# Age 18?



## jonesvilletexas (Dec 1, 2008)

How many believe the age 18 is good for the fraternity if so why?


----------



## caeservi (Dec 1, 2008)

I think it should be 21.  Granted, there are the occasional 18 yr olds who have the maturity for the fraternity (we have one in our lodge, we just passed him the week before thanksgiving, and his father is an officer) but in general, they are a rarity.  There needs to be some maturity to understand what they are undertaking.


----------



## cpmorgan2 (Dec 1, 2008)

caeservi said:


> I think it should be 21.  Granted, there are the occasional 18 yr olds who have the maturity for the fraternity (we have one in our lodge, we just passed him the week before thanksgiving, and his father is an officer) but in general, they are a rarity.  There needs to be some maturity to understand what they are undertaking.


I've met quite a few masons of the older persuasion that are VERY immature. That comment my brother is I think prejudice. The younger Generation like that in DeMolay work hard at what they do they deserve as much of a chance as next, if an 18 y/o wants to be a mason, I will give him the the considerations I would give a 40 year old _immature_ man. Please forgive me if I seem to forceful with my opinion, but that is what this website is about.


----------



## TCShelton (Dec 1, 2008)

I'm good with 18.  If he isn't ready (often times he won't be at 21 either), then the investigation committee should sort that out.


----------



## nick1368 (Dec 1, 2008)

TCShelton said:


> I'm good with 18.  If he isn't ready (often times he won't be at 21 either), then the investigation committee should sort that out.



I agree with you Bro.  that is why we have an investigation committee.  Those Brothers are charged with making sure the canidate is ready for our Great Fraternity...


----------



## scottmh59 (Oct 22, 2009)

18's good


----------



## HKTidwell (Oct 22, 2009)

TCShelton said:


> I'm good with 18.  If he isn't ready (often times he won't be at 21 either), then the investigation committee should sort that out.



If a person is old enough to die for their country in war, be a peace officer, fire fighter, or otherwise help a nation stand on its' feet I think they are old enough to petition.

As has been said we have a process in place that should a person not be suitable then they should be weeded out before they become a member.  The petitioner is not an issue, our process if a person who is not suitable gains admission has broken down because of the individuals involved in it.  Then we must look at the people involved in the process and take responsible steps to change it.  I guess I view each of us as the gate guards, we have a responsibility and must stand up and partake in those responsibilities.


----------



## Payne (Oct 22, 2009)

I8 , You can vote, Join the military  Why not join the Craft..?


----------



## Hippie19950 (Oct 22, 2009)

I have no problem with 18, but it is a biased opinion... At 19, I was notified by President Nixon, I WOULD be reporting for duty, no questions. I was given training, and sent to places far, far away. I made a trip home to get married, and had to have my Dad sign so I could get the license. I could not buy the champagne, or even consume it after the wedding... But I was old enough to die for My Country. If there is a problem with 18, let's send them through Boot Camp. Oh, wait, we already do in some respect!!


----------



## JTM (Oct 23, 2009)

picking an arbitrary age is pointless, imo.  the brothers should be able to discern whether a man is mentally old enough to join.


----------



## owls84 (Oct 23, 2009)

TCShelton said:


> I'm good with 18.  If he isn't ready (often times he won't be at 21 either), then the investigation committee should sort that out.



I put no opinion. I think as with every person that petitions. It should be a case by case basis and should be investigated. Just because someone petitions doesn't mean they should get in.


----------



## MGM357 (Oct 23, 2009)

We just had an EA on an 18 yr old last Thurs. I was on the investigating commitee, we made sure told the young man how serious our fraternity was. We made sure he wouldn't crack under any peer pressure. 

I understand the going to war and voting when you turn 18. Maybe a canidate needs to at least graduate high school.


----------



## fairbanks1363pm (Oct 23, 2009)

how many 18, 19, 20 year olds do you think have joined since we passed the law?  how many blackballed or got thi ea and not finished.  i think it would be an intresting study for th gand lodge to do.  i have no problm with 18.  i think bing able to go fom the dmolay to the blue lodge may assure some of the dmolay kid before they go off to college.


----------



## rhitland (Oct 23, 2009)

If 18 is good for the govement than it is good for me. I would want to be on the investigation team though.


----------



## Traveling Man (Oct 25, 2009)

I still voted for 21. I have to agree I too have seen 21 year olds that weren't mature enough. The exception I would have would be a "Lewis".


