PIETY AND FRATERNALISM: A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
SECRET FRATERNAL SOCIETIES AND THE AMERICAN CIVIL RELIGION.
By
ELIZABETH JEAN LOUGHREY
B.A. Brock University, 1976
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS
in
THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
Department of Religious Studies
We accept this thesis as conforming
to the required standard
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
October, 1981
Elizabeth Jean Loughrey, 1981 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.
Department of Religious Studies
The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5
Date October 19, 1981
DE-6 (2/79) ii
ABSTRACT
Robert Bellah has suggested that there "exists alongside of and rather clearly differentiated from the churches and elaborate and well institutionalized civil religion in America".
This religion expresses certain common elements of religious orientation shared by most Americans. It gives, says Bellah, a "religious dimension to all aspects of life including the political sphere".
Accepting Bellah's argument, this thesis analyses working mens' secret fraternal societies as one aspect of the institu• tionalization of the American Civil Religion. It examines how fraternal organizations have fostered public religion as a vital force within American culture. More specifically, it examines the following interrelated questions.
What is the nature of American Civil Religion? How is a particular understanding of this religion reflected in the fraternal emphasis of American lodges? Why has its collective expression required the maintenance of a cloak of secrecy? How do the rituals of secret fraternal societies mediate and confirm for their members the ideals of the public religion? Histori• cally, what segment of the population has been most attracted to this interpretation of American Civil Religion? What is the nature of the dynamic relationship between American society, its civil religion and organized secret fraternalism? iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Footnotes to the Introduction ...... 8
I. THEORETICAL COMPONENTS .10
Footnotes to Chapter I 26
II. COMPONENTS IN CONTEXT 32
Footnotes to Chapter II 49
III. HISTORICAL CONFIRMATION 56
Footnotes to Chapter III 75
CONCLUSION 81
Footnotes to the Conclusion 8 6
BIBLIOGRAPHY 87 iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am greatly indebted to Professor N. K. Clifford.
Without his patience, good humour and wisdom this thesis would not have been completed. INTRODUCTION
In the decades Immediately following the American Civil
War organized secret fraternalism bourgeoned throughout the
United States. More than one hundred men's secret fraternal
orders were established within a thirty year span; over ten million Americans joined at least one. Particularly in the
newly industrialized towns of the mid and northwestern states,
the number of men belonging to a secret fraternity frequently
equalled one third of the total adult male population.1 The value of fraternal membership was widely acknowledged: secret
fraternal societies provided an organized setting for male
conviviality; the majority operated economic self-help and benefit programs for their members; with few exceptions, the orders encouraged philanthropic activity; most were delibe•
rately non-political and non-sectarian, choosing instead to
celebrate their wider loyalty to a transcendent vision of an
America in which liberty, equality and nationalism were rendered secure. Finally, participation in secret rituals confirmed for fraternal members the reality of their shared ideal.
While disavowing political activity and, therefore, only minimally affecting American political patterns, secret fraternities contributed significantly to the fabric of Ame• rican social life. They gave expression to a particular -2-
understanding of American Civil Religion and, for many whose
experience of post Civil War America was contrary to the
truths of this religion, the rituals of fraternalisra allowed
them to confirm an ideal to which they had in reality no access.
Nearly all contemporary analyses of American Civil Reli•
gion reveal, to some extent, an indebtedness to the writings 2 of sociologist Robert Bellah. This thesis is not an
exception. It accepts and builds upon his fundamental premise
that American Civil Religion is a constellation of beliefs,
symbols and rituals which have grown out of the American his•
torical experience interpreted in the dimension of transcen- 3
dence. Although primarily expressed through Christian
symbolism and metaphor, the civil religion is distinguishable
from Christianity. It locates the sovereign agency of God's 4 will in the state. The state is understood as being rooted
in two equal truths: the philosophy of the Enlightenment,
emphasizing reason as the chief good, as exemplified in the
American Federal Bill of Rights: and, the conviction of
activistic Protestantism that submission to God's will is 5 man's first duty. These two truths, which simultaneously
transcend and are reflected in American life, combine positi• vely to value "individual freedom, personal independence,
social and political democracy, restraint in outward conduct
and thrift".6
American Civil Religion is characterized by ambiguity
for the two traditions which have shaped it do not easily -3-
7 blend, The Enlightenment emphasized human self-sufficiency and saw self-interest as the safeguard of historical progress.
Enlightenment thinkers believed competition, technological advancement and material acquisition would induce a state of abundance which, in turn, would satisfy man's desires and eradicate his hostility for his fellow man. When hostility vanished, the genuine brotherhood uniting all men would be revealed. But these doctrines, in many respects, were con• travened by American Protestantism. This tradition taught that man is morally corrupt, estranged from God and from creation. Only by God's grace is man wholly redeemed and able to live by the terms which ensure human fulfillment.
Human reason, however, is capable of discerning these terms and, aided by a sound will, it can develop the highest appro• ximation of regeneracy possible within the human sphere.
Since, as a consequence of the Fall, man's will is not sound, external substitutes compensating for its defects should be Q developed. These substitutes include a society of like-minded men and a civic polity conducive to man's moral betterment.
Where the Enlightenment saw liberty and equality leading to a pre-existent fraternity, American Protestantism believed that the natural principles of equality and liberty were in• sufficient for the realization of a fraternal world. Adherents of American Civil Religion attempted to reconcile these dif• ferent perspectives. Likewise, American secret fraternal -4- societies created an uneasy harmony between Enlightenment doctrines and the American Protestant tradition. They acknowledged that the protection of the "natural rights of man" heralds the advent of the perfect unity of mankind but they placed equal emphasis on the fact that equality and liberty cannot in themselves constitute fraternity. Unless they are buttressed by a prior fraternal understanding, equality and liberty lead only to social anomie.
American secret fraternal societies stressed that the fraternal impulse springs from the acknowledgement of shared weakness. In so far as men are dedicated to the realization of a fraternal world, they must understand, through fraternal relations, that the like qualities uniting them are more worthy than the unlike qualities separating them. Only then will the necessity of living by the principles of equality and liberty be properly understood.
In American secret fraternal societies, fraternity was expressed through the maintenance of the group's secrets. As guardians of particular secrets, fraternal members understood themselves as set apart from and, therefore, standing in a new relationship to the larger society. This new relation• ship, in turn, defined relations between fraternal members.
Shared perception of difference established a new basis of identity. Where this identity was valued, there was frater- nxty. -5-
The symbols, regalia and rituals which serve as the
medium for the creation of secrecy, frame and consolidate
the individual worth experienced in fraternal relationships.
Symbolic patterns give shape to reality by fusing principles
of behavior and individual preferences so that they become
one.^ The symbols employed by American secret fraternal
societies reflect their ambiguous understanding of American
Civil Religion. Christian images and personal piety, animal
totems and the righteousness'of man's quest to conquer the
laws of nature exist together.
