In a discussion the other day about the way we (in Iowa) choose our Grand Masters (and this is not meant to be disparaging about our current Grand Master or any past or future Grand Master) the question was asked: "What is it about a person being able to memorize and parrot the ritual that makes him capable of running a multi-million dollar organization such as the Grand Lodge?" Should there not be some other qualifications such as intelligence, organizational ability, fiscal responsibility, and ability to see and plan for the future?
Answers welcome in the comments.
6 comments:
Jay,
I would agree that ritual should not play a major role in the selection of leadership. Far too often (at least in the Symbolic Lodge) I am finding that someone who specializes in ritual has no leadership skills, and becomes a tyrannical manager.
Truly, we need people in the 'line' that are leaders, and not only ritualists.
All in MHO.
According to the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, the following are the qualifications—and the ONLY qualifications—necessary to becoming Grand Master:
"ARTICLE IV
"...
"Section 6. QUALIFICATIONS.
"a. Lodge Membership. Each officer and member of the Grand Lodge must be a member of some lodge within its jurisdiction. The termination of such membership shall terminate his office and membership in the Grand Lodge; provided, that a change of membership direct from one lodge to another of the jurisdiction shall not terminate office or membership within the meaning of this section, and provided, further, that a renewal of membership in a subordinate lodge shall restore any permanent membership in the Grand Lodge which may have been lost by cessation of subordinate lodge membership.
"b. Past Master. No brother shall be eligible for the office of Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, or Grand Warden who is not a Master or a Past Master of a subordinate lodge chartered by the Grand Lodge.
"c. Past Grand Officers. A Past Grand Officer may hold office in a subordinate lodge, and this shall not deprive him of his rights in the Grand Lodge as a Past Grand Officer."
While being an MI or DL is usually seen as an unwritten criterion for being Grand Master, note that it is NOT a part of the Constitution or of the Code. And, while virtually all Grand Masters since 1844 have been good ritualists, the MI and DL designation is much more recent than the founding of the Grand Lodge of Iowa.
That said, there's no question that in recent years no man has become Grand Master who was not proficient and an MI or DL—and a good one. Proficiency, while expected, is not, however, the chief—or even a major—criterion for choosing a Grand Master in Iowa.
But that’s not what’s remarkable about the “Iowa System.”
What's really unique about our system is that the man who is about to become Grand Master personally selects (with the approval of the Jurisprudence Committee, of course) his successor BEFORE he actually assumes the Grand East. Most other jurisdictions have a progressive line, so that the Craft can examine a potential GM for several years.
In Iowa, though, we put a great deal of trust in the Jurisprudence Committee (comprised of ALL past Grand Masters who remain members of an Iowa lodge) AND on the inherent sense of the man who is about to become Grand Master. The original conception, I suspect, was that any man who was being considered for appointment as Chairman of the Committee on Division and Reference would have spent enough time in Grand Lodge activities to have had his abilities and character examined closely--and he spends a year under even closer scrutiny as Chairman.
A wise and experienced Brother once observed, "It's a weird system, but it works—for us."
And, indeed, it has produced many more good GMs than shaky ones. More. It has produced some truly GREAT Grand Masters, perhaps because becoming Grand Master does NOT require 7 years in the Grand Lodge officers’ line.
So. The simple answer, I should think, is, "While we expect our Grand Masters--and, indeed, all elective Grand Officers--to be proficient, it is not a requirement, and there are numerous other considerations that are far more important, both to the Craft and to the nominators. Those criteria include ALL the items the questioner suggests."
Bro. Húgust Thámus
"If it is such a great system" why is it that only those who have memorized ritual are deemed as qualified to be Grand Master. Very limiting. Practice is what counts, not what the code doesn't say. The Jurisprudence Committee seems to have a strangle hold over the Grand Lodge.
I rather think you may have missed the point.
It is patently UNTRUE that being a ritualist is required to be a Grand Master in Iowa. There are two—and ONLY two requirements: a man must be a member in good standing of a constituent Lodge, and he must be a Past Master of a constituent Lodge. Period.
