Masonic Traditions for the Twenty-First Century
Dennis V. Chornenky
President, Masonic Restoration Foundation

Considering the Craft's current decline in most English-speaking
jurisdictions, it is imperative that we understand what is at stake if
the organization is to be preserved in its original form and its
traditions are to continue to have a meaningful impact on the lives of
its members.

Masons must be able to answer three questions if Masonry is to be
successful.

What is Freemasonry?

What is its historical purpose?

And what makes it different from other fraternal organizations?

The answer to the first question is that Freemasonry is a traditional
initiatic order. While it has taken its modern form during the
Enlightenment, its traditions, symbols and lessons, reach back to
pre-modern times. If we closely investigate the lives of the
individuals who were active in shaping speculative Freemasonry out of
its operative roots, and particularly examine their connections to
older occult societies and traditions, it becomes clear that
speculative Freemasonry was designed to be foremost an initiatic
institution through which men could recognize their true spiritual
potential.

The courtly philosophical climate of sixteenth and seventeenth century
Britain, where it did not follow strictly Puritan or Anglican trends,
was strongly influenced by the underground tradition sometimes referred
to as Arcadia, which encompassed within its philosophy elements of
Gnostic, Neo-Platonic, Hermetic, and Kabalistic thought. As
Rosicrucianism surfaced in the early seventeenth century it also showed
an affinity to the
Arcadian stream of thought.

A close study of the literary works produced during this period reveals
a distinct current of symbolism embedded inside seemingly mainstream
publications. And to those well versed in Masonic symbolism the central
themes of the initiatic tradition become
quickly evident upon examination of this literature.

It was precisely out of this philosophical climate, united through
organizations such as the Royal Society, and through extensive
correspondence that is now well documented, that the most well known
proponents of seventeenth and early eighteenthcentury
Freemasonry emerged from. Men like Sir Robert Moray, Elias Ashmole,
Jean Desaguliers, James Anderson, and their numerous friends and
counterparts from all across Europe. Even if some of their writings
regarding the history of the Craft may appear questionable to us in
light of the evidence now available, it is clear that the viewed
Speculative Masonry as a custodian of the initiatic traditions of the
past, charged with their propagation and preservation.

The general work associated with the initiatic tradition, and the
purpose of Freemasonry, put simply, is to provide an environment where
good men can unite together to assist one another in self-improvement
and the realization of their true potential. One of the underlying
tenets of this initiatic tradition is the belief that if even one
individual becomes a better person the entire world profits thereby.

Being part of the initiatic tradition is what distinguishes Freemasonry
from purely social or philanthropic organizations. There are many
organizations that contribute large sums of money to charity; there are
many organizations that offer fellowship with like minded men; there
are many organizations that exist for the purpose of providing
education. But there are far fewer organizations that offer a
traditional initiation into the
mysteries of life and death.

Freemasonry is special in that it combines all of the things just
mentioned. However, it is essential that we recognize that the
initiatic tradition is the core, defining characteristic of
Freemasonry. Attempts to make Freemasonry as accessible as other
organizations by reducing or eliminating the initiatic elements are
likely to bring ruin to the Craft. Without the initiatic tradition
there would be nothing to differentiate Masonry
from other social or philanthropic organizations. One could call the
new organization which would emerge from such a process anything one
likes, but it would no longer be Masonic.

Much of our dilemma arises from the fact that too many men that join
are not properly educated about the fraternity. Rather than coming to
an understanding of the Craft based on diligent study and thinking, new
candidates tend to form their opinions
based on the behavior of fellow Masons, who are themselves too often
poorly educated about the fraternity's history and philosophy. A
disproportionately small number of serious and scholarly men within the
organization has led to a general decline over the last several
decades.

In efforts to arrest the decline in numbers, many jurisdictions in
North America have sought to make Masons faster and to make it easier
for them to join by reducing the requirements for membership.
Unfortunately, in order to appeal to the greatest amount of people
possible things must generally be reduced to the lowest common
denominator. It must be considered, however, that Freemasonry, is
designed to appeal to what might be called the highest common
denominator, that is, good men seeking to improve
themselves. Selling ourselves cheap is a sad sign of a desperate
organization. If an organization is vibrant and has a strong sense of
purpose it will attract good men naturally. Based on the facts, we know
this to be the case in most Continental European and South American
countries, where Freemasonry does not advertise itself to the public
yet its membership continues to grow or remains stable.