Just as symbols present themselves as axiomatic, the
messages conveyed by ritual are stated in a form which renders
them unverifiable.^ Ritual imbues the objective world with
subjective order so that both confirm one another. It tem•
porarily negates the boundaries of a specific social setting
and unveils a principle of transformation which serves as a
common ground for a new classification. If only momentarily,
it demonstrates the power of this transforming principle by 12
altering man's relationship to his fellow man. Through
their rituals, members of American secret fraternal societies
realize fraternity. This realization affirms the truth of
their interpretation of American Civil Religion.
Historically, secret societies drew the bulk of their membership from the lower middle classes. Members lived within and accepted an America which has built its power on -6-
the idea of a perfectible world and the conviction that it is
destined to be the New Jerusalem. Allegiance to these truths
required a fiction. It required that members deny the reality
of their everyday experience. Membership in a secret frater•
nity supplied this fiction and ritual re-affirmed that which was most in doubt. The rituals of secret fraternalism
established an equality otherwise without substance.
Members of America's secret fraternities generally did
not have access to the channels of power which bring change.
They could not challenge the short-comings of society. They
could only render them invisible by the power of ritual.
Retreat into personal piety was organized fraternalism's
response to a society whose momentum appeared beyond immediate
control.
The function of secret fraternal societies, therefore, has been to foster public religion as a vital force within
American culture. This thesis examines how fraternal secret- societies have performed this function. More specifically, it examines the following interrelated questions. What is the nature of American Civil Religion? How is a particular understanding of this religion reflected in the fraternal emphasis of American lodges? Why has its collective expression required the maintenance of a cloak of secrecy? How do the rituals of secret fraternal societies mediate and confirm for their members the ideals of the public faith? Historically, -7- why has a particular segment of the population been most
attracted this interpretation of American Civil Religion?
What is the nature of the dynamic relationship between Ameri•
can Society, civil religion and organized secret fraternalism?
Chapter one surveys the literature pertinent to the
discussion. Although there are no detailed analyses outlining
the relationship between American Civil Religion and secret
fraternal societies, the writings of several scholars are
particularly useful in the development of such a study. In
the second chapter, the theoretical components drawn from the
literature in Chapter one are placed in historical context.
The character of secret fraternal societies is examined, as
they existed in the decade immediately following the American
Civil War. In the final chapter, the genesis and development
of three American mens' secret fraternities is traced from
their inception in the post Civil War years until 1940. The
three orders examined are: The Benevolent and Protective
Order of Elks, The Loyal Order of Moose and The Fraternal
Order of Eagles. They have been chosen because of the like•
ness of their histories, their similar social locations (areas
of geographical strength, class, status affiliations) and
because they have consistently maintained the centrality of
their secret fraternalism in relation to both economic and
benevolent programs. -8-
FOOTNOTES TO INTRODUCTION
Walter Basye, History and Operation of Fraternal Insurance.
(Rochester, New York: The Fraternal Moniter, 1919), pp. 14-16; Albert C. Stevens, The Cyclopedia of Fxaternites.
(New York: E.B. Treat & Co., 1907).
Robert Bellah, "Civil Religion in America", Daedalus, vol. 96, 1 (Winter, 1967), pp. 1-21.
Robert Bellah, "Response to 'Commentaries on Civil Religion in America'", The Religious Situation: 1968, ed. D.R. Cutler.
(Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), p. 389.
Leo Pfeffer, "Commentary on 'Civil Religion in America'",
The Religious Situation: 1968, ed. D.R. Cutler. (Boston:
Beacon Press, 1968), p. 367.
Robert Bellah, "Response to 'Commentaries on Civil Religion in America'", The Religious Situation: 196 8, ed.
D. R. Cutler. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), p. 390.
Robin Williams in American Society: A Sociological Inter• pretation, cited by John F. Wilson, "The Status of Civil
Religion in America", The Religion of the Republic, ed.
E. A. Smith (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971), p. 6.
Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973), pp. 94-111. -9-
Ibid., p. 121.
Georg Simmel, "The Secret and the Secret Society", The
Sociology of Georg Simmel, trans, and ed. Kurt Wolff.
(Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1950), pp. 331-334.
Victor Turner, Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic
Action in Human Society. (New York: Cornell University
Press, 1974), p. 55.
Sally Moore and Barbara Myerhoff, "Introduction", Secular
Ritual, eds. S. Moore and B. Myerhoff (Amsterdam: Van
Gorcum, Assen, 1977), p. 18.
Terence Turner, "Transformation, Hierarchy and Transcen• dence: A Reformulation of Van Gennep's Model of the
Structure of Rites de Passage", Secular Ritual, eds.
S. Moore and B. Myerhoff (Amsterdam: Van Goreum, Assen,
1977) , p. 63. -10-
CHAPTER ONE
THEORETIGAL COMPONENTS
American secret fraternal societies have been examined \ from three perspectives. Members have viewed them apologeti• cally; sociologists have studied them as economic self-help organizations; and, theologians have understood them as threatening Christian teaching. Secret fraternities, however, have not been critically examined as an aspect of the institu• tionalization of American Civil Religion. Yet this fourth perspective is valuable for it employs wider, less evaluative presuppositions than those implicit in the other three approaches. To develop this perspective it is necessary to consider phenomena not generally analysed in the literature associated with organized fraternalism. Texts discussing the
American Civil Religion, fraternity, secrecy, myth and ritual must be consulted.
"The Religion of the Republic", "The American Way of
Life", "American Shinto", "American Folk Religion", and, most
recently, "American Civil Religion" are all terms frequently used to designate those aspects of American history and social
life which have contributed to a national self-understanding which possesses religious as well as political dimensions.
The variety of terms employed reflects a debate regarding the
traditions fostering this religious self-understanding and, -11- also, whether the phenomena supporting a national spirituali• ty may be rightly interpreted as constituting a public , • . 1 religxon.
Scholars who have discussed the American Civil Religion include Robert Bellah, Martin Marty, John F. Wilson, Sydney 2
Mead, Will Herberg and W. Lloyd Warner. Particularly help• ful in relating what may be described as a national faith to its institutionalized expressions is Robert Bellah. His thesis is that "there actually exists alongside of and rather clearly differentiated from the churches an elaborate and well 3 institutionalized civil religion in America". The central tenet of this religion is the conviction that, throughout history, America has been called upon by God to establish 4
"a new sort of social order". Having identified this as the civil religion's major theme, Bellah is then able to identify its parameters. First, since man's rights and duties proceed from a transcendent, sovereign will, they provide a point of leverage from which the political structure may be altered.