The incoming Grand Master can recommend ANY Brother with those qualifications as his successor.
But I also think you may sell the Jurisprudence Committee short. The members of that committee are the ONLY members of the Grand Lodge who have first-hand knowledge of what it takes to be Grand Master. Watching someone do a job is a far different thing from actually doing the job yourself.
Of course, the two constitutional criteria, in practice, are NOT the only personal qualifications taken into consideration. Such is the case with the nominators in ANY organization.
I would hazard a guess that a candidate's ability to manage people and finances ranks very high in the selection of a new Grand Master. Since the Grand Master is expected from time to time to perform ritual, his ability to do so seems a no-brainer.
The Grand Master is decidedly NOT the Ritual Police, however—nor are Grand Lodge officers. But they DO confer Degrees.
Is it really your contention that they should be incompetent to do so?
Of course, if you are unsatisfied with the way things are at present, you are encouraged to submit legislation to change them.
The people eligible to propose legislation to the Grand Lodge are the Masters and Wardens of all constituent Lodges (a total of about 900 people), members of standing committees of the Grand Lodge (MAYBE another 100 men), and the past ELECTIVE officers of the Grand Lodge (maybe another 100 or so).
Clearly the constituent Lodges can outvote anyone else several times over.
The Grand Secretary's office will assist you in putting your proposed legislation into proper form.
The change you want to make, if I read your comments correctly, would be to say that knowledge of ritual NOT be considered when a new Grand Master is selected.
That would require a constitutional amendment, and it would need to be approved by a 2/3 majority of those voting, in each of two successive years.
Nope, I am not dissatisfied. In fact I think that we have has very competent Grand Masters (Perhaps the present one is the most competent in my memory) . However, it is definitely a system which requires a person to be nominated by one man. Granted he has to be "vetted" by the Past Grand Elective Officers, but why should that be so.
Doing Ritual is important and I would not put anyone down for being able to do the ritual work.
But to make that a defacto requirement of the position seems to me to leave out a lot of competent brothers who do not wish to spend hours upon hours memorizing the ritual and then traveling around maintaining it. I still think there should be other qualifications and I do realize that the Grand Masters Iowa has and has had are very good. I just like to stir things up once in awhile and see if anyone can defend the practices.
I am not sure that "because it works" or "we are better in our method than other states" is a really good argument. I still think a lot of great men who could do much for the fraternity get left out by this system. But change it? No way.
Ah, but Bro. Jay, it is NOT a requirement that a Grand Master be an MI or a DL—though most have been,and it is expected that Grand Masters be able to do our work.
Note that last clause: it IS expected that our Grand Masters be able to do our work. That presupposed that a Grand Master KNOWS the work!
Let's suppose that we choose a Grand Master who CANNOT confer a degree. What does he do when he gets a request to assist with a degree? Or a request for the Grand Lodge officers to confer a Third Degree on a special new Brother?
What then? It is--and always has been--expected in OUR Grand Jurisdiction, and, I suspect, in every other Grand Jurisdiction in the world, that a Grand Master be a good enough ritualist to confer a degree.
In fact, if I remember correctly, THIS Grand Master has conferred degrees in YOUR part of the state since he was installed last September.
But ritual certainly should NOT be a Grand Master's primary focus as a Mason. The welfare of Masonry in Iowa is his most important task during his year in the Grand East.
There is a story of a Grand Master many years ago who crowed about having conferred some astronomical number of third degrees during his term. He missed the point, and turned the Grand Lodge officers into a degree team. He was wrong, in my opinion.
I agree wholeheartedly that Iowa Masonry has been BLESSED with remarkable Grand Masters, for years and years.
That's why I'm a bit bemused when some of our Brethren seem to think that proficiency is the single most important criterion, stated or tacit, for becoming Grand Master. That is simply NOT the case, as our history, and most particularly our present Grand Master, will demonstrate. Our Grand Master is one of the most proficient Masons in the state, and in a number of appendant bodies as well as the Blue Lodge.
That's NOT why he's Grand Master, though.
But you and I agree on this...
Post a Comment