Jump to content
Mike Martin

Increase in Unsuitable Candidates

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, mindmagic said:

Not under MetGL in London, they don't. Nowadays there's an elaborate points system for assessing 'worthiness' and if you don't get enough points you don't get LGR. The criteria for SLGR are even more stringent. In practice, a Secretary will send a brother's CV to the VO, and he will say whether it's worth proceeding with the application.

Beat me to it.

Details here: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same goes here; you might now still get Provincial Rank for having gone through the chair, but unless you've worked for it, it'll be a token award. And if you want to be recommended for Grand Rank, serious hard work is required(!) - in Cambs, though, the last has always been the case - with one appointment a year, not just anybody gets one!

Edited by Sontaran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mindmagic said:

Not under MetGL in London, they don't. Nowadays there's an elaborate points system for assessing 'worthiness' and if you don't get enough points you don't get LGR. The criteria for SLGR are even more stringent. In practice, a Secretary will send a brother's CV to the VO, and he will say whether it's worth proceeding with the application.

 

I think that’s pretty fanciful to be honest and as a London Freemason it’s certainly not what I see. It’s rare being in any lodge where a PM five years plus out of the Chair doesn’t have the “honour” of LGR. 

 

Invariably the PM will have filled two (possibly three) offices in that period so they get the adequate number of points to qualify for “honours.” How poor they’ve been in those offices or how little they’ve contributed to the wider Craft don’t seem to impact the award.

 

I think we need to face facts that the LGR “honour” is worthless other than to the regalia manufacturers. At least they get a nice day out at the investiture I suppose. 

 

I do accept that nowadays SLGR and Grand Rank are much harder to attain. Personally I wish more brethren put as much effort into their ritual as they do into chasing “honours.” I’m jaundiced by it all but I’ve had my fill of GP meetings and festive boards where it’s all a lot of people can talk about. I really don’t care if they’re  in “twenty units” and attended over one hundred meetings last year, and certainly not if they can’t even do the most basic of ritual to a high standard. 

Edited by MrSifter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not being a London mason in that system, I cannot comment but out here in the weeds, one of my led discussion sessions entitled 'Fifty Shades of Blue' seems to go down fairly well, dealing with the inconsistencies and divisiveness of the 'system'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/06/2019 at 18:26, MrSifter said:

 

, and certainly not if they can’t even do the most basic of ritual to a high standard. 

There lies the problem. You are assessing a Brother's worth on his ability to deliver ritual. We are not an amateur dramatic society. I judge a Brother on whether or not he is just and upright, i don't give a damn whether or not he can memorise the ritual.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, yorksmason said:

There lies the problem. You are assessing a Brother's worth on his ability to deliver ritual. We are not an amateur dramatic society. I judge a Brother on whether or not he is just and upright, i don't give a damn whether or not he can memorise the ritual.

Totally agree. Our Almoner is not, by his own admission, a ritualist (although he's not bad by any means), but as an Almoner(!) - I couldn't ask for a better one. His predecessor, who was also my IPM first time round was definitely not a good ritualist! - but again, as an Almoner he was outstanding. His predecessor however, was both a ritualist and an outstanding Almoner - he later became Inspector General for a (at the time) new District.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, yorksmason said:

There lies the problem. You are assessing a Brother's worth on his ability to deliver ritual. We are not an amateur dramatic society. I judge a Brother on whether or not he is just and upright, i don't give a damn whether or not he can memorise the ritual.

I couldn't agree more.  It is not given to many that skill of not only memorising but meaningful delivery of our ritual for the benefit of candidates in the several degrees.  Far more important, in my view, is the desire and progress in living according to the precepts laid down in the VSL and emphasised throughout our rituals.  A lodge Master has much to do and if his forte lies elsewhere than in ritualistic matters, then he need only delegate work to those who enjoy and have the skills to inculcate those precepts upon candidates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, yorksmason said:

There lies the problem. You are assessing a Brother's worth on his ability to deliver ritual. We are not an amateur dramatic society. I judge a Brother on whether or not he is just and upright, i don't give a damn whether or not he can memorise the ritual.

 

Actually the problem lies in your selective quoting and virtue signalling. 

 

I can only wonder at what your motivations were for ignoring:

Invariably the PM will have filled two (possibly three) offices in that period so they get the adequate number of points to qualify for “honours.” How poor they’ve been in those offices or how little they’ve contributed to the wider Craft don’t seem to impact the award.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, yorksmason said:

There lies the problem. You are assessing a Brother's worth on his ability to deliver ritual. We are not an amateur dramatic society. I judge a Brother on whether or not he is just and upright, i don't give a damn whether or not he can memorise the ritual.

I think you have missed the point!? Mr Sifter was not stating that they should be good ritualists, he did say that anyone who has reached and progressed through the Chair should at least be able to perform basic ritual to a high standard. I cannot see that this is wrong, I have always said ritual is only part of Freemasonry but surely we have to expect a minimum of effort and quality? There will always be exceptions especially members who have dyslexia or maybe learning difficulties, we should all be ready to jump in and help, however I have seen far too often recently Masons reaching the Chair and then have done absolutely nothing to justify the Lodge members selecting them to be Master! We all need to push ourselves to be the best we can possibly be, if we do this no one has the right to complain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I don't think he has.