----------



## Joey (Oct 25, 2009)

HKTidwell said:


> If a person is old enough to die for their country in war, be a peace officer, fire fighter, or otherwise help a nation stand on its' feet I think they are old enough to petition.
> 
> As has been said we have a process in place that should a person not be suitable then they should be weeded out before they become a member.  The petitioner is not an issue, our process if a person who is not suitable gains admission has broken down because of the individuals involved in it.  Then we must look at the people involved in the process and take responsible steps to change it.  I guess I view each of us as the gate guards, we have a responsibility and must stand up and partake in those responsibilities.



Great response :001_cool:


----------



## Beathard (Feb 23, 2011)

I vote for 18. We have 2. Voting on 1 Monday. One is about to sit for his certificate. Why turn them away.


----------



## tom268 (Feb 24, 2011)

caeservi said:


> I think it should be 21.  Granted, there are the occasional 18 yr olds who have the maturity for the fraternity (we have one in our lodge, we just passed him the week before thanksgiving, and his father is an officer) but in general, they are a rarity.  There needs to be some maturity to understand what they are undertaking.


 You took the words out of my mouth. You would surely get a push on membership, but that is short sighted. On the long run, you just increase the number of those who quit.


----------



## Beathard (Feb 24, 2011)

Are you implying that 18 year olds will quit when 21 year olds won't quit?  My lodge has better retention on under 30s than we do with the 40-60s. Maybe we need mature, but not to set in their ways. Mature but not stale?  Maybe we should get everyone to sign a contract guaranteeing they won't quit to soon?

Of course I'm being sarcastic here, but is everyone reading the forum?  We need members, but not these members or those members. We need members that really want to be here, but we have to entertain them and give them steaks and alcohol to keep them. We need ladies in lodge...  We need Martians in lodge...

Sorry, maybe it is the post operation pain pills that are making me talk like this, but are we being hypocritical in saying we need more people, but only certain ages, types, etc?


----------



## tom268 (Feb 25, 2011)

First of all, I never said, that we need more members. We need masons, not fee-payers. Second, yes, it is exactly my opinion, that we need *certain *members, not everyone, who can not run away fast enough.

And to come to the point of my former posting, I just wanted to say, that the changes in the life of an 18year old boy is much much greater than of an older man. And many of these changes will bring them away from masonry, intentionally or circumstantially. The minimum age of 21 is OK, but I see the best age for joining in about 28-35.

And no, I don't think, it is the pain killers, we just have different positions and experiences, that we both believe in.


----------



## ddreader (Feb 25, 2011)

We need good quality men. Who will finish, and stay active at lodge. Men who will take the time to learn the work. learn the lessons. Teach it to new members proficiently. and love masonry for what it truly means. How do you pick them out of the crowd. I wish to god i could tell you. Age has nothing to do with it. Some men join out of curiosity, some because they think it will profit them in there business affairs. or get them aide in distress. others are interested in our mysteries, or want titles, and distinction that masonry confers. Very few care for our masonic philosophies, or care to learn about its ancient symbols. How are we suppose to know if our petitioner falls into one of these categories? You think he is going to give you that information during his investigation? All we can do, is hope that we can open his eyes. Show him the beauties of masonry, hope that he gets it, and stays to share it with the rest of the world. We need quality men, of all ages, shape, sizes, and colors if we are going to survive. We need to join as brothers, and come up with good solid solutions to this problem. This forum reaches world wide. some change is going to have to happen, what that is i wish i could tell you. we need to take a step back, and look at what is best for masonry. Maybe our own personal opinions do not always serve the greater Good of what we are trying to accomplish. I HAVE HAD HEAD STRONG OPINIONS ON ISSUES IN THE PAST, THAT UPON FURTHER REFLECTION, HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE OVERALL GOOD OF THE LODGE, AND MASONRY. We can fix this problem. We have to, in a few years a lot of us will be the old timers. What will our legacy be? What condition will we leave our fraternity in?


----------



## cemab4y (Feb 25, 2011)

The GL of KY lowered the age to 18, several years back. It has had no discernable impact on the quality or quality of new applicants. I am personally 100% in favor of it.


----------



## davidterrell80 (Feb 25, 2011)

I would have appreciated being able to take my son to a lodge in his college town, introduce him around and give him some folks he could rely on, in his separation from me. We did not, at the time, and we may have lost a good man to the Craft. Time will tell.

I've helped two good young men become brothers. They are both worth it.