This is one of the Masonic traditions that must be considered-Masonry
works best when lodges are smaller. Granted, for smaller lodges to be
viable economically, they must adopt higher dues, but if quality is to
be had, it must be paid for and men should not be afraid to show that
the fraternity is important to them.

Unfortunately, North American Freemasonry has taken a different route
for most of the twentieth-century. When it swung its doors wide open
the organization quickly swelled, but it was filled with men that had
not taken the time to learn about the real purpose of Freemasonry. Nor
could they have as there was no way the lodges could have so quickly
incorporated so many men into the Masonic culture. This is one of the
keys to understanding our dilemma-the number of men that any given
lodge can effectively initiate and educate is naturally limited.

Initiation is a slow and sensitive process and requires great effort on
behalf of both the candidate and the existing members of the lodge. For
initiation and Masonic growth to be meaningful and enriching, great
care and attention must be afforded to each
individual candidate. He must understand that the organization is
highly selective, allowing him to feel self-worth and leading him to
respect the high standards of the Order.

Great time must be spent to educate him about the history, symbolism
and philosophy of the Craft if he is to become a Freemason worthy of
the title. Therefore, another tradition that we seem to have lost, that
should be emphasized, is the thorough investigation of candidates and
meaningful preparatory period. Indeed, this is a demanding tradition
that limits the number of candidates that any given lodge can initiate
successfully. Doing otherwise, that is, filling up the fraternity with
members
who have not been properly educated about the purpose and history of
the Craft seems only to have led to the deterioration of Masonic
traditions and values.

This, along with the rise of popular culture and high-technology, left
Freemasonry in North America unprepared to respond appropriately to the
social changes that were quickly coming upon the institution. Nor could
there have been a proper response as
much of the leadership, poorly versed in Masonic history and the
initiatic tradition, could not understand what it was that it should be
endeavoring to preserve. Even now, much of what is introduced with the
best intentions seems too often to result in further deterioration. The
monitors warn us against innovations with good reason.

The facts tell us that we are going to become a much smaller
organization over the next decade. But rather than accepting this
inevitable fact and making preparations for Masonry to succeed with a
smaller membership, it seems that we are too eager to
adopt anything that could possibly delay the inevitable, that is,
anything that has the potential to bring in members in large numbers.
In a sense, this is a kind of denial, and unless it is shaken off soon
it is likely to leave North American Masonry unprepared once more for
the challenges of the future. But if the right preparatory steps are
taken, as Masonry becomes a much smaller organization, it can also
become a much stronger
organization.

One important thing to understand is that simply adopting one
traditional practice here and another there is not going to turn the
whole organization around. What is necessary is an all encompassing
approach to the way our lodges can be improved. We
know that European Masonry has been very successful in working as small
lodges. And we know, whether we like it or not, that our own lodges are
also going to become relatively small in the near future.

While it is true that we can consolidate lodges as a means of keeping
the dues low, this approach is only going to work for a limited time
and does not address the more fundamental problem of having lost our
focus and traditions. If we want Masonic
traditions to continue to have an impact on the lives of Masons, we
need to focus on quality and working out viable models for smaller
lodges.

We need higher dues and dress codes as a means of returning dignity to
the institution. We need festive boards and more engaging Masonic
programs in order to provide higher quality fellowship. And we need
more thorough investigations and more
meaningful preparatory periods for candidates if we are to rediscover
our original purpose, uniting good men in the pursuit of virtue. We
cannot afford to forget that the initiatic tradition is what defines us
as Masons.

Keeping these things in mind, Masonry will doubtless overcome its
future challenges and survive for many years to come. But the North
American Masonic experience of the last century must teach us that
Masonry cannot go wholesale-that the number of men entering the
fraternity must be limited to how many men can effectively be initiated
and educated. We must learn and understand that Freemasonry, if it is
to be true to its designs, does not lower its standards but demands
that individuals raise theirs.

The Masonic Restoration Foundation
Copyright © 2004

from http://www.masonicrestoration.com/pages/862190/index.htm
-><-
Pope Pompous Pilot