Lodgeroom UK

zambuk wrote:Just a question or three..

Are the holders of a Grand rank FORCED to wear their Garter Blues at their regular Lodge Meetings, or do they have the option?

What happens if they just cannot afford the rather high cost of the Regalia? From the prices that I have seen on the web sites of many Regalia makers over there, a suite of G/L Regalia ain't cheap. The same applies over here too, where we don't get much change out of $a2,500 for a basic set.

If they chose not to wear their Garter Blues, would the Tyler have the right or indeed an obligation to refuse them entry because the weren't "properly clothed"?

And one last question...do you have the same situation regarding regalia wearing in RA Chapters?

Cheers

zambuk

The BoC stipulates that each has to be clothed according to his rank - so yes, it's mandatory to wear dark blues if you've been awarded them. The major exception is those who have been Prov Grand Stewards - on certain occasions, for example the Prov GL meeting in Bucks, and all Stewards' Lodge meetings, the wearing of Stewards' regalia is mandated, with a few exceptions.

The cost should not be that much of an issue - second hand regalia is generally available; one of our Tylers raises a lot for charity by recycling such.

I doubt the Tyler at a private Lodge would give two hoots if someone pitched up in light blues when they should be wearing dark - I doubt the same could be said of the scrutineers at GL, though!

Chapter - yes, same principles (no pun intended) apply.

Burnham wrote:
The BoC stipulates that each has to be clothed according to his rank - so yes, it's mandatory to wear dark blues if you've been awarded them.

Hi Burnham,

I am afraid that is not correct and a common misconception. I held a similar view and discovered this fact when reading Graham Redmonds latest book regarding the wearing of aprons. The BoC states

239. The regalia, clothing, insignia and jewels to be worn are as hereinafter prescribed, and no Brother shall be admitted into any meeting of the Grand Lodge, or of any subordinate Lodge, without the clothing appropriate to his rank under the Grand Lodge.

The significant thing here is Grand Lodge. Now rule 5 states the members of Grand Lodge as follows;

5. The members of the Grand Lodge rank in the
following order:
1. The Grand Master.
2. The Pro Grand Master.
3. Past Grand Masters.
4. Past Pro Grand Masters.
5. Deputy Grand Master.
6. Past Deputy Grand Masters.
7. Assistant Grand Masters.
8. Past Assistant Grand Masters.
9. Metropolitan Grand Masters.
10. Past Metropolitan Grand Masters.
11. Provincial and District Grand Masters.
12. Past Provincial and District Grand Masters.
13. Senior Grand Warden.
14. Past Senior Grand Wardens.
15. Junior Grand Warden.
16. Past Junior Grand Wardens.
17. President of the Board of General Purposes.
18. Past Presidents of the Board of General Purposes.
19. Grand Chaplain.
20. Past Grand Chaplains.
21. Grand Registrar.
22. Past Grand Registrars.
23. Grand Secretary.
24. Past Grand Secretary.
25. Grand Chancellor.
26. Past Grand Chancellors.
27. President of the Grand Charity.
28. President of the Royal Masonic Trust for Girls and Boys.
29. President of the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution.
30. President of the Masonic Samaritan Fund.
31. Past Presidents of the Grand Charity, the Royal Masonic Trust for Girls and Boys, the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution and the Masonic
Samaritan Fund.
32. Grand Director of Ceremonies.
33. Past Grand Directors of Ceremonies.
34. Grand Sword Bearer.
35. Past Grand Sword Bearers.
36. Grand Superintendent of Works.
37. Past Grand Superintendents of Works.
38. Grand Inspectors.
39. Past Grand Inspectors.
40. Grand Treasurer.
41. Past Grand Treasurers.
42. Deputy Grand Chaplain.
43. Past Deputy Grand Chaplains.
44. Deputy President of the Board of General Purposes.
45. Past Deputy Presidents of the Board of General Purposes.
46. Deputy Grand Registrar.
47. Past Deputy Grand Registrars.
48. Deputy Grand Secretary.
49. Past Deputy Grand Secretaries.
50. Deputy Grand Directors of Ceremonies.
51. Past Deputy Grand Directors of Ceremonies.
52. Deputy Grand Sword Bearer.
53. Past Deputy Grand Sword Bearers.
54. Deputy Grand Superintendent of Works.
55. Past Deputy Grand Superintendents of Works.
56. Grand Orator.
57. Past Grand Orators.
58. Senior Grand Deacons.
59. Past Senior Grand Deacons.
60. Junior Grand Deacons.
61. Past Junior Grand Deacons.
62. Assistant Grand Chaplains.
63. Past Assistant Grand Chaplains.
64. Assistant Grand Registrars.
65. Past Assistant Grand Registrars.
66. Assistant Grand Secretaries.
67. Past Assistant Grand Secretaries.
68. Assistant Grand Directors of Ceremonies.
69. Past Assistant Grand Directors of Ceremonies.
70. Assistant Grand Sword Bearers.
71. Past Assistant Grand Sword Bearers.
72. Assistant Grand Superintendents of Works.
73. Past Assistant Grand Superintendents of Works.
74. Grand Organist.
75. Past Grand Organists.
76. Grand Standard Bearers.
77. Past Grand Standard Bearers.
78. Assistant Grand Standard Bearers.
79. Past Assistant Grand Standard Bearers.
80. Deputy Grand Organist.
81. Past Deputy Grand Organists.
82. Grand Pursuivant.
83. Past Grand Pursuivants.
84. Assistant Grand Pursuivants.
85. Past Assistant Grand Pursuivants.
86. The Grand Stewards for the year.
87. Grand Tyler.
88. Past Grand Tylers.
89. Such Past Grand Stewards as are Masters or Past Masters qualified under Rule 9 of private Lodges.
90. The Master, Past Masters qualified under Rule 9, and Wardens of the Grand Stewards’ Lodge, and of every other private Lodge.