American Civil Religion is not merely religious nationalism.^
Second, since this sovereign will has spoken through the historical process, its characteristics are reflected in the major traditions shaping American history as they have been given political legitimation. Bellah identifies Protestant
Christianity and the Enlightenment as the most pervasive influences shaping American Civil Religion.^ -12-
Bellah employs Rousseau's phrase "civil religion" be• cause he understands American Civil Religion as reflecting
Enlightenment thought adapted to American experience. The separation of church and state, the exclusion of religious intolerance, the assumption of a deity whose will is revealed in the laws of nature are all, says Bellah, concepts frequent- . . 7
ly appearing in the writings of the founding fathers. But they are refracted, he argues, through the older tradition of
American Puritanism. This tradition understands America as uniquely covenanted to God. The work of the nation is God's work and he is "actively interested and involved in [American]' p history". Both traditions stress individualism but American
Protestantism lessens the implications of this idea by advo- 9
eating, via the concept of covenant, a strong communal ethic.
These traditions have coalesced differently at various times in American history and the civil religion has been interpreted in a myriad of ways. Doubtless, Bellah would agree with Marty that there are "as many civil religions as there are citizens"."^ Still, the civil religion is given symbolic definition in several specific ways.
Bellah names five ways in which the American Civil
Religion is given expression. First, events crucial to the development of America constitute the religion's "sacred
calender". Second, individuals associated with these events
are the prophets, teachers and martyrs of the civil religion. Third, places related to these events and individuals are the religion's hallowed ground. Fourth, rituals celebrating these historic moments, people and places affirm and propagate the
American Civil Religion. Fifth, specific documents express the ideological content of the civil religion as it has been forged throughout American history.1"'"
Bellah sees the civil religion expressed in the follow• ing: The American Declaration of Independence, The Federal
Bill of Rights, The American Constitution and The Gettysburg
Address; The War of Independence, frequently described in
Old Testament terms; The American Civil War, which introdu• ced the New Testament themes of sacrifice, death and rebirth; the first and second world war experiences; the veneration of presidents, particularly Abraham Lincoln; the national holidays, including the fourth of July, Memorial Day and
Thanksgiving; and, Arlington Cemetry, the American Civil 12
Religion's most esteemed monument.
John Wilson argues that the ideological specificity of
Bellah's model avoids the weaknesses while admitting the strengths of two other models used to analyse American Civil 13
Religion. Like Professor Warner, Bellah sees the civil religion existing in the country's folkways; unlike him, he does not understand it to be co-terminus with all cultural rites and beliefs. Similar to Professor Mead, Bellah analyses the public faith as a prophetic, transcendent religion; -14-
however, he does not see its theology transcending the field of traditional religious observance. Bellah's argument is sufficiently complex that it facilitates the isolation of particular kinds of behaviour and belief centered on the na• tional polity and it, also, affords a less elusive understand• ing of the theology of the civil faith.
Philip Hammond has claimed that Bellah's thesis is, essentially, a cultural analysis. In an essay intended to extend rather than refute, he examines with greater precision 14 the institutionalization of American Civil Religion. The public school and judicial systems are closely analysed.
Neither Hammond nor Bellah, however, study secret fraterna• lism as giving symbolic definition to the civil religion.
Consequently, while their studies are wide-ranging, they have, nevertheless, neglected an important aspect of the institu• tionalization of the American Civil Religion.
Fraternity is seldom mentioned in relation to American
Civil Religion. There is only a small body of modern litera• ture on fraternity and only one major text, written by Wilson Carey McWilliams, which discusses The Idea of Fraternity in 15
America. E.J. Hobsbawn attributes this gap in the litera• ture to the fact that, since its essence is individualistic, the tradition of middle class liberal thought has not known 16 what to do with the concept. Fraternity can only be a by• product of individual impulses and, while it is partially defined as liberty and equality which can be legislated, the attempt to legislate fraternity into practice "has the same air of fantasy as Frederick William I of Prussia beating his subjects on the back with his stick ... saying 'You shall love me' " .
While a part of McWilliam'.s thesis corroborates
Hobsbawn's comments, his analysis of fraternity is more sub• stantive. McWilliams examines fraternity within the context of American social experience, as it has been seen through political and literary- history. He argues that there is a
"general principle of ambiguity in the culture" and attributes this ambiguity to the American attempt to harmonize, rather 18 than choose between, religious and Enlightenment ethics.
Following a path of aggressive pragmatism, Americans have lost sight of the richness of both traditions and their under• standing of the symbols associated with each has become attenuated and vague.
McWilliams' study may be broken down into three distinct sections. In the first, he examines fraternity as a political symbol shaped by Enlightenment doctrine. In the second, he explores the American Puritan understanding of fraternity.
In the third, he traces the symbiotic relation of both inter• pretations throughout American history. Throughout his ana• lysis, he argues that the Enlightenment thinkers were mistaken in their understanding of fraternity. Equality and liberty do not lead to fraternity. Rather, fraternity contributes to civic polity which, in turn, makes liberty and equality possible. McWilliams1 criticism of the Enlightenment interpreta• tion of fraternity is attributable to his sympathetic under• standing of Freud and Georg Simmel. Both these theorists found the key to the human condition in the "paradoxical frustration of man's possibilities as a prerequisite to his 19 humanity". This tenet is central to McWilliams1 analysis.
He acknowledges that Enlightenment thinkers recognized how fraternity presupposes an alienation from present surroundings and is dependent on the exaltation of a shared likeness not apparent in immediate circumstances. But he argues that, while the Enlightenment saw man estranged from nature, it did not see man estranged from himself. Self-alienation requires fraternity to be the basis of community, not its final goal.
"The individual who knows his unworthiness needs the assu• rance that he has value; he demands the encouragement of affection .
The founding fathers, however, believed that the affect• ions of friendship conflicted with man's essential interests.
Affection is prone to parochiality while progress requires a
"willingness to put aside demands for immediate fulfillment and especially for fraternal relations on a scale more limi- 21 ted than that of humanity". Quoting from The Federalist,
McWilliams demonstrates that the design of American govern• ment was intended to minimize this conflict. With the division of political powers, the proliferation of interme• diate groups and the concomitant fragmentation of public -.17-
loyalty, the federal government would emerge as both the 22 guardian of Interest and the most worthy object of affection.
While American Enlightenment thinkers frequently used the language of American Puritanism, their understanding of fraternity was the antithesis of that older tradition. In
Puritan analysis, all societies were based on covenants which committed men to a "common soul" by acknowledging their shared values and goals. While only one covenant, the Covenant of
Grace, ensured perfect fraternity, it was the responsibility of lesser covenants to encourage existing fraternity so that,
through mutual support and education, the individual spirit 23 would more conform to the divine will.
Until the introduction of the Halfway Covenant, the
civic polity of American Puritanism was based on the recog•
nition of a prior fraternal understanding. Duties and obli•
gations were defined by this understanding and the strict
employment of reason aided in their execution. It was be•
lieved that reason was largely separate from and did not
suffer the defects of the human will. It propelled the
affections toward the higher will which stood in judgement
over all men and guaranteed that the fraternity of this world
did not become an end in itself.^
When, however, New Englanders codified the Halfway
Covenant the need to acknowledge fraternity was replaced
by the assumption of its pre-existence. The-problem •
of how to make inherited duties felt as personal obligations became keenly realized. It was hoped that a renewed emphasis on education would strengthen the weakened bonds of fraterni• ty. But, as McWilliams argues, reason, rather than encourag• ing fraternity, became an instrument for self-exaggeration.