This is a thread about 'ranks', and it's generally accepted that to receive Grand Rank or high Provincial office you have to have put in serious work to be recommended, so where does that leave those who can't learn ritual to save their life, but have put in the effort everywhere else to the extent that they merit that recommendation EXCEPT for the fact that they haven't gone through the chair because of that inability to learn or retain the ritual? - especially when you take into account that only PMs are eligible for recommendation. Are you going to penalise them by saying 'minimum of effort and quality'? (long sentence - sorry!) Or are you going to support and get them through the chair to ensure they get the recognition they deserve?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sontaran said:

No I don't think he has.

This is a thread about 'ranks', and it's generally accepted that to receive Grand Rank or high Provincial office you have to have put in serious work to be recommended, so where does that leave those who can't learn ritual to save their life, but have put in the effort everywhere else to the extent that they merit that recommendation EXCEPT for the fact that they haven't gone through the chair because of that inability to learn or retain the ritual? - especially when you take into account that only PMs are eligible for recommendation. Are you going to penalise them by saying 'minimum of effort and quality'? (long sentence - sorry!) Or are you going to support and get them through the chair to ensure they get the recognition they deserve?

 

1. It is not a thread about ranks. The thread is actually about “unsuitable candidates”, whatever that nebulous term means. The “honours” discussion is a side issue (rabbit hole!).

 

2. I don’t agree that to receive LGR you have to “put in serious work.” The fact there’s barely a PM five year plus out of the Chair in London without LGR is a testament to how difficult it is to get this “honour.” I say that as someone that has visited dozens of London lodges where dark blue nearly always outnumbers light blue. I’d be pretty confident in saying  I’ve never attended a lodge where light blue was the majority. 

 

3. Can you or yorksmason point to one post where I said that only those who are highly proficient at ritual should be able to go through the Chair or be the only ones eligible for “honours?”

 

4. What is this “recognition they deserve” you speak of? I thought yorksmason had a window into their souls and was able to judge them on how “just and upright” they are?

 

As an aside, we lost one old PM who never had honours because he’d never joined HRA. He felt quite put out by it. It was all very sad as he’d been a wonderful lodge member, served in multiple offices and been a very attentive Almoner. It turned out he was cast aside by our glorious rulers because anyone that’s not in HRA isn’t good enough in their view. 

 

I could then go on at length about some quite appalling PMs utterly desperate for LGR that do a mix of secretary/mentor/almoner/treasurer to a very poor standard for a couple of years each, join HRA with no intention of attending or progressing but just so they achieve the adequate number of points for a dark blue apron. 

 

I’d end the rank/honours system tomorrow. It’s not only unnecessary, it’s unmasonic and brings out the absolute worst in a lot of men. 

Edited by MrSifter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Sontaran said:

Are you going to penalise them by saying 'minimum of effort and quality'? (long sentence - sorry!) Or are you going to support and get them through the chair to ensure they get the recognition they deserve?

Or go ahead and recognise their contribution anyway. I can think of several brothers in our Province with dark blue rosettes on their aprons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Sontaran said:

- especially when you take into account that only PMs are eligible for recommendation.

Note that you do not need to be awarded Provincial Honors. A MM has has been outstanding for many many years can be promoted to a Past Provincial Grand Pursuivant with rosettes on his apron. Very rare but can be.

Sorry, didn't see the post above before I posted my comments

Edited by lewis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DavidGoode said:

Or go ahead and recognise their contribution anyway. I can think of several brothers in our Province with dark blue rosettes on their aprons. 

I get that David, but there is a limit to the rank MMs will be appointed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed it wasn't about rank, but it has moved on to the subject - and I never mentioned LGR; I said 'high (read: senior) Provincial rank' - I'd include SLGR in that. So are you telling me that SLGR and the more senior of the Provincial offices don't require a) a Past Mastership and b) a considerable background of work - masonic or community? And so far as Grand Rank is concerned, you HAVE to be a PM to qualify for recommendation (Rule 9/19).

What I asked is - if you have a brother who, for whatever reason, struggles with the ritual but is deserving of recognition above a token appointment, are you really going to penalise him by not supporting him through the chair and making him eligible for the most senior appointments? I'm sure we all know a number of MMs who have worked their b**** off for the members (and/or the community) who deserve a decent rank (ignoring the idea of getting rid for the sake of the argument), but are 'stuck' with a relatively lowly one purely because they've not gone through the chair? - I can personally think of at least 2 in my own lodge - we've tried to persuade them to go through precisely for so they become eligible for the recognition they deserve (but without success). They hold the same rank as others I can think of who have done b****r all!

Edited by Sontaran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lewis said:

Note that you do not need to be awarded Provincial Honors. A MM has has been outstanding for many many years can be promoted to a Past Provincial Grand Pursuivant with rosettes on his apron. Very rare but can be.

