forums.DeMolay.org
forums.DeMolay.org
DeMolay Resources
Dad Land's Instructions on the LOH Nomination|
Go
![]() |
New
![]() |
Find
![]() |
Notify
![]() |
Tools
![]() |
Reply
![]() |
|
|
Forum Know-it-all |
It is always both a treat and an education to read Dad Frank Land's thoughts on matters of importance in DeMolay.
I was fortunate to find, in the detrius of an extinct Chapter of ancient lineage, an Active LOH Nomination form for the year 1937. I am posting both the Requirements page and the text of Dad Land's address concerning whom the Legion of Honor was intended for. Circumstances have changed but I believe his thoughts still have great value for us all. The following is the exact text of the Instruction Sheet that was part of the Active Legion of Honor Nomination for the Year 1937, issued over the signature of Frank S. Land, Secretary General.
|
||
|
|
Active Forum Member |
And soon hopefully one day - non-masons will be allowed to receive this honor - The honorary status, not Active, of course....
|
|||
|
|
Frequent Forum Contributor |
And soon hopefully one day - our membership troubles will be solved
And soon hopefully one day - our advisor shortage will be solved And soon hopefully one day - we can put aside all petty titles and awards and work for the sheer benefit of youth And soon hopefully one day - there will be world peace and we can all come together And soon hopefully one day - it won't rain on sunny days. There are a lot of problems out there, is this really that important? ************* Peter W. Brusoe |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
Is it really that important? I believe so.
Even Dad Land has demonstrated by the various awards and honors he established that it is in the best interest of the Order to recognize the efforts of both adults and adolescents when deemed outstanding and/or meritorious. Over the course of it's history, the Supreme Council has adapted itselt, either by choice or necessity, to not restrict membership on an Advisory Council to only Master Masons. They have, over the years, opened the opportunity to serve as Advisors to Non-Masonic Senior DeMolays, Non-Masonic Fathers, and, now, women. It has even relaxed the requirement that the Chapter Advisor need be a Master Mason or Senior DeMolay. Why allow hundreds of qualified men AND women to dedicate themselves to the service of the Order as Advisors and to work as hard as any other Masonic Advisor, but, deny them due and just recognition (i.e. the HLOH) simply because they don't wear the Square and Compasses on a ring on their hand? We, as Masons, by our general lack of apathy, have opened "Advisorhood" to men and women of all walks of society due to our inability to produce enough Advisors from the Masonic Fraternity. In otherwards, is our Masonic Fraternity saying to the Non-Masonic Advisors: "You can do our work, but, don't expect our honors?" |
|||
|
|
Frequent Forum Contributor |
The Cross of Honor is for both Genders, and is for serving as an advisor.
************* Peter W. Brusoe |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
I understand that. I was making a point, though. Many, many non-Masons are out there that not only meet the criteria of high service to country, community and business, but, also, serve as Advisors. Unfortunately, too many Advisory Councils nominate high ranking or well known Masons in their communities for the HLOH as a political move and forget those within their own backyard. It is no different with some individuals that are nominated for Class 3 and/or Class 1 membership within the Supreme Council. Being a Past Grand Master of Masons or Past Eminent Grand Commander of Masonic Knights Templar should not be a qualification for consideration for membership on the Supreme Council. That is why we have the Honorary Supreme Council Membership. I am pointing out that, unfortunately, there does exist a certain sense of elitism and hypocricy within our own DeMolay Family. No, HLOH is not awarded based solely on DeMolay involvement, but it should be a consideration. Too many Masons that have never been DeMolays or served as an Advisor let alone have attended a DeMolay meeting are recipients of the HLOH. What is wrong with (and this is only an example) awarding the HLOH to a female Advisor who is the mother of a DeMolay; has served as Worthy Matron of her Eastern Star Chapter; has served multiple terms on a City Council or Board; and, is a volunteer of many years at the local hospital? Hasn't she done much of what is expected from an HLOH recipient? My point again is that there are many, many individuals, both male and female, that are excluded from the highest honor within the gift of the Supreme Council primarily because they do not belong to the Masonic Fraternity. |
|||
|
|
Frequent Forum Contributor |
I would agree that a lot of people are excluded from receiving honors and awards because they lack a qualification or to.