As New England became more and more a Gemeinschaft, self- exaggeration increasingly became a method of liberation from 25 oppressive social conditions.
The disintegration of the Puritan community facilitated, says McWilliams, the acceptance of the Enlightenment inter• pretation of fraternity. The older understanding was not entirely displaced but it was reconciled to the new so that it became simply a diffuse fellow-feeling. Fraternity became an adjunct to politics for it was the "friendship of the in• dividualist who demands the semblance of perfect unity, too proud (or insecure) to bear contradiction, too weak and iso- lated to do without human support '^together:
McWilliams remarks that apolitical lodges exemplify 27 the American understanding of fraternity. He does not, however, pursue this comment and, consequently, he fails to critically examine the relationship between secrecy and fra• ternity. For an explanation of this relationship it is ne•
cessary to turn from McWilliams to an essay by the German sociologist Georg Simmel.
Simmel's essay "The Secret and the Secret Society" 2 8
clearly reveals his methodological assumptions. A mate•
rialist to the extent that he believed group relations had a -19- life of their own and were partially determinate of mind and an idealist, in that he assumed mind had its own possibili• ties, Simmel saw all human relations as a "synthetic product of the interplay between the mind and the reality of activi- 29 ty". He inferred the existence of a similar dialectic be• tween individuals and culture, and, it is his understanding of this second dialectic that forms the basis of his analysis of secrecy.
Simmel understood man to be pitted against the culture he creates. Self-actualization requires the incorporation of external objects of culture but, rather than contributing to the development of individuality, culture makes man its 30 epiphenomenon. There are two reasons for this fact. First, culture is the product of many people, each with different subjectivities. Second, there is more culture than any one person can incorporate. Culture, therefore, may be experienced 31 as oppressive. When it is, secrecy develops. Simmel claims that, regardless of the contents it guards, secrecy functions as an integral part of the individu- 32
ation process. Particularly applicable to the analysis of
secret fraternities is his argument that, since man's natural
impulse is to idealize the unknown, the knowledge that another
possesses a secret accords the possessor an importance other- 33 wise denied. The secret places one in a position of except•
ion. When this position is publicized, as it is by formally
"public" secret societies, the contents of the secret are of little significance. The secret exists primarily for those who observe it and their acknowledgement "returns to the subject as the enlargement of his own sphere of significan- 34 ce". In such instances, secrecy, like vanity, requires 35 others in order to despise them.
While "public" secret societies, their own arguments notwithstanding, , are not fraternal in their attitude to outsiders, the relations between society members represent a conscious attempt to establish fraternal identity. Members honour one another with, a double trust for, in addition to the trust determined by their organization's purpose, there 3 6 is the additional trust of secrecy. The bestowal of confidence in secrecy cannot be mechanically assessed.
Temptations of disclosure are so omnipresent that the dis• cretion involved in bestowing confidence involves an "incom- 37 parable preponderance of the subjective factor".
Community provides psychological support against the
temptation to betray the society's secrets and, also, eompen sates for the isolation implied in separating from the large 3 8 society. Oaths, systematic instruction in the art of
silence, symbolism, ritual and the threat of punishment all
contribute to the establishment of a well-rounded structure 39
capable of strongly binding members together. The secret
society, therefore, organizes itself as a counter image of
the official world to which it places itself in contrast. -21-
As Simmel points out, while the intention of society members may be individual autonomy, there is with the absence of norm-giving regulations only rootlessness. The organizat• ion of secret orders must restore the equilibrium of human nature. Paradoxically, to the extent that membership in a secret society implies a sizeable and precarious bid for freedom, to the same extent will the internal structure of the secret society reflect the larger social milieu which, ostensibly, is being left behind.
Simmel's analysis of "The Secret and the Secret Society" 41 has been largely overlooked. This is unfortunate because little has been written on secrecy, and Simmel's conception of secrecy is deeply enriched when it is considered in conjunction with the study of ritual as shown by Mary Douglas,
Clifford Geertz, Edmund Leach and Victor Turner.
The writings of Douglas, Geertz, Leach and Turner share two emphases. First, their analyses of ritual are informed by a dialectical approach, congruent with their understanding of culture as a symbol system. Second, their theories utilize van Gennep's thesis that ritual is a process which 42 mediates passage from one social position to another. All four theorists see culture functioning in two ways. -22-
As a system of shared "conceptions expressed in symbolic 43 forms" , culture Is the context through which social action
is rendered intelligible. Culture also shapes social action
by providing symbolic guidelines for behaviour. To use
Professor Geertz's terms, culture is both a "model of" and 44 "model for" reality.
Although culture is instrumental in shaping behaviour,
it does not entirely determine social reality. Culture is
meaningful only when It articulates social relations and,
since its fixity is contradicted by the flux of reality, ;
shifts in the social structure continually, if imperceptibly, 45
reshape culture. Between culture and social reality there
is an ongoing dialectic.
Ritual attempts to transcend this dialectic by eliminat•
ing the conflict between the world as it is lived and cultur•
ally defined. Ritual symbols evoke and unify objective and subjective understandings of reality so that individuals 46 experience a congruence between themselves and their culture.
By symbolically defining the assumptions underlying social relations, ritual integrates these assumptions into culture and redresses social conflict. Even when it effects no tangible unity between culture and behaviour, ritual modifies 47 perceptions of reality by presenting life in its totality. 48 It provides a metasoclal commentary on reality. In his seminal work, The Rites of Passage, van Gennep 49 demonstrated that the order of rituals is constant. Rituals have three phases: separation (.from one social position) ,
transition, and incorporation (into a new social role).
Professors Douglas, Geertz, Leach and Turner see ritual's
dynamic in its middle phase. In the transitional stage of
ritual, individuals exist beyond society's classifications.
From the viewpoint of structure, they are. "polluting" for whatever is not symbolically defined possesses infinite
possibilities for ordering.^ In ritual transition, the
actuality of society is superseded by alternate possibilities
for social organization."^
The degree to which ritual actually reorders social
relations is dependent upon the assumptions underlying 52
existing relations as they have'been shaped by culture.
Victor Turner contrasts ritual assumptions which develop out•
side society's economic and political processes with others
more integrated into the social whole and argues that, in
ritual, the latter more clearly reveal the subjectivity of 53
and, hence, the possibilities for social organization. His
analysis emphasizes the function of these contrasting assumpt•
ions within the ritual process rather than the dynamic by
which they first assume shape. Roland Barthes and Herbert
Marcuse, however, directly examine this problem in their 54
respective studies of bourgeois myth and contemporary culture.