D


----------



## Goatrider (Feb 25, 2011)

I vote for 18. Look at me, master mason just turned in petition for OES then headed towards becoming a Templar. I will not be quitting anytime soon, in fact I will be attempting to receive my A cert. by august


----------



## Beathard (Feb 27, 2011)

If you could not tell from his post, Goatrider is 18. Will be until August...


----------



## Benton (Feb 27, 2011)

Yeah, I think the age 18 is fine. If an individual petitioner isn't mature enough at that age to become a member, the investigative committee should be responsible enough to let the brotherhood know that. I know I've met younger Masons who, while seemingly good people, maybe weren't quite mature enough for it. But then again, I bet there are men much older who never mature. 

Maturity is relative. It often has little to do with age. Guard the West Gate with prudence. Don't assume one arbitrary age or another is enough.


----------



## tom268 (Feb 28, 2011)

I think, it is a matter of perspective and no less, the demography. I'm sure, if there would be hordes of young men, knocking on our doors, the GL would lower the age to 18.

On the other hand, an 18 year old man, who looses his interest in masonry, because he is not initiated immediately, was not ripe for that decision in the first place. Interested men have constant contact to the lodge for a minimum of a year anyways, before even getting an application. If that is not OK with the young man, he is better off, joining some club.


----------



## Beathard (Feb 28, 2011)

Is the one year minimum a masonic law in Germany?

It definately isn't in Texas.  If it were it would definately lower the number of EA degrees we do, but would probably increase longevity in the fraternity.


----------



## tom268 (Feb 28, 2011)

No, it is not a law, but a widely common tradition. We try to know those men at best be could, before letting them into our temple. For example, we topped our intake of new brothers at 5 per year. We have more interested men waiting, but we also want to integrate the new brother into our family. You can't do this on a conveyor belt-like ratio. It takes months, to get a new brother into feeling at home, and also the old brothers, don't feel at home any more, when they cannot remember all the new names to all the new faces.

Lodgelife is much more family style here. Many lodges split up long before they reach 100 members, not because there is struggle, but because the lodge evening begins to turn too anonymous. Strong lodges have 50-80 members here.


----------



## Beathard (Mar 1, 2011)

Wow! A lodge with 50 members in Texas would be endangered. It's just not enough members to get things going well with Texas work and our average members activity level.


----------



## Benton (Mar 1, 2011)

Beathard said:


> ...and our average members activity level.



Which I think generally tends to be the real problem, not a lack of members.


----------



## tom268 (Mar 1, 2011)

My lodge as 71 members, including 3 EAs and 8 FCs at the moment, and at degree meetings we have an attendance of 28-35 of them. We need 9 officers to do the initiation or passing/raising. I'm not sure, where you need the masses of people. Actually, I always asked me, why so many US lodges look so hard on membership numbers. A few days ago, I read in a masonic newsletter, that a GM said, the membership topic is the top priority of the lodges ...... well, I always thought, masonry would be the top priority. *ggg*

But without pun, why do you need so many members? I can understand, that cities with cathedral-like lodge buildings need a lot of income. On the other hand, some lodges even get income by owning such buildings. But the cost of buildings in more rural areas is much cheaper in the US then in Germany. Many lodge buildings in saw on pictures, are quite ordinary (no offence intended, I mean as ordinary as ours). The large palace and cathedral ike masonic homes seem to be as rare as here, so that can't be the need for membership.

The level of attendance cannot be countered by more and faster initiations. We made the experiance, that more intense ritual experiances creates a stronger bond among the brethren. Stronger than any cameradery in the social rooms can get.


----------



## Dave in Waco (Mar 2, 2011)

tom268 said:


> The level of attendance cannot be countered by more and faster initiations. We made the experiance, that more intense ritual experiances creates a stronger bond among the brethren. Stronger than any cameradery in the social rooms can get.




In Texas this year, the GM's message follows this line of thinking somewhat.  He has put forth, "quality, not quanity", which I have to agree with.  In Texas, about 10% attendence is average.  The lodges that excede that are lodges that have usually embraced some form of what you stated above.  I have always used in my arguements against watering down the ritual, that anything worth having is worth working for.  In which if you ask any Master Mason who conferred their Master's degree, regardless if it was done last night or 70+ years ago, they can all tell you.  They can also tell you who they learned their work from as well.  So in keeping with the GM's message, I would rather have 50 members and have 25 guys at meetings then 500 members and that same 25 at meetings.


----------



## Hndrx (Mar 2, 2011)

In my opinion, I've known some pretty mature 18 year olds.  Some of which were more mature than some 40 year olds that I have known.  I believe each candidate should be evaluated on an individual basis.


