Offering the Gavel to The Grand Master
Honouring the Ancient Landmarks of the Order
Why is it when The Grand Master enters a Lodge, the Worshipful Master offers him the Gavel and the surrender of the Masters Chair?
There are two very specific reasons why this is done, but there are also some quirks or lesser known facts that come along with this custom.
To better understand this tradition, we should first look at our Book of Constitutions. While every jurisdictions BoC is different, they will all have a similar clause.
First, if we go back to a previous article about the Charges of a Freemason, we learn that a Brother may arrive at the honour of being Grand Master of All Lodges. The next section of the charge also states that the Grand Master has the power to choose his own Deputy who has the privilege of acting whenever the Grand Master, his Principal, should act, unless the said Principal be present. This establishes that the same custom is then also extended to the Deputy Grand Master when present at any Lodge.
In the summary of the Ancient Charges, the Worshipful Master agrees to pay homage (respect and honour) to the Grand Master and his Officers when Installed.
Therefore we now arrive at how the custom is extended to The Assistant Grand Master, but not to those esteemed brethren who have previously served as Grand Master, or Brethren conferred with Past Deputy or Past Assistant Grand Master - as they are not currently Installed.
From a Constitutional perspective, it states that The Grand Master may preside in any Lodge, and order any of his Grand Officers to attend to him. This is how the Grand Director of Ceremonies supersedes the Director of Ceremonies of the Lodge. But this also extends to other Grand Lodge Officers, such as the Grand Wardens if present; they also can take the seats of the Wardens of the Lodge.
However, when the The Grand Master is presiding, and his Grand Wardens are not present he may command, the Wardens of the Lodge, or any Master Mason to act as his Warden, essentially becoming a Grand Warden for the time being.
There also are further descendant clauses, that provide The Deputy Grand Master and The Assistant Grand Master the same rights in the absence of their superior.
So, why does the Master of a Lodge surrender the Gavel, which if accepted would also mean the surrender of the Chair?
Well, does he actually have to? Interestingly enough, The Grand Master can simply enter and take over. The Worshipful Master can’t deny such, being bound by the Constitution. Not surrendering also means failing to submit to and uphold his promise of supporting the Ancient Charges, while also breaking a Clause in the Constitution, a Masonic Offence. If push came to shove, the Grand Master could simply impound the Charter, after all his Office issued it — he also has a sword.
But it shouldn’t get to that, because any man of integrity, let alone a Mason, would respect such established customs and the laws of our order by offering the gavel.
However isn’t it just a clause in the Constitution? Since constitutions can be changed, why not just change it— and what about the fact that after all, it’s a Private Lodge?
There are two considerations
Firstly, the term ‘private lodge’ doesn’t actually reflect the actual structure of Freemasonry. Lodges exist under the issue of a Warrant or Charter by the Grand Lodge, which is kind of a franchise agreement per-se, and that document is what gives the lodge their existence and makes them regular.
‘Private lodges’ are really ‘Warranted Lodges’, all the terms of the Warrant and the issuing authority, the Grand Lodge, are enforceable. This negates any argument that a Private Lodge can do what it likes in any scenario.
This then leaves changing the constitution, surely that can be done?
Albert Mackey’s, The Principles of Masonic Law established The Ancient Landmarks of Freemasonry. Being landmarks their nature makes them unchangeable and practically set in stone.
Another problem arises. With each Grand Lodge being sovereign and self-governing, how do you ensure that each jurisdiction is practicing the same Freemasonry?
Just as we individual masons have our ways of recognising each other, adherence to the ancient landmarks is how Grand Lodges do the same. It is why we recognise some Grand Lodges as Regular, and determine others as Irregular.
Those we recognise as Regular, we mutually extend the same privileges to each brother. But those which are irregular, while we may say they’re Freemasons in general terms, we can’t recognise them a Brethren. Think of this like Coke and Pepsi, yes they’re both cola drinks; but they’re not the same.
In Mackey’s 25 Ancient Landmarks published in 1858, he places the following:
The Government of the fraternity by a Grand Master
The prerogative of The Grand Master to preside over every assembly of the Craft
That every Freemason be amenable to the laws and regulations of the Jurisdiction in which he resides
Every Grand Lodge which adheres to Mackey’s 25 Ancient Landmarks can recognise each other as regular. However if we were to change the constitution, we’d foul Landmark 5, therefore we’d no longer be regular, and I’d argue, be Freemasonry.
But it’s only 1 landmark?
Well, Landmark 25 puts a stop to that - “25. These Landmarks cannot be changed.”
That aside, once you start moving or removing landmarks to suit your own agenda, you then allow yourself to change anything as your agenda shifts. Slowly overtime you wouldn’t exist as you once were.
After all, this is exactly what happened with The International Order of OddFellows (IOOF), which was very similar to Freemasonry. They had many of the same objectives & principles and many men had membership to both the Craft and to the Oddfellows.
But the Oddfellows moved their ‘ancient landmarks’. Today, IOOF is unrecognisable. Unlike Freemasonry, where we have maintained our Craft, a brother from anytime in history could sit in any lodge today and feel at home.
Rather, in Australia, IOOF is now a financial planning company who in recent years have been prosecuted for offences of serious misconduct such as insider trading, front-running, misrepresentation of performance figures, and cheating on training and compliance exams (citation: SMH) - Once a society also founded on mortality and virtue: now gone.
For Freemasonry to continue to be Freemasonry, we must not move these ancient landmarks, we must respect them, adhere to them, honour them and when The Grand Master, his Deputy or Assistant enter any Lodge, The Worshipful Master must:
“In respect of the Ancient Landmarks, and in reverence to your high office,
I surrender to you the Gavel of this lodge so that you may preside over us”
— So Mote It Be