On this list other than PGM's tehre are no Provincial Ranks. I queried this with the Grand Secretarys office. There is anomally.

A Brother is to where the rank given to him by Grand Lodge, unless he is a GO then the rank may well be PM or MM.

At a Provincial meeting then a Brother should wear the rank given to him by that Province. However a Brother could, and would be within his rights under the UGLE BoC to be given a Provincial Rank, but wear the rank to which he is rightly entitled to under the GL so remaining a light blue.

Many thanks for the correction, Chestnut - my daily advancement!

Seeking-Light wrote:The way ugle hand these out almost trivialises the whole award.If you see a brother north of the Rio Tweed wearing a Hon G L jewel then he will have done something credible to deserve this ,served his lodge in an exemplary fashion for 20 or 30 years not just attended most musters after he came out the chair.

S-L, I don't know if you're getting confused between 'Provincial Grand Rank' and 'Grand Rank' ?

UGLE 'hand out' Grand Rank to the most deserving of Brethren who, as you describe as the Scottish system, have served their Lodges, Freemasonry generally and their communities in an exemplary fashion over a long period of time. It is not easy to become a Grand Officer, a great honour and certainly not trivial.

Having looked very quickly at the UGLE Year Book and done some very quick maths it looks like there are very approximately 6,500-7,000 Grand Officers (some Craft, some Chapter, some both) and the UGLE website states membership of over 250,000. So fewer than 3% of UGLE Freemasons are Grand Officers. Hardly handed out like sweets are they?

S&F,

Kyle

PS - Interesting stuff Chestnut on the regalia - my daily advancement too

Thanks for the info, Chestnut. Here in NSW, all Master Masons now automatically become members of Grand Lodge on their Raising, but are not entitled to wear Garter Blue, this being reserved for those with the word "Grand" somewhere in their title.

They also have the right to ask questions of the Grand Master at the Grand Quarterly Communications, and vote on motions put to the Grand Lodge.

Our lowest Conferred Grand Rank is that of Past Deputy Grand Director of Ceremonies, which would normally be awarded to an Installed (or Past Master) for services rendered to the Craft.

A similar situation occurs in our United Supreme Grand Chapter.

We all learn something new every day!


cheers

zambuk

Lets take this a stage further. If the lowest rank in GL for us mortals is a Warden on a regular Lodge, then why does everyone pay fees to Gl when you are not recognised as being a member?

A little tongue in cheek but still!!!

I sometimes find it hard enough to take the right regalia for the right degree. Without wearing different ranks in the same degree.

If you agree to take the rank then you agree to buy the kit (difficult to get invested else), in which case wear something else or go back to light blue?