----------



## Beathard (Mar 2, 2011)

Once again I agree.  My son is 18.  Looking at him, I wish I had started a few years earlier.  Man, he picks up the work quickly.  He is already workign in degrees and is sitting for his "B" certificate on April 16th.  There are not many men of any age that are more active.  I have another 18 year old I am teaching the work to and he is doing fine.  We are about to initite another.  If these three men are representative of the quality of 18 year olds out there, I believe that we might lose committment with age.  By the way, we have not recommended the fraternity to more 18 year olds than we have accepted.  Once you or the invetigation commity gets to know the applicants it is pretty easy to tell if they are ready.  They are also very willing to wait a while if the committee says they need to come back when older.


----------



## AnthonyBolding (Apr 29, 2011)

18 cause if not I wouldn't be a mason!


----------



## Gerald.Harris (Apr 29, 2011)

tom268 said:


> You took the words out of my mouth. You would surely get a push on membership, but that is short sighted. On the long run, you just increase the number of those who quit.


 
I am not certain that your statement is correct. Another brother has mentioned that it would be intresting for the Grand Lodge to conduct a study on this subject. I have seen several men under the age od 21 who have joined Texas lodges in the last two years, and I can not recall a single one, who has not completed his studies. I also want to say that each of the sub 21 year old brothers I have come in contact with seem to have a good grip on maturity, perhaps our investigation committies are doing a good job in this area.
I agree that a study on this subject would be intresting.


----------



## Beathard (Apr 29, 2011)

Agreed. I would really be interested in the results.


----------



## Benton (Apr 29, 2011)

I will say, I can't think of any local under 21 brothers who haven't completed their studies off the top of my head. Interesting point.


----------



## Beathard (Apr 30, 2011)

My 18 yr old son was raised in February.  He now has a C certificate and is working on his B. He has visited 14 lodges, several on his own. He is also a member of the OES. I don't know of many over 21 men that are more active. I don't think you can automatically assume a higher drop out for men under 21.


----------



## Michaelstedman81 (Apr 30, 2011)

While I don't have anything personal against the Masons that are under 21, I do think that the age requirement needs to be 21 and not 18.  This fraternity is a group for "men".  Just because the law of the land pretty much labels a person as an adult at the age of 18, I don't think necessarily that is the case for all persons.  An 18 year old is just barely out of high school and for the most part, not all of them are even taking care of things on their own yet.  They are still basically late teenagers and have a few years to go of taking care of adult things and learning about the real world.  

However, on the other hand I do think that 18 is a good age for someone to be eligible to become a Mason.  I know that there are some very mature 18 year olds out there, and bigger than that, some 18 year olds have completed a lot of Masonic things that the older cats haven't done yet.  There are also some guys that are over 21 that aren't as mature as some 18 year olds. I also have a son and can't wait for him to turn 18 and to join the fraternity if he so chooses...lol

But, overall and what is best for the fraternity, I think that the age requirement should be 21 to join the fraternity.  Maybe go back to some of the old times where there were waiting times for each degree.  Wait one year for the EA, then wait a whole year for the FC, and then another year for the MM.  That way the young Mason can be monitored a bit and he can prove that he is a good candidate for the craft and will stick around and take Masonry seriously.  But that is just my seven cents.


----------



## Tony Siciliano (Apr 30, 2011)

As was mentioned: 18 y/o's can fight and die for country, vote, get married, etc., etc.  That's what the investigative committee is for.


----------



## Michaelstedman81 (May 1, 2011)

Tony Siciliano said:


> 18 y/o's can fight and die for country




I do think that if the age limit was raised to 21, I do think that service members that are under 21 should still be eligible.  And good point on the investigative committe, Bro. Tony.


----------



## Beathard (May 3, 2011)

Not sure I would want to increase waiting periods for the 18-20 year olds.  We have a lot of 21-40 year olds that don't stick with it.  And really, in Texas, the only real difference between and EA and a MM is who can vote.  18 year olds can vote for President.  Why shouldn't they vote to pay the bills?


----------



## Benton (May 3, 2011)

Beathard said:


> Not sure I would want to increase waiting periods for the 18-20 year olds.  We have a lot of 21-40 year olds that don't stick with it.  And really, in Texas, the only real difference between and EA and a MM is who can vote.  18 year olds can vote for President.  Why shouldn't they vote to pay the bills?



I definitely agree. As I've said before, some of the under 21 brothers I know are far more committed than the older than 21 brothers. Age is only a cursory indicator of maturity, and rarely an indicator of dedication. Let's judge the man, not his calendar age.