Myth, argues Barthes, is a system of values interpreted
as facts. In myth, already accepted symbols of social reality
are reduced to a purely signifying function; they are filled with, historically contingent concepts; and then, like "a con• stantly moving turnstile", both signlfier and concept are presented, apparently in a relation of equivalence. Myth, 55 therefore, functions to transform history into nature.
Traditionally, because individuals have been simultane• ously producers and consumers of their culture, mythic truths have existed In an ideal-real tension with society. Not divorced from the daily struggle of living, culture's .myths have provided freedom for symbolic opposition to existing social arrangements. But as Marcuse and Barthes point out, bourgeois myths have eliminated this freedom; they have in• tegrated culture and social reality.^
Bourgeois myths assume a mobile and perfectible world, subject to the laws of rational, scientific inquiry, in turn, bourgeois ideology postulates a world whose order lacks crea• tive significance. Stripped of significance, this world view provokes the image of an. unchanging humanity, "characterized 57 by an indefinite repetition of its identity". Bourgeois myths, therefore, eternalize man and, in doing so, man's cultural concepts become identified with their prevailing , . 58 social realization. Since most of bourgeois culture consists only of con• sumption, how the few producers of culture perceive the re• lations between men and the world determines how the majority experience life."Practiced on a national scale, bourgeois norms are experienced as the evident laws of a natural order". Twice divorced from the process of signification, the majority of the bourgeoisie abdicate twice from the responsibility of shaping reality. The degree to which they can effect change - through ritual or other means - is minimal. Because the signification underlying social facts is obscured, public ritual merely evokes affective confirmation of what is already considered self-evident. Its generative powers can only recreate the world in its own image.
Any analysis which understands secret fraternal socie• ties as giving institutionalized expression to the American
Civil Religion must utilize the theoretical components out• lined in this chapter. Members of American secret fraterni• ties live' within a society whose civil religion has increas• ingly degenerated to the pursuit of power as an end in itself.61
Lacking power and unable to alter their society in any tangible way, fraternal members choose to confirm it through the rituals of fraternity. Their interpretation of fraternity reflects a desire to cling to the pietistic Puritan under• standing of the concept; their secrecy, however, constitutes a bid for the autonomous power of the later republican ideal. -26-
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER ONE
This debate is outlined in Donald G. Jones and Russell E.
Richey, "The Civil Religion Debate", American Civil Reli• gion, eds. Donald G. Jones and Russell E. Richey. (New
York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1974), pp. 3-18.
Representative articles are found in American Civil Reli• gion, eds. Donald G. Jones and Russell E. Richey. (New
York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1974). Additional works by John F. Wilson and Robert Bellah are cited in this thesis 1s "Selected Bibliography".
Robert Bellah, "Civil Religion in America", Daedalus, vol.
96, 1, (Winter, 1967), p. 1.
Ibid., p. 8.
Ibid.,i p. 4.
Robert Bellah, "Response to "Commentaries on Civil Religion in America'", The Religious Situation: 1968, ed. D.R. Cutler.
(Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), p. 390 .
Robert Bellah, "Civil Religion in America", Daedalus, vol.
96, 1, (Winter, 1967), pp. 6-8.
Ibid., p. 7 .
Robert Bellah, "American Civil Religion in the 1970's",
American Civil Religion, eds. Donald G. Jones and Russell
E. Richey. (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1974), p. 268. -27-
10 Martin Marty, "Two Kinds of Two Kinds of Civil Religion",
American Civil Religion, eds. Donald G. Jones and Russell
E. Richey. (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1974),
p. 143.
Robert Bellah, "Civil Religion in America", Daedalus,
vol. 96, 1, (Winter, 1967), pp. 1-21.
12 Ibid., pp. 1-21. 13
John F. Wilson, "A Historian's Approach to Civil Religion",
American Civil Religion, eds. Donald G. Jones and Russell
E. Richey. (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 19 74) ,
pp. 117-129. 14
Phillip E. Hammond, "Commentary on Civil Religion in
America", The Religious Situation: 1968, ed. D.R. Cutler.
(Boston: Beacon Press, 1968), pp. 381-388. 15
Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973) . 16
E.J. Hobsbawn, "Fraternity", New Society, vol. 27, (Novem•
ber, 1975), pp. 471-473.
17 Ibid., p. 471. 18
Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973), pp. 111-118. 19
Robert Murphy, The Dialectics of Social Life: Alarms and
Excursions in Anthropological Theory. (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1971; Morningside Edition, 1980), p. 130. -28-
20 Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973) , p. 51.
21 Ibid., p. 184.
22 Ibid., p. 190.
23 Ibid., pp. 112-132.
24 Ibid., pp. 112-132.
25 Ibid., p. 152.
26 Ibid., p. 18 2. 27
Robert Murphy, The Dialectics of Social Life: Alarms and
Excursions in Anthropological Theory. (New York: Columbia
University Press, 19 71; Morningside Edition, 19 80), p. 130. 2 8
Georg Simmel, "The Secret and the Secret Society", The
Sociology of Georg Simmel, trans., and ed. Kurt Wolff.
(Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1950), pp. 330-386. 29
Robert Murphy, The Dialectics of Social Life: Alarms and
Excursions in Anthropological Theory. (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1971; Morningside Edition, 1980), pp. 130-
131. 30 Ibid., p. 133. 31
Georg Simmel, "The Secret and the Secret Society", The
Sociology of Georg Simmel, trans, and ed. Kurt Wolff.
(Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1950), p. 330.
32 Ibid., p. 334. 33 Ibid., p. 333. -29-
34 Ibid., p. 342. 35 Ibid., p. 34 2. 36 Ibid., p. 348. 37 Ibid., p. 348. - 38 Ibid., p. 355. 39 Ibid., pp. 350 & 359. 40 Ibid., p. 371. 41 Of Simmel's commentators, only Lawrence E. Hazelrigg,
H.B. Hawthorn and, perhaps , Robert Murphy could be said to
have examined this article in detail. For their works, see
this thesis's "Selected Bibliography". 42 Arnold van Gennep, The Rites of Passage, trans. Monika B.
Vizedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee. (Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1960) . 43 Clifford Geertz, Interpretation of Cultures. (New York:
Basic Books, 19 73), p. 89. 44 Ibid., p. 93. 45 Clifford Geertz, "Thick Description: Toward an Interpretat•
ive Theory of Culture", Interpretation of Cultures.((New
York: Basic Books, 1973), pp. 3-32. 46 Victor Turner, Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action
in Human Society. (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University
Press, 1974), p. 55. 47 Clifford Geertz, "Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cock•
fight", Daedalus, vol. 101, 1, (Winter, 1972)., pp. 1-38. -30-
48 Ibid., p. 28 . 49
Arnold van Gennep, The Rites, of Passage, trans. Monika B.
Visedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee. (.Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1960). 50
Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts
of Pollution and Taboo. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul,
19661, P- 94. 51
Victor Turner, Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic
Action in Human Society. (Ithaca, New York: Cornell Uni•
versity Press, 19 74) p. 14. 52
Victor Turner, "Variations on a Theme of Limmality",
Secular Ritual, eds. Sally F. Moore and Barbara G. Myerhoff.
