this to the attention of his District Deputy he was told that if he had proof that this had taken place he needed to file formal charges against the Brother(s) involved at a Communication of his Lodge.
McCabe thought this peculiar because while he, like many other Brothers in this situation, might have a snippet of information only the Grand Lodge could investigate books and records fully to make a complete case and that needed to be done first before any charges were filed. McCabe’s District Deputy told him not to bring up the subject again unless he was willing to file charges.
Both before and since this particular episode occurred, Lodge Secretaries and Treasurers have been suspended by Grand Lodge, for allegedly failing to provide their installed successors with a Lodge’s books and records.
McCabe persisted because Grand Lodge’s in-actions in this instance was even more puzzling since Lodge funds had been expended without the knowledge or consent of the Lodge’s elected fiduciary officers. The existence of this Lodge checking account had been withheld from them.
And because he persisted and wanted the matter thoroughly reviewed it appears that for no legitimate reason, Masonic charges were filed against him, a Masonic trial conducted and he was eventually expelled. The Charges were threefold:
He had disobeyed the orders of his Worshipful Master to produce documents backing up his allegations.
He disobeyed the direct order of his District Deputy not to bring the subject up anymore but to file charges himself.
Possession and control of stolen property – stolen aprons.
Charge #3 was a made up bunch of malarkey thrown in to make the situation look worse than it was. This charge was based on hearsay because the individuals who made the accusations concerning the theft of Lodge property were not the individuals who preferred and signed the charges against him. Grand Lodge rules require the person making the allegation must sign the charges. The individuals that signed this charge refused to testify, admitting that they had not been present when the alleged offense supposedly occurred. Instead two other Lodge members testified in support of the allegation, one of these being the Deputy Grand Master. McCabe was found not guilty and exonerated on this charge but he was found guilty on the other two charges and expelled.
McCabe claims that 20 or more violations of Section 13, Charges and Codes for Trial, occurred at his trial as well as numerous other violations of the New Jersey Constitution.
In regards to charge #1 – “A Lodge cannot…..compel him to first submit his complaints to the Lodge” (Section 29-27)
In regards to charge #2 – “District Deputy Grand Masters have no authority to ……decide questions of Masonic Law” (Section 16-02). The power to decide all questions related to Masonic Law (or serious Masonic issues), rests solely within a Grand Master’s purview.
McCabe could not find another Mason to represent him so he represented himself and as the saying goes had a fool for a client. It seems hypocritical that McCabe’s Grand Lodge was persecuting him for allegedly ignoring two bogus charges made against him, but turned a blind eye to the numerous violations of the Constitution permitted during his trial process.
Moreover a Mason brought up on charges to a Masonic trial is supposed to be tried on unmasonic conduct or a Masonic offense. According the Grand Lodge Constitution expulsion is reserved for individuals who have been found guilty in a civil court of law for committing 1st or 2nd degree criminal activities, or at a Lodge’s discretion, 3rd or 4th degree criminal offenses.
What McCabe was charged with was trivial and does not meet this criterion. Since when is notifying the New Jersey Grand Lodge of potential violations of its rules and regulations a criminal offense? Expulsion is not a punishment that fit the crime in this case.
Lastly McCabe alleges that the charges are unconstitutional and that a Grand Master willfully and knowingly violated his own Grand Constitution.
The accuser that alleged that McCabe was in the possession of stolen property did not sign the charges as required.
The penalty phase of the process was held at an emergent Communication, in violation of Section 13-83
The Constitution requires that the members of a Lodge shall be summoned to meet at a regular Communication, for determining the degree of punishment to be afflicted on the accused. That summons was required to be signed by both the Worshipful Master and Secretary of the Lodge, and embossed with the Lodge’s seal. None of this was done.
The Grand Master ordered every Lodge Trestle board in New Jersey to publish McCabe’s expulsion and this continued for many months. This violates the Constitution where it says, “It is improper to print the names of suspended or expelled Masons in circulars issued by Lodges.”
These and many other irregularities too numerous to mention constitute what McCabe alleges as a violation of his civil rights.
A legal opinion regarding civil rights violations from private and semi-public organizations has been offered by the US Supreme Court and was used in a decision between New Jersey homeowners and their Homeowner’s Association board.
“New Jersey is among the few states to require private entities to provide some Constitutional protections. Most states have concluded that only governmental actors can interfere with an individual’s Constitutional rights. The U.S. supreme Court has agreed, but has held that states may provide broader protection if they choose, and the New Jersey courts have gone further in that direction than any others.”
The article on this court case also highlighted some important practical applications of the rights of those involved.
“In balancing the interests of the parties, [we conclude that the homeowners’] rights to engage in expressive exercises, including those relating to public issues in their own community …must take precedence over the [association’s] private property rights.”
“Your regulations must be fair and reasonable, they must not violate public policy, and they must be authorized by the community’s covenants or bylaws. That’s not new legal ground; just good governance and common sense.”
It must be remembered that Grand Lodges who have incorporated and become a nonprofit corporation are no longer an “untouchable”, solely private entity. They must abide by the rules of incorporation of that state and obey all civil law regarding the regulation of said corporations. Such civil regulation of Grand Lodge takes precedence over and supersedes Masonic tradition and the by-laws, rules and regulations that Grand Lodges have written in their own private Constitutions.
Grand Lodges are not exempt from Civil rights law that has been codified by civil governments. Because they are now a semi-private, semi-public corporation, Grand Lodges have brought themselves into the civil sphere and must adhere to civil constitutional guarantees that are required of corporations.
As such, when a Grand Lodge violates the rights of an individual member and does not follow its own published rules in its Constitution and refuses to follow civil rights as has been specified by civil law in regards to corporations, then an aggrieved member such as Mike McCabe has a legal case with Constitutional issues that buttress his claim that his civil rights were violated.
And right now all Mike McCabe is asking for is an appeal so that he can be heard again, with competent counsel to put forth his arguments based on the additional research he has accomplished. As of this moment McCabe has shown no inclination to take his case into the civil courts. The Grand Lodge of New jersey would be wise to grant Mike McCabe an appeal and another hearing.
, Wozniak says about his experience with the Fraternity:
I’ve been thinking about how we motivate people lately, be it in the work place or in a volunteer organization and I’m of the opinion there is no single approach that is universally applicable. It’s a matter of finding each person’s hot button and knowing how to push it. I think the reason for this is because people today are more ruggedly independent and competitive, rather than cooperative and working as a team. Unfortunately, this complicates the life of the manager who must somehow get a group of people working towards common objectives.
Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of 