----------



## Brent Heilman (May 3, 2011)

Benton said:


> Let's judge the man, not his calendar age.



I couldn't agree more.When I was in my early 20's I managed a wholesale plumbing store and the one thing that bothered me most was people seeing I was young would write me off as not knowing what I was doing or talking about. The sad thing is that I knew as much if not more than most of my customers. I don't judge based on an age because it is just a number. Only when you get to know a person can you really tell how "old" his is. 

Age doesn't necessarily mean mature. I have friends that I would swear are still in the 9th grade.  I will never judge a person for their age, I might joke about it, but I will not judge.


----------



## JJones (Jun 15, 2011)

I picked 21 as a general rule but I really think it should be on a case by case basis.  If the investigating committee thinks the petitioner is mature enough and will have time to devote the the fraternity then I don't see any harm in it.


----------



## jw21 (Jun 19, 2011)

Wisdom comes with age, no one develops at the same rate...there is no correct answer.


----------



## Ol Kev (Jun 19, 2011)

jw21 said:


> Wisdom comes with age, no one develops at the same rate...there is no correct answer.



I think this post nails it.

The problem here is, how do brothers determine if sufficient wisdom exists to vote a man in?


----------



## jw21 (Jun 20, 2011)

Thank you, I appreciate your response to my theory of wisdom. The question in hand , I am also looking for the answer.


----------



## Timothy Fleischer (Jun 20, 2011)

davidterrell80 said:


> I would have appreciated being able to take my son to a lodge in his college town, introduce him around and give him some folks he could rely on, in his separation from me. We did not, at the time, and we may have lost a good man to the Craft. Time will tell.
> 
> I've helped two good young men become brothers. They are both worth it.
> 
> D


 
Brother,
I was very proud to be the top line signer of my nephew's petition to my hometown lodge before he turned 20. He bugged me about it since he was in HS. He was initiated in the same lodge where I was initiated some 16 years ago. I acted as his Senior Deacon in the EA and as the Master in the FC and MM degrees. I was able to teach him his work on odd weekends when he came home from college. It took a while, but he learned it very thoroughly. While he was at college, I drove down one night and took him to a Lodge that we found in Austin. He attends Lodge every chance he gets and shows up for coffees and informal practices. I worked with him so that he could be SD for his best friend's initiation into the University Lodge in Austin.

Both are enrolled in college and are members of the ROTC program.

My son, on the other hand, is over 21, but really shows no sign of interest in Masonry. Maybe in his case, it was too close to home.

I think that 18 is an adequate age,  but that we should be guardians of the West Gate. It is easy to spot those 18 year olds who are not ready. The investigating team can run interference before a petitioner is rejected by the Lodge and let a young man know that he "should wait a while."  In that time period, the young man can show his real interest by showing up for open events and getting to know the men of the lodge and to let the men of the lodge get to know him, as well.


----------



## rpbrown (Oct 18, 2012)

The ages of 18-21 are impressionable years. I would think that at 18, they can have what it takes to be a Mason but could also be swayed by peer pressure toward the dark side so to speak. If they have become Masons at 18, they have surrounded themselves with some of the finest men around and what role models we can become to them. After all, they are the future of the craft as well as the country. I vote for 18


----------



## dreamer (Oct 18, 2012)

Hippie19950 said:


> I have no problem with 18, but it is a biased opinion... At 19, I was notified by President Nixon, I WOULD be reporting for duty, no questions. I was given training, and sent to places far, far away. I made a trip home to get married, and had to have my Dad sign so I could get the license. I could not buy the champagne, or even consume it after the wedding... But I was old enough to die for My Country. If there is a problem with 18, let's send them through Boot Camp. Oh, wait, we already do in some respect!!



Amen Brother. Hear you on that one!


----------



## Warrior1256 (Oct 28, 2014)

caeservi said:


> I think it should be 21.  Granted, there are the occasional 18 yr olds who have the maturity for the fraternity (we have one in our lodge, we just passed him the week before thanksgiving, and his father is an officer) but in general, they are a rarity.  There needs to be some maturity to understand what they are undertaking.


My opinion also.


----------



## crono782 (Oct 28, 2014)

Perhaps in yesteryear I would say 18, but nowadays 21. I feel as though we as a society do not mature as quickly as we used to. An 18 year old a century ago, might have a family, work a farm, go to war, etc. Now though, I just don't see the same level of growing up, even in my own generation.


----------

