Part 12 of 13 in Masonic Symbols & Symbolic Thinking
← Previous: Why Symbols Say Things Plain Language Cannot · Next: Why Moral Architecture Is More Than a Metaphor →
You can read the rules of an institution without joining it.
You may understand its history, explain its procedures, and know more about some of its customs than the people who attend regularly. You are still not a member.
Something other than the transfer of information distinguishes studying an institution from entering it.
That is where initiation begins to make sense.
In Freemasonry, initiation brings a candidate into a recognized relationship with a lodge and its members. It presents instruction, establishes obligations, and gives that beginning a ceremonial form.
The intention reaches beyond telling him things. He is being asked to undertake something.
The title needs one qualification at the outset. Information matters. A candidate cannot make a responsible commitment while remaining uninformed about what he is joining.
But information alone does not establish the relationship, and admission alone does not establish a better character.
Between those two facts lies the work initiation is intended to begin.
Being Told and Undertaking
Consider the difference between hearing that someone ought to keep a promise and making one yourself.
The first statement presents a principle for consideration. The second places you in a relationship with someone entitled to expect something of you.
The words may be simple. Their use changes the situation.
An initiation includes actions of this kind. The participant is not merely listening to an account of membership. He is taking part in becoming a member.
Others recognize the change. Responsibilities become particular rather than hypothetical.
A description might say that brethren should assist one another. Membership raises the less general question of what assistance you owe these people, within the limits of the obligation you have accepted.
That is not necessarily an inward transformation at once. It is a changed position from which inward work may follow.
Calling it a disguised lecture misses this part of the event. A lecture can explain an undertaking without establishing that you have undertaken it.
Why Mark the Beginning?
We mark certain changes because an unmarked transition can leave responsibilities conveniently indistinct.
When does the appointment begin? Who has accepted the duty? What does the community now recognize?
Ceremony can make an answer visible.
Arnold van Gennep’s study of rites of passage examined a recurring pattern of separation, transition, and incorporation into a new condition.[1] The framework helps us look at how ceremonies distinguish a previous status from another.
It is not a stencil that must fit every event exactly.
For Masonic initiation, the useful point is that admission concerns a passage into a relationship. The candidate approaches as someone seeking entry and is received under the forms of the tradition.
The distinction between before and after is not confined to what he knows.
He now has a place within the institution, and the institution has responsibilities toward him.
If only his duties are discussed, part of the relationship has gone missing.
The Lodge Is Making a Commitment Too
An initiation is sometimes described as though the candidate were the sole object of the exercise.
He must prepare, learn, respond, and improve. The existing members appear as witnesses who have already completed the interesting work.
That is a comfortable arrangement for the witnesses.
Receiving a member should also mean undertaking to instruct him, explain unfamiliar practices, answer reasonable questions, and help him find a useful place in the lodge.
The candidate’s seriousness cannot compensate for the institution’s indifference.
A carefully performed ceremony followed by neglect creates a peculiar contrast. The lodge has made the beginning memorable and the continuation difficult to find.
The social change deserves practical support. Who will remain in contact? Where can the member take a question? How will he learn what is expected without repeatedly discovering it through embarrassment?
These arrangements may lack ceremonial grandeur. They help give the ceremony consequences.
What Is Supposed to Change?
“Transformation” is a large word. Without a more definite account, it can make an ordinary beginning sound like a supernatural alteration.
There are several changes worth distinguishing.
First, there is admission: the institution recognizes a new member.
Second, there is an accepted responsibility: the member has undertaken obligations and entered relationships he did not previously hold.
Third, there may be changes in understanding, habits, judgment, or conduct.
The first two can be identified through the institution’s procedures and the participant’s undertaking. The third requires evidence over time.
A ceremony may mark the beginning of that work without completing it.
This is the sense in which I use transformation here. Initiation aims to make a difference in how the member understands and practices his responsibilities, not merely in how he describes himself.
If the only durable change is the description, we should ask what became of the intended education.
An Experience to Return To
A candidate may not notice everything during the ceremony.
He may remember a phrase, an action, or the feeling of being received. Another detail may become intelligible only when it is explained afterward.
Masonic interpreters such as W. Kirk MacNulty have examined initiation through the relationships among symbols, ceremonial action, and later reflection.[2]
The experience gives the member something to return to.
A discussion of obligation can refer to an undertaking he remembers making. An explanation of a symbol can address something he encountered rather than an image introduced without context.
This is a possibility, not a guarantee about memory.
A ceremony may leave a vivid impression. It may also be overwhelming or difficult to recall. Good instruction should be able to work with either response.
The point is not to test whether the new member can produce the correct emotional account of his admission.
It is to help him understand what he has entered.
Understanding Can Develop Without Excusing Confusion
You do not have to foresee every consequence of a responsibility to accept it.
Experience will present circumstances that no introductory explanation could cover completely.
But that does not justify withholding what a person needs to make a free decision.
A candidate should receive an intelligible account of the institution’s purposes, membership expectations, costs, and relevant commitments. Preserving ceremonial details is different from concealing the conditions of participation.
Nor should later questions be answered by suggesting that understanding will arrive once he becomes sufficiently obedient.
Sometimes understanding requires patience. Sometimes it requires someone to explain a sentence clearly.
The difference is usually worth investigating before recommending more patience.
The earlier article on ritual and understanding considers how an experience may acquire further meaning. That process works best when questions have somewhere to go.
Why a Script Is Not the Event
A printed account can disclose words and actions. It cannot, by itself, establish membership or reproduce a particular encounter.
This is not because the page lacks a mysterious ingredient.
The difference is that an event involves people acting in a recognized setting, with intentions and consequences. Reading about an appointment does not appoint the reader.