For example, Bill Clinton will never receive an alumni award from San Diego State. Why, he's not an alumnus. George Bush will never receive KBE from Elizabeth the II, why, he's not British. Some people will never get the federal government service award, why, because they are not employed by the federal government. I will never get an award from the elks, why, because I am not an elk. We establish honors with certain requirements that people need to meet, we should be really wary of making everything “oh, you’re a good person, here is the award.” Would we put Mick Jagger in the Baseball Hall of Fame? Probably not. Would we put Babe Ruth in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? Probably not. The real elitism and hypocrisy comes within our governance structures. Why aren’t Non-Masons on the Supreme Council? Why aren’t non-masons on the Board of Directors? Why aren’t non-masons on the foundation? Why aren’t non-masons allowed to serve as executive officers? (Please note I am not advocating that they should or should not be) We are saying that “yes, it’s fine that you volunteer with the local level, you can even volunteer on the state level, but work in a manner to govern us, no.” Again, I go back to my old point, we have larger and important issues that we need to address, then who do we give honors to. ************* Peter W. Brusoe |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
I agree with you Peter in as much as our honors, and awards were created with a specific purpose in mind. To recognize an individual who meets specific requirements for a specific service.
Now, what some of the others on here don't realize is that yes, the power to alter these stringent guidelines does exist, and yes, steps are being made to alter these regulations to be more accepting. This past year at Session, one of the call items that came up was whether or not to open up the HLOH to "Non-Masonic" adults. I am of the belief that yes, we do need to devise a way to recognize the Non-Masonic Advisors who do so much for their Chapters, and I will agree that there are some Non-Masonic Advisors who work harder for their Chapters than some Masonic Advisors I know. However, the Legion of Honor and the Honorary Legion of Honor were created with a specific focus for recognition, and if we change this focus, we alter everthing that this Honor has meant to those recipients of old. Tristin H. Murphy, PSMC Colorado DeMolay Region 7 Coordinator |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DSMCColorado:
However, the Legion of Honor and the Honorary Legion of Honor were created with a specific focus for recognition, and if we change this focus, we alter everthing that this Honor has meant to those recipients of old. And yet the LOH was originally meant for Senior DeMolays. The HLOH was created later to recognize non-Senior DeMolays. Does the HLOH lessen the honor of the recipients of old that received the LOH prior to the creation of the HLOH? Or perhaps, and I'm playing Devil's advocate, Dad Land was wrong for not allowing Mother Chapter to limit it's membership to a maximum of 75? I mean, opening the membership beyond that original circle of friends I'm sure lessens the memory of our first DeMolays. Or perhaps all the young men that have joined the Order when they were younger than 16 has lessened the importance of the members that joined when the minimum age was at a higher number. I am using sarcasm to try and make a point. We need to look "outside the box" and learn to "stretch the boundaries of our comfort zones" when dealing with our accepted policies and procedures. |
|||
|
|
Frequent Forum Contributor |
Being a rabid conservative, when the young men, in this case Bro. Murphy , speak, the old men should be quiet and take their lead, so I will not post about this topic again.
I will stress though that I can't imagine that this is the single most important issue that this organization faces. I mean maybe I am wrong and NY is the *only* one that's having membership problems, advisor recruitment problems, retention issues, education issues, and issues with successful events. If I am, great, if not, I really think we have larger issues to worry about. Those are the areas we need to "stretch the boundaries of our comfort zones" on. ************* Peter W. Brusoe |
|||
|
|
Active Forum Member |
Peter, you are right...........
When are we going to start initiating girls? |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
If this topic was on Membership, I presume we would be discussing Membership, but, as Dad Dietzman began the topic as about LOH, why would we discuss Membership here?