(Amsterdam: Van Gordum, Assen, 1977), pp. 36-52.
53 Ibid. , pp.' 36-52.
54
Roland Barthes, "Myth Today", Mythologies, trans. Annette
Lavers. (Frogmore, St. Albans, Herts, England: Granada
Publishing Limited, 1973; Paladin, 1976), pp. 109-159. 55
Roland Barthes, "Myth Today", Mythologies, trans. Annette
Lavers. (Frogmore, St. Albans, Herts, England: Granada
Publishing Limited, 1973; Paladin, 1976), p. 142.
^ Herbert Marcuse, "Remarks on a Redefinition of Culture",
Daedalus, vol. 94, 1, (.Winter, 1965), p. 192.
Roland Barthes, "Myth Today", Mythologies, trans. Annette
Lavers. (Frogmore, ST. Albans, Herts, England: Granada
Publishing Limited, 1973; Paladin, 1976), pp. 137-142. -31-
Roland Barthes, "Myth. Today", Mythologies, trans. Annette
Lavers. (Erogmore, ST. Albans, Herts, England: Granada
Publishing Limited, 19 73; Paladin, 1976), p. 142.
Herbert Marcuse, "Remarks on a Redefinition of Culture",
Daedalus, vol. 94, 1, (Winter, 1965), pp. 198-204.
Roland Barthes, "Myth Today", Mythologies, trans. Annette
Lavers. (Frogmore, St. Albans, Herts, England: Granada
Publishing Limited,- 1973; Paladin, 1976), p. 140.
Robert Bellah, "American Civil Religion in the 1970's",
American Civil Religion, eds. Donald G. Jones and Russell
E. Richey. (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1974), p. 272. -32-
CHAPTER TWO
COMPONENTS IN CONTEXT
The spectacle of a significant number of American men
meeting regularly in guarded rooms and pledging themselves "in
ambiguous and hyperbolic oaths", as buffaloes, moose, warriors,
nobles and knights is something which has occasioned more mirth
than serious discussion."'" The myths and rituals of American
secret fraternal societies generally have been dismissed as
light-hearted flummery: as a writer in Harper's Magazine once
pointed out, they merely exist to afford grown men the oppor- 2 ...
tunxty "to play Indian". Denied mythic and ritual signifi•
cance, secret fraternities usually have been analysed simply
as philanthropic and benefit organizations. Consequently,
their relation to other types of oath-bound societies has been
obscured, and their cultural significance has not been fully
explored.
Secret fraternal societies are closely related to vete•
rans 1 and hereditary organizations, and they can be considered
together as one aspect of the institutionalization of the
American Civil Religion. Founded in the decades immediately
following the Civil War, fraternal, veterans' and hereditary
groups all catered to the citizenry's delight "in meeting in
guarded rooms, and wearing spangled dresses, and calling them•
selves sachems and brothers and comrades, soldiers of Gideon 3 and Sons of Reehab". Through symbol, myth and ritual, these -33-
organizations similarly oriented their members to matters of
ci vic behaviour and meaning. Whatever their other functions may have been, they considered themselves sentinels of American
patriotism.
In order to place in perspective the similarities, and
also the differences, between fraternal, veterans' and heredi•
tary organizations, this chapter considers the genesis of
these associations against the larger backdrop of post Civil
War America. Viewed, essentially, as a response to the urbani•
zation that accompanied post-war industrialization , these
patriotic organizations are usefully considered as similar u 4 revitalization movements. At a time when America was expen- 5 encing "a profound change of direction", members of patriotic societies attempted to maintain their collective self-under- .6
standings in forms suited to their uncertain present..
Responding to and shaped by the same environment, fra•
ternal, veterans' and hereditary groups differed significantly
only insofar as their memberships and geographical locations
dictated particular interpretations of the same set of issues.
As the least exclusive of the three types of association,
fraternal societies were the least issue oriented. In order
to maintain their popular base, they necessarily presented
a more malleable .interpretation of the civil religion. Con•
sequently, more, than either veterans' or hereditary organi•
zations, they were best suited to survive the passage of time. -34-
Although. the changes which American reformers had hoped
to bring about through, the Civil W:ar were political and moral, not economic, the rapid industrialization the war encouraged
transformed the lives of many Americans, more dramatically than 7
any moral victory they may have gained. On the one hand, -
the modern . technology of .transportation and.communications
served to bring men together, encouraging the tendency toward
common thought and provoking the Impulse for associative ac-
tion. On the other hand, Individuals increasingly found
themselves bound to a commercial system which, while uniting
them in centers of trade, divided them from each other in
competition. Subject to.changes in "the market", farmers,
tradesmen and labourers all became the direct competitors of
their neighbour, a fact which threatened an already fragile 9
sense of community.
It is too easy to dub this era "The Great Barbeque" for
the security and community that were endangered by industria•
lization were also believed to be fostered by its forces.1^
In many instances, the spirit which propelled American business leaders was the same as that which inspired the
growth, of numerous and diverse humanitarian organizations.
The period of Reconstruction more properly is characterized as.
a. time of great ambiguity;.. The return to normalcy was Im•
possible. But, It was believed that the nation's wounds would be
bound and the act of Union given "normal justification and 11 meaning" through the logic of Industrial expansion . -35-
The. contradictory yearnings to restore simultaneously the old ways and advance with, the new could not be reconciled through, an appeal to the inherited creeds of the eighteenth century. Social Darwinism elevated eighteenth century liber• alism to the level of science and tied it, with little diffi- 12 culty, to nineteenth century Industrialization. Consequent• ly, while the older belief in a this-worldly fraternal commu• nity was not displaced by nineteenth century ideals, it generally.remained a vague yearning. This is true until near the end of the century, when even Industrialists were forced to acknowledge that classical liberalism could not possibly 13 lead to a fraternal Utopia.
But others had already reached, this conclusion, albeit in a hesitant and frequently faltering way. Generally without systematic programs for the creation and maintenance of a
fraternal America, the appearance of veterans' and fraternal
orders, as early as the 1860's, testifies to a wish to esta• blish a more workable balance between the old ways and the new.
Hereditary organizations, which had their large-scale begin•
nings in the 1880's, were also a manifestation of this desire.
Fraternal, veterans' and hereditary organizations all
functioned primarily to compensate for the instability and
anonymity of post-war American life. Each of these types of
association emphasized their recreational and convivial
character; and, to varying degrees, each lobbied for political
reform. Their social atmosphere proved most attractive. For veterans returning to civilian life, .meetings of the Grand Army of the Republic (established in 1866) recalled the warm com• radeship found in war. For the townsman, who wished respite from dally competition and drudgery, the lodge was "a world of 14 pure affection,, a momentary place of romance". . For belea• guered members of hereditary organizations who confronted
Increased immigration from southern and eastern Europe, the grandness of their social gatherings gave reassurance of •. 15 their own social position.