Likewise, reading a ceremonial undertaking is not the same action as making it within the institution.
This explains why reducing initiation to its script leaves something out. It does not establish that the script is unimportant or that advance knowledge makes participation worthless.
Words can be understood before they are spoken and still matter when spoken.
The value of initiation therefore need not depend entirely on surprise. It can rest on the seriousness of what the participant undertakes and how that undertaking is received.
The Morning After
An impressive beginning can create an unfortunate expectation: that the work will continue to feel impressive.
Much of it will not.
Learning requires time. Service may involve an ordinary task that somebody must complete. Self-examination may lead to an apology rather than an insight suitable for a speech.
That is where the language of transformation becomes practical.
Has the member become more attentive to what he promises? Does he listen differently? Has he accepted a responsibility without treating it as a claim to importance?
We should not expect dramatic answers immediately.
We should also resist explaining away every absence of change by declaring that the ceremony must be working somewhere inaccessible.
The member’s conduct and the lodge’s support remain open to examination.
An educational intention is a reason to undertake the work. It is not proof that the work has succeeded.
Information Still Has a Job
There is a misleading version of this argument in which information is something shallow that initiation nobly transcends.
That will not do.
Accurate information can change a decision, expose an injustice, or correct a belief maintained for years. Historical study may dismantle a flattering account of the fraternity. A clear explanation may prevent a member from repeating a mistake.
Facts are not the opposition.
The distinction is between knowing about a responsibility and accepting and practicing it.
We need information to understand the undertaking. We need judgment to apply it. We need action if the undertaking is to become more than a description of our intentions.
Initiation can bring these into relation by marking a beginning and giving it a shared form.
It does not make any one of them dispensable.
Neither Superiority Nor Submission
Admission can tempt a person to feel that he has been elevated above those outside the institution.
But becoming a member does not establish superior judgment, moral worth, or a privileged ability to understand life.
It establishes membership.
What follows must earn a more substantial description.
There is an opposite danger too. The initiate may be encouraged to surrender judgment because others possess the experience he lacks.
Instruction requires some trust. It does not require treating every confident assertion as knowledge.
A healthy educational relationship allows the newcomer to ask for reasons. It allows the experienced member to say that he does not know. It distinguishes respecting a tradition from accepting every explanation offered in its name.
The intended change is toward greater responsibility, not greater dependence on the approval of whoever is instructing.
From Receiving Instruction to Contributing
One useful measure of development is whether the member gradually becomes able to contribute responsibly to the shared work.
That need not mean seeking office.
He may become dependable in a practical task, thoughtful in discussion, attentive to an isolated member, or careful in helping someone who joins later.
The relationship changes as he learns what he can offer.
Historical studies of Freemasonry place these memberships within networks of fellowship, social expectations, and institutional activity.[3] They remind us that initiation has consequences beyond a private experience.
The new member enters relationships.
Those relationships may support growth. They may also present difficulties that require judgment. Belonging does not remove the need to distinguish loyalty from favoritism or assistance from interference.
In this respect, initiation connects directly with the previous discussion of brotherhood. The obligation becomes interesting when it concerns actual people rather than an agreeable idea of fraternity.
A Beginning That Needs a Continuation
The strongest account of initiation does not ask the ceremony to perform an impossible task.
It marks admission, gives an undertaking a memorable setting, introduces a symbolic vocabulary, and establishes relationships through which instruction and practice can continue.
These are substantial functions.
Their value does not require claiming that everyone leaves inwardly altered in the same way.
What matters next is the continuation: explanations that can be examined, duties that can be practiced, support that can be relied upon, and standards that apply to the established member as well as the new one.
The ceremony gives the beginning a form.
The life of the lodge shows the member what that form means in practice.
More Than Knowing the Words
Initiation is not merely an indirect means of delivering information. It concerns entry into a recognized undertaking.
The candidate is asked to become responsible within it. The lodge is asked to receive and instruct him. Both acquire something to do.
That is why the distinction between information and transformation is worth making, provided we do not turn it into a quarrel between facts and experience.
The facts explain what is being undertaken.
The ceremony marks the undertaking.
Conduct reveals what follows.
A person can leave with the words remembered and the work still ahead. That is not an embarrassing defect in the beginning.
It is the reason the beginning needs to lead somewhere.
Continue the Series
Next: Why Moral Architecture Is More Than a Metaphor →
Sources and Further Reading
This essay distinguishes a recognized change of membership from a later change in character. Calling initiation transformative describes an educational purpose and possible development, not a guaranteed psychological result.
Arnold van Gennep, The Rites of Passage, translated by Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee (University of Chicago Press, 1960; originally published in French, 1909). His framework distinguishes separation, transition, and incorporation. It is an approach to comparison, not proof that all ceremonies have identical forms or effects.
W. Kirk MacNulty, Freemasonry: A Journey Through Ritual and Symbol (Thames & Hudson, 1991). This offers an interpretation of Masonic ceremonial and symbolic experience. Specific explanations should be attributed to the relevant passages and tradition.
Steven C. Bullock, Revolutionary Brotherhood: Freemasonry and the Transformation of the American Social Order, 1730–1840 (University of North Carolina Press, 1996); Margaret C. Jacob, Living the Enlightenment: Freemasonry and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Europe (Oxford University Press, 1991).
For further approaches to ritual, transition, and structured relationships, see Victor Turner, The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (Aldine, 1969), and Catherine Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (Oxford University Press, 1992). Their theoretical arguments should not be treated as interchangeable evidence for the effects of a particular Masonic initiation.
Return to Masonic Symbols & Symbolic Thinking: the complete series →
