I’m not a Freemason myself, but I’m currently reading literature on Masonry out of personal interest. Apparently, there is a marked difference in the times it takes for initiates to move up a degree between the Anglo-American world on the one hand and the European continent on the other: In the U.K. and the U.S., apprentices are usually passed to the degree of fellowcraft within a month or so after initiation, and after another month they are raised to become master masons. On the European continent, the period between two degrees is usually a year each. And I’m talking about regular Masonry here, recognised by the English and American grand lodges, not some irregular jurisdictions.
Does anybody have an idea why this is so? Does it have consequences for the relative value attached within the Masonic community to degrees conferred by different lodges?
I’m a Master Mason at a lodge in the U.S. My degrees were spaced one month apart b/c my lodge (and I believe most others) has one meeting per month. There is no “international” body of Masonry to enforce standards, and I’m not sure about the exact rules for any country. However, to draw an analogy, some rules differ by jurisdiction (usu. state), each of which is overseen by a Grand Lodge in the U.S., and I’m not aware of any conflicts arising as a result. I believe the rule is mutual recognition, and membership reciprocity, among jurisdictions within the U.S. anyway.
As a practical matter, a visiting Mason from Continental Europe would be more than welcome to attend one of our meetings.
Unless, I suppose, he comes from a lodge whose grand lodge is not recognised by yours? I would presume, but I might be wrong, that this goes for the French lodges in most of America.
:smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack:I stand corrected, my Grand Lodge does not recognize Continental Freemasonry, whose existence I just became aware.:smack::smack::smack::smack::smack::smack:
I am not a Mason either and I don’t have a cite, but what I have read is that because for example German Freemasonry never really recovered from National Socialist persecution as a popular movement, the remaining handful of Masons is relatively ‘fundamentalist’ by the standards of the anglophone world. It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a correlation between mainstream status and emphasis on accessiblity in general.