Fraternal, veterans' and' hereditary organizations all sponsored frequent lunches, dinners, conventions, lecture 16 courses and literary entertainments. Similarly, they ful• filled their social function by developing "elaborate" decor• ations and rituals, establishing auxilliary associations for their members' children and spouses, and undertaking a variety of patriotic projects.
While fraternal and veterans1 societies showed a greater interest in ritual and uniform, hereditary groups were equally zealous about their medals, and badges. On ceremonial occas,1- • ions, the Sons of the American Revolution (established in 1883) wore "a silver cross, with a gold medallion in the center, surmounted by a gold or silver eagle, the center decoration 17 being suspended from a gold ring by a blue ribbon". - Other groups had equally symbolic, although, sometimes more oblique, insignia. The Daughters of the. Revolution (established in
1890)_, for example, used the colours blue and buff - the buff -37-
supposedly was the same colour as George Washington1 s knee1-; 18 britches.
Occasionally hereditary organizations developed titles
for their members that were as "official" as the decorations
they wore. On the whole, however, only fraternal orders used
elaborate titles. Members of the Grand Army of the Republic were always "comrades", and, for a short while, according to
their degree, they were also Recruits, Soldiers and Veterans.1
But only the Ancient and Honorable Order of the Blue Goose had a Most Loyal Gander, and only the Modern Order of Praetorians 20 moved under the direction of a Sublime Augustus. ••
Ostentatious designations of degree and office, while nearly always the property of fraternal societies, were in
keeping with the rituals of both fraternal and veterans' orga• nizations. For example, neophytes in the Grand Army of the
Republic were required to kneel blindfolded before an empty
coffin decorated with a flag, skull, crossbones and crossed
sword. With their left hand on the Bible, they took their pledges. "Vowing to keep the order's secrets, extend charity
to veterans and help their comrades secure employment, ini•
tiates understood that if they broke their vows they would be 21
executed, a punishment reserved for "traitors and spies".
The use of regalia and ritual extended to the auxilliary
associations of fraternal, veterans' and hereditary organizat•
ions. Veterans' and fraternal societies had a constellation -38- of women's and youth, affiliates and hereditary groups sponsored several children's organizations. The satellites of one type of association frequently overlapped with those of another.
For example, the Loyal Order of Moose's (.established in 18 88).
Junior Order of Moose was related to the Moose Veterans '•
Association and the relationship between these groups was not unlike that between Civil-War Veterans' societies and their young men's affiliates. In turn, these associations' young people's groups somewhat resembled the Children'of the Ameri• can Revolution which was spawned by the Daughters of the
American Revolution (.established in 1890} in 1895. Although some suggested that these youth satellites merely were designed for the prosaic task of keeping the orders supplied with members, the young people's affiliates also expressed concern with the meaning of citizenship and patriotism. Patriotism was seldom well-defined but it was strenuously advocated for, as a spokeswoman for the Daughters of the American Revolution made clear, if children were properly nurtured there would be 22
"no question about national defense". '. .
Concern for the nation generally reflected their own self-interest, and, consequently, fraternal, veterans' and hereditary organizations could unite for only a few patriotic ventures. As an "emblem of unity, of loyalty to home and to kindred, and to all that is sacred in life", veneration of
the flag required only a vague sentiment of patriotic goodwill;
fraternal, veterans' and hereditary groups, therefore', parti- cipated together In the "cult of the flag"."^ Beginning in
the eighteen eighties and continuing through the nineties, hereditary groups, especially, petitioned Congress for the creation of Flag Day; they advocated compulsory saluting of
the flag within the schools; and, they also lobbied for 24
legislation prohibiting desecration of the banner. Less embroiled in the legislative repercussions of the cult, fra• ternal orders developed special rituals for Flag Day. For example, in the Elk's (established in 1866) service, three
cylindrical objects were ritually constructed to resemble the
Liberty Bell, a flag was placed atop the bell, and an address 25 on the history and meaning of American patriotism was given.
Other patriotic projects and lobbies were more partisan
in nature and reflected the interests and memberships of the specific types of association. It was commonly acknowledged
that "a list of respectable names" added to the credibility
and status of any organization and most patriotic societies,
accordingly, dotted their membership rolls with the names of
the socially significant. On the whole, however, hereditary, veterans' and fraternal groups had very different criteria for
joining.
With their strongholds in the north eastern American
states, hereditary groups were more exclusive than either veterans' or fraternal orders'. Members were required to
possess, more than pedigree: there was an "equally prime
prerequisite - that of honorable career and high social -40-
2 6 standing" . Members of hereditary.associations were gene- 27 rally well-to-do business people and professionals.' -
Although veterans and fraternal orders antedated heredi• tary organizations, few within the pedigreed clans would have joined these earlier types of association. Members of heredi• tary groups were well-educated and propertied, and their patriotism reflected this fact. Witnessing the social and economic disquiet of the 1880's and 1890's, and believing this unrest either to be caused by or aggravated by the New Immi• gration, hereditary bodies looked to their past for reassuran• ce of their present. Attachment to the ways of their ances• tors was given academic support: Sir Francis Galton's
Hereditary Genius and popular understandings of Social
Darwinism both gave reassurance of individual and national 2 8 superiority by virtue of lineage.
Convinced that they constituted the vanguard which would interpret American history so as to maintain national grandeur, hereditary associations busied themselves with two main types of projects. The first was to instruct immigrants in the ways of America. The Daughters of the American Revolution, for example, presented "a handsome silver medal to the little foreigner who (turned) out the best composition on American 29 beatitudes". Of more lasting significance was the second type of project. Preservation of historic buildings, monuments at historic sites, publication of Important correspondences, establishment of scholarships, lobbying for -university chairs of history - hereditary groups demonstrated a keen interest
30 in preserving and making American history more accessible.
While the Grand Army of the Republic's chief auxi.lli.ary, the Woman's Relief Corps, (.established in 18 83) , occasionally engaged in historical research, most veterans and their affiliates could not afford the leisure time, to be concerned with their ancient past. The rank and file of veterans' groups came from modest economic and social backgrounds. In many instances, returning, veterans had little formal education
and lacked specific work skills. More than anything, they needed to gain economic security.
In this respect, veterans' groups resembled the strictly
rural Order of the Knights of Husbandry (established in 186 8) .
The Grange and the veterans both understood themselves as
deserving government favour, and they both lobbied for parti•
cular economic advantages.. In return for their Civil War ser•
vice, veterans expected laws of preference, improved pensions, 32
homesteading privileges and homes for orphans and the aged.
The fact that they were petitioning for special compen•
sation did not incline the veterans to sympathize with others
also looking for reform. They, and their progeny, firmly
believed that the vertical channels of society were open to
those who possessed the proper qualifications and ability to
persevere. This was the conviction that girded the fraternal
orders. For veterans' offspring, who were less likely than
their fathers to benefit from government aid, their auxllla- -42- ri.es. and fraternal societies were parallel bodies.