Debate is essential on almost any topic. Since my opinions, and that is all they are, are not in line with your conservative view (of which I am as well) am I to not express them, Bro. Brusoe? Perhaps, if it is you that is so concerned with the question of Membership (which we all are concerned with, but not obsessed with), then you need to limit yourself to reading, replying and contributing to the forum topics that are only labeled Membership. I mean no disrespect, Peter, but, because you don't agree with a topic or the views there in, do not presume to quiet the views of those commenting. |
|||
|
|
Frequent Forum Contributor |
"Dad" Haney,
We "induct" girls, not initiate. (Avoid the cult like image) My calendar is free for next Sunday, we can start then. "Dad" Pratt, you can express your view, I am just done talking about the substantive issue, as the active DeMolay has spoken. pwb ************* Peter W. Brusoe |
|||
|
|
Forum Know-it-all |
Brothers,
Feel free to debate and discuss anything pertaining to DeMolay. For what it is worth, this post was never meant to start a debate. The "DeMolay Resources" topic indicates it is a place to put copies of little known DeMolay materials which may be of wider interest and use than they are presently getting (my interpretation). In line with that, when I happened to get the actual text of Dad Land's thoughs concerning the LOH...and he does NOT address the HLOH here....I thought that some current Advisors MIGHT like to consider Frank's thoughts and beliefs when they were deciding whom to Nominate for this Honor. There is precious little guidance on selecting Nominees for either the Legion or the Chev, except for some articles like this, (a bad omission in my opinion in the DAD program) and so when I find thee I post them, for anyone who wishes to reference them. I do think some of this discussion would be more appropriate in some of the other Forum Topics, like DeMolay Debates, but do what you will. Fraternally, D. |
|||
|
|
Frequent Forum Contributor |
As I used to tell our Current Grand Senior Steward:
"Wendell started it!" pwb ************* Peter W. Brusoe |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
In reference the above statement, I feel much like Dr. Lyman Hall, a Mason and a Georgian representative to the Second Continental Congress in 1776, when he stated (and I paraphrase slightly) "It seems that Georgia (in reference to the topic of independency) is split down the middle; I am for it, and, they are against it." In otherwords, the DeMolay Congress is against the "relaxation" of the Masonic membership requirement, and I am in favor of it. But in my defense, hoping not to be labeled as an "Old Fart" trying to "run" the young men's organization, Dr. Hall continued his oratory before the Congress by quoting British statesman Edmund Burke saying (and, again I paraphrase slightly) "A representative of the people owes the people, not only his industry, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving the people if he sacrifices it to their opinion." Therefore, with that in mind, I will continue to proport the idea of eliminating Masonic membership as an eligibility requirement for the HLOH, because I believe it to be the right thing to do. Now, Peter, I, too, like you, am finished offering my comments (or arguements) relative to the topic. I thank Dad Dietzman for the informative topic and apologize if in the natural course of events "Wendell" (Hahaha) turned it into a debate. |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
An excellent point to make there Rusty. I agree completely that as a member of the Congress, it is my duty and obligation to represent the members of my Jurisdiction. I think that on occasion, and I am guilty of this myself, the delegates at Congress allow their personal feelings to interfere with their job of representing all of the DeMolays within their Jurisdiction, aand allow their prejudices to cloud their judgement when making decisions that will affect DI as a whole.
Something I have found though, is that it is extremely difficult to discover how our Jurisdicitons feel about the call items when we as delegates don't find out about them until the very last minute, something this years International Officers are looking to rectify. |
|||
|
|
Forum Member |
Clarification for the posts above, the LOH is for Senior DeMolays regardless of being a Master Mason.
Does anyone have any thoughts on were the Medal of Appreciation should fit in all of this? Steve Berry Florida DeMolay |
|||
|
|
Forum Know-it-all |
Bumping up since this is being asked about on another Thread.
|
|||
|
| Previous Topic | Next Topic | powered by eve community |
| Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
forums.DeMolay.org
forums.DeMolay.org
DeMolay Resources
Dad Land's Instructions on the LOH Nomination