Sorry, didn't see the post above before I posted my comments

If you re-read, you should see that I was talking about recommendation to Grand Rank or the more senior Provincial Ranks. It varies with the Province, but MMs are 'restricted' to the junior appointments ('junior' being defined by the Province); for your Province you imply it's PPGPurs; in Cambs it's PPJGD and below; I don't know of any MMs higher than that.

Edited by Sontaran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sontaran said:

To be fair, it has moved on to 'rank' - and I never mentioned LGR; I said 'high (read: senior) Provincial rank' - I'd include SLGR in that. So are you telling me that SLGR and the more senior of the Provincial offices don't require a) a Past Mastership and b) a considerable background of work - masonic or community? And so far as Grand Rank is concerned, you HAVE to be a PM to qualify for recommendation (Rule 9/19).

What I asked is - if you have a brother who, for whatever reason, struggles with the ritual but is deserving of recognition above a token appointment, are you really going to penalise him by not supporting him through the chair and making him eligible for the most senior positions? I'm sure we all know a number of MMs who have worked their b**** off for the members (and/or the community) who deserve a decent rank (ignoring the idea of getting rid for the sake of the argument), but are 'stuck' with a relatively lowly one purely because they've not gone through the chair? - I can personally think of at least 2 in my own lodge - we've tried to persuade them to go through precisely for so they become eligible for the recognition they deserve (but without success). They hold the same rank as others I can think of who have done b****r all!

 

I’ll take that as you withdrawing your outrageous smear against me. Hopefully yorksmason does likewise.

 

I’m all for supporting any brother through the Chair that’s prepared to do his absolute best and am consistently on record as saying that’s what we should all do if it is what the brother wants to do. I’ve had no higher honour than being installed in the Chair of King Solomon of my craft lodge, it is one of the highlights of my life and I’d love every brother to experience it  

 

To answer your last point, I don’t think “rank” or “honours” (whatever term applies) should exist at all. Human beings being what they are, it’ll always be open to abuses and perverse qualifying criteria. If it didn’t exist we wouldn’t have these embarrassing discussions on here, in GP meetings and every festive board. It’s bread and circuses and I actually find it quite disturbing that so many people (despite the inevitable protestations) are utterly obsessed “being eligible for senior positions” as you euphemistically put it.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, the Honours system has been based on attendance both at meetings and the FB, Offices held after the chair, ritual delivery and charitable activities/additional work for the Province.  Hit all the criteria and you'll get Active rank.  Don't and you will get a Past Rank.  Be really not up to the mark and you'll get nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What smear? - you were the one who said .. and I quote " and certainly not if they can’t even do the most basic of ritual to a high standard. " - I disagreed (to an extent) - that's not a smear!

Oh, and I actually agree with your observations about 'honours' or 'rank', but we have to accept that they're here to stay - I did say 'ignoring ..etc'! (and if you ask David Goode, you'll find I'm not moaning because of being overlooked!)

Edited by Sontaran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sentience said:

Here, the Honours system has been based on attendance both at meetings and the FB, Offices held after the chair, ritual delivery and charitable activities/additional work for the Province.  Hit all the criteria and you'll get Active rank.  Don't and you will get a Past Rank.  Be really not up to the mark and you'll get nothing.

A lot of Provinces are starting to move in that direction - ours included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sontaran said:

What smear? - you were the one who said .. and I quote " and certainly not if they can’t even do the most basic of ritual to a high standard. " - I disagreed - that's not a smear!

 

Be a love, put up the full quote and in context. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, having re-read, I do apologise and -to an extent, take it back - but I do stand by my observation about supporting someone deserving to 'enable' suitable reward. I do agree with your observation; my view was coloured by the shortened quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sontaran said:

Ok, having re-read, I do apologise and -to an extent, take it back - but I do stand by my observation about supporting someone deserving to 'enable' suitable reward. I do agree with your observation; my view was coloured by the shortened quote.

 

Thank you. 

 

If getting a “reward” is what motivates someone and it’s what they want, I’ve no problem at all with the lodge supporting that. In return, the bare minimum we can expect any brother to do is give it his all in whatever office he is invested in. Sadly, and far too often, it’s not what happens. 

 

On a personal level I just find it very disheartening that every single lodge meeting, GP meeting and festive board a large chunk of the discussions revolve around this issue. Even more so when it’s top of the VO and SVO’s agenda. As I say, it is bread and circuses to keep the masses in line. 

Edited by MrSifter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sentience,

Come to Cambridge for a visit sometime, either Sontaran, David or myself can arrange a Lodge meeting.  We are a good bunch, the Province is small and happy and you'll enjoy it :)

S&F

Jon

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the same invitation applies to you MrSifter - I think you'll be pleasantly surprised; I don't (nor, I suspect, does Jon) hear any such discussions here - and we're both in positions where we would hear of such. I can think of only one lodge in the Province where such talk may occur.

I guess it does help when pretty much every member of the Province knows the PGM (he's also GSupt), Deputies, etc personally as between them they attend all Installations, and quite a few ordinary meetings. We are very much a 'family' Province.

Edited by Sontaran
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...