Obvious exception is if you have to wear regalia owned by the lodge or chapter as part of the ceremony, or in our lodge if you are the master in which case you wear the Master's apron with the lodge badge on the front.

The question was do you have to wear Provincial Rank? The answer is no, you do not have to. However 99.9% do and will continue to and there is nothing wrong with that.

One takes the course of least resistance in may cases.

I have to agree that the so called honours system under UGLE could do do with radical reform. In my opinion the huge variety of ranks and 'past' ranks has a tendency to grade (or even degrade) the honours. To receive an honour just for staying breathing for a certain number of years after leaving the Chair of a Lodge, seems risable to me.

London, when it was administered by the Assistant Grand Master, had two grades: 'London Grand Rank' and 'Senior London Grand Rank' and that was all. Now that has been replaced by the Metropolitan Grand Lodge, it appears the system may follow the example of the Provinces with the complete gamut of ranks.

I'm willing to be corrected on this, as always, particularly since it is of little interest to me, so I have not wasted valuable time studying the subject. For me, it has little, if anything, to do with Freemasonry. In my time I've met a few 'badge chasers' and frankly I don't think they should be in the Craft at all.

As to the question of wearing that regalia is concerned, in the UGLE Book of Constitutions it would appear that rule 239 requires the regalia for rank to be worn, like it or not!

239. The regalia, clothing, insignia and jewels to be worn are as hereinafter prescribed, and no Brother shall be admitted into any meeting of the Grand Lodge, or of any subordinate Lodge, without the clothing appropriate to his rank under the Grand Lodge.

Trouillogan wrote:London, when it was administered by the Assistant Grand Master, had two grades: 'London Grand Rank' and 'Senior London Grand Rank' and that was all. Now that has been replaced by the Metropolitan Grand Lodge, it appears the system may follow the example of the Provinces with the complete gamut of ranks.

Not AFAIK (speaking as a Secretary of one London Lodge, IPM of another and member of another two). There are no such thing (officially at least) as 'Past Metropolitan Grand Officers'. Metropolitan Grand Deacons and below, if a first appointment, will be LGR after their active year. Anything above will be SLGR once they are out of office.

Apart from active MetGL (and MetGC) officers there is still only LR, LGR and SLGR. The only exception I believe is the actual MetGM as I believe both Rex Thorne and Lord Millett are recognised as PMetGM.

Also, the recommendation system for all these is incredibly far removed from 'have you done X number of years out of the Chair?'. Appointment to any rank or office in London requires a large amount of service, dedication and taking an active part in Lodges and Chapters after leaving the Chair.

Trouillogan wrote:As to the question of wearing that regalia is concerned, in the UGLE Book of Constitutions it would appear that rule 239 requires the regalia for rank to be worn, like it or not!

239. The regalia, clothing, insignia and jewels to be worn are as hereinafter prescribed, and no Brother shall be admitted into any meeting of the Grand Lodge, or of any subordinate Lodge, without the clothing appropriate to his rank under the Grand Lodge.

I agree with your comments but please read my previous post regarding the above. The key is Grand Lodge, Provincial ranks are not included so under Grand Lodge the highest is WM unless you are a PGM or GO.

You can not escape the rules!!!

Chestnut wrote:

Burnham wrote:
The BoC stipulates that each has to be clothed according to his rank - so yes, it's mandatory to wear dark blues if you've been awarded them.

Hi Burnham,

I am afraid that is not correct and a common misconception. I held a similar view and discovered this fact when reading Graham Redmonds latest book regarding the wearing of aprons. The BoC states

239. The regalia, clothing, insignia and jewels to be worn are as hereinafter prescribed, and no Brother shall be admitted into any meeting of the Grand Lodge, or of any subordinate Lodge, without the clothing appropriate to his rank under the Grand Lodge.

The significant thing here is Grand Lodge. Now rule 5 states the members of Grand Lodge as follows;

5. The members of the Grand Lodge rank in the
following order:
1. The Grand Master.

<Many, many ranks snipped at this point for the sake of brevity>

Chestnut wrote:90. The Master, Past Masters qualified under Rule 9, and Wardens of the Grand Stewards’ Lodge, and of every other private Lodge.

On this list other than PGM's tehre are no Provincial Ranks. I queried this with the Grand Secretarys office. There is anomally.

A Brother is to where the rank given to him by Grand Lodge, unless he is a GO then the rank may well be PM or MM.

At a Provincial meeting then a Brother should wear the rank given to him by that Province. However a Brother could, and would be within his rights under the UGLE BoC to be given a Provincial Rank, but wear the rank to which he is rightly entitled to under the GL so remaining a light blue.

I know there will be exceptions, but surely the VAST majority of brethren with Provincial (or similar) rank will be Past Masters of a private Lodge, and therefore members of Grand Lodge. As such they would be subject to BoC 293. I agree however, that those brethren with provincial honours, not being past masters, do not appear to fall under this rule and would not have to wear dark blues. At a guess though (and from my limited experience) this would represent no more than 2 or 3% of brethren with provincial honours.

Indeed, I stand corrected - in part. As I said, 'rank' is not a matter to which I have given much study time. On the matter of Provincial rank given to those who have not chaired a Lodge, I feel they really have earned recognition for the deeds they have done. That's not to say PMs haven't earned it, just that they may not have done so in a real sense.

Richard, you are correct in that PM's with Provincial Rank fall into the PM's of Private Lodges. As such rule 239 stipulates to be clothed in the their GL Lodge rank, which is as a PM with light blue not dark blue.

As stated I have questiond the Grand Secretaries Office on this and this is correct. No Provincial Rank appart from PGM is an excpted rank in GL and as such only the PM rank should be worn, which is light blue.

Chestnut wrote:As stated I have questiond the Grand Secretaries Office on this and this is correct. No Provincial Rank appart from PGM is an excpted rank in GL and as such only the PM rank should be worn, which is light blue.

Just out of interest, if one were to show up to Grand Lodge Quarterly Communications, wearing a Provincial/London apron, the scrutineers aren't exactly going to turn that brother away, surely?

BoC, Rule 260 (iv):

"In the Grand Lodge a brother entitled to wear any of the collars described above may instead wear the appropriate collar of the office or rank in right of which he is attending."

In other words, a holder of Provincial or London rank may wear a PM collar instead of his Provincial one - if he wishes to do so.

Is London more elite?

Angler89 wrote:Is London more elite?

It's a lot harder to get dark blue!

mindmagic wrote:

Angler89 wrote:Is London more elite?

It's a lot harder to get dark blue!

I have not done this but I think if you look through the pages of this thread you will probably find that there are very few members of London Lodges that have a problem with the honours system within London. The simple fact in my opinion is that it has shown that there is something that is not quite right about the honours system within the Provincial structure of UGLE.

It is a sad thing to me and I feel it 'cheapens' the whole system that brethren who receive an honour find a reason to 'complain' about it! Let alone the mason who believes he has been 'overlooked'!

I do feel however that it is becoming more and more prevailent that brethren are turning down honours to keep wearing the 'light blue' and this is also becoming in its own way a 'badge' of pride!

In my own case I went through the Chair in 1993/94 and after my year as IPM I was appointed ADC for one year and then appointed as DC and preceptor, I enjoyed 10 years as DC before being asked to go back through the chair due to a blip in the line of progression, I then done one year as IPM and have been Chaplain since. I am still preceptor although I am hoping the new DC from April will take over. I love being involved with the Lodge but have suggested our 'elder' statesman should rightly take over as Chaplain in April, leaving me 'Free' from the Top table for the first time since 1993! it has been an honour and privilige to be able to serve my Lodge over these last 20 odd years.

I was conferred LGR in 2005 and in 2008 I was awarded SLGR. I wear my badge with a great deal of pride but I also try to remember the words which I consider to be most important; You are awarded Honour for the work you have done but more importantly for the work you are going to do.

I do know that if anyone lets themselves get upset about any honour in any order then they are really the only ones to suffer.

I said something about this a few months ago in this thread, that in fact a light blue apron appears to be the badge of honour, as everyone else in the lodge wears dark blue! I really feel quite distinguished...............

I derive immense pleasure and satisfaction from my Freemasonry without anyone telling me how important I am. As long as I have something to learn, I am happy. In the COI we all wear mufti, and it doesn't seem to diminish the "profit and pleasure" one whit! It all brings us back to the fact that it is what you are, and not what you are wearing, that counts.

Regards,

Lobbus
JD 4712
SD 8459

(So I shall probably die of old age before I am required to change the colour of my apron, and I don't give a hoot!).