Economic self-help without government protection was an- aim of both, fraternal and veterans' societies/, and to this end, they both, emphasized benefit schemes that offered finan- cial compensation in times of sickness and at death. In order to compete more successfully with such fraternal bodies as The Royal Arcanum (.established in 1877) , the Sons of Vete• rans (established in 189 0). discussed the merits of introducing massive insurance programs.. This idea was dismissed in the
1890's but numerous fraternal societies came to focus prima•
rily on their insurance programs. The Ben Hur Life Insurance
Company, for example, was originally a fraternal body.
Even though, numerous fraternal societies eventually
abandoned their ritual and became insurance companies, secret
fraternities, more than veterans' and hereditary groups, were
built to survive. Existing independently of the men's asso•
ciations, many members of the women's hereditary organizations
moved with, the crest of the suffragetemovement and, in many 34
instances, abandoned their D.A.R. and Colonial Dames ties.
The fraternity of the veterans was dependent on participation
in the Civil War, and as succeeding generations grew up
without that experience, the veterans' societies slowly
dissolved, to be replaced by orders commemorating other wars.
The fraternity of secret fraternal lodges was less ex•
clusive and more amorphous than either veterans' or hereditary
organizations; and, In this final section, the character of -43-
this fraternity Is examined. Criteria for membership, the
nature of fraternal ritual and the position of secret frater•
nities on political issues are considered.
Believing they provided an outlet for those "ambitions
for precedence" which American life fostered and stimulated
"without adequate provision for gratification"., Walter B. Hill
once described secret fraternal societies as "The Great '".35
American Safety-Valve" . • • "The Golden Age of Fraternity" was
a popular and uncertain response to the essential ambiguity of
post Civil War American society . On one hand, members of
fraternal associations consciously upheld existing social
values -.they applauded rugged individualism and opposed 3 7
government; regulation of business . . On the other hand, mem•
bers of fraternal groups felt the need for a pietistic brotherhood. Subject to social and economic dislocation,
their understanding of fraternity reflected William Summer's
conviction that the present life offered "only a 'martyrdom of 3 8 man' in the interest of future generations".
The nature of lodge fraternity is well exemplified in the teachings of "Elkology", and a brief outline of Elk doctrine illuminates the philosophy underlining fraternal criteria for membership.^ Elkology was a religion that was
"free, not creed-bound; scientific, not dogmatic; spiritual, not traditional; universal, not sectarian". Elkology, in short, reflected a popular -understanding of nineteenth, century liberal thought. However, it was an understanding that was -44- robbed of any grim overtones for, more than a theory, of God,
Elkolotjy was the "new application oi his existence". As a fount of love, whose attributes were helpfulness, and happiness, the God of the Elks lived within and about all of life.
Through, degrees of Enlightenment, men came to know this God and to understand that he formed the core, of their being. The responsibility of practical brotherhood became realized, and it was extended to all for "sin is only a term applied to ignorant good". .
Fraternal organizations, consequently, believed the doors of their orders were wide open. As a spokesman for the
Loyal Order of Moose (established in 1888) made clear, "no social station of life is too high, none too low for member• ship in the Moose ... men ... meet equally ... enlisted in the • 40 great human cause of Moose". . In reality, there were several stipulations for joining. Fraternity was. impossible without the conviction of a deity, and members were required to state their belief in a Supreme Being. Practical concerns for daily living also intruded in the selection process. "Foreigners" - the appellation generally applying to all non Caucasians - were excluded. Caucasians had built and sustained the nation
God had blessed; immigrants threatened to destroy the coun- 41 try's institutions. The destitute and the infirm were also excluded. In order to .maintain their benefit schemes, fra•
ternal orders required members who could pay their dues; they
also needed reassurance that particular individuals would not -45- 42 drain, their coffers to the deteriment of other members.
All candidates were examined for eligibility before they were inducted Into the mysteries of the various orders. For
example, the sachem of the Improved Order of Red Men (.esta•
blished In 1833) dispatched his chief of records, to an ante-.,
room to examine the candidate. Only when he had received
appropriate answers to his questions, did the official permit
the neophyte to proceed with initiation.4^
In initiation the neophyte "journeyed" from the profane
world to the realm of the sacred. He was a "pilgrim in search
of light", a "weary traveller in the wilderness", an "alien
far from his own shores", a "lost waif toiling the Elysian
fields". His travels were not easy. "A series of perambula•
tions around the lodge room" could be a trek over hot sands or
a cake of ice; it could be an odyssey through the enemy's camp;
it could be a perilous ascent of Mount Olympus. Pitfalls
existed at every turn. Sometimes the neophyte was lowered into
a mattressed grave and mourned as lost before miraculously
being brought back to life. Lodge members sometimes assumed
the role of ruffians and subjected the initiate to great indig•
nities, challenging him to defend his journey. Sometimes they
personified the vices and the weary pilgrim was made to avoid
great temptation. Only if these pitfalls were avoided could
the initiate hope to complete his pilgrimage and gain member- 44 ship in the order. Having, demonstrated the qualities of a warrior, or a
knight, or a wild beast, the initiate was brought finally
into the light. "Unleash the sixty watts of every frosted bulb on .Mount Olympus". I.n the Ancient Arabic Order of
Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, the neophyte "is then introduced
to the Grand Potentate, whom he is commanded to approach with humble and great reverence, stooping low on his knees, his head near the ground, his' buttocks elevated, where he receives
the "Grand Salaam", that is a blow on his buttocks". After
this stroke of introduction, he is Introduced to the Grand
Potentate, "hear whom there is a Galvanic Battery (.under the carpet) that when the candidate is introduced to the Grand 45
Potentate he receives, a severe electrical shock".. •
What was the nature of these esoteric truths, gained at such cost and symbolized in the flicking of a light switch?
In initiation the candidate entered the mysteries of chivalry, charity, hope, patriotism and fraternal brotherhood. Depending on his choice of lodge, he learnt the meaning behind such stories as King Arthur and his knightly court, the Good
Samaritan, suffering Job, the unknown soldier and Valley Forge,
David and Jonathan, Damon and.Pythias whose love was stronger 46 than death, and a cautionary analysis of Caxn and Abel.
The practical application of these mysteries usually was confined to participation in benefit schemes and charitable undertaking within the lodge. It also included such platltu- dinous promises, as "I will never... voluntarily disturb the
domestic relations of a brother Knight" and "X will always ..
endeavour to warn him of any: danger which I may know to 4 7
threaten him or his family". It did not entail committment
to specific economic and political ideologies. .
Few fraternal societies actively petitioned for govern• ment reform. Most discouraged political discussion, and the Improved Order of Red Men went so far as to foreswear politics 48
entirely. Emphasizing Instead personal virtues and congeni•
ality, the lodges, at least unconsciously, recognized that
their fraternity was too weak "to compete with the other 49
loyalties and the Individualized purposes of men".
The proliferation of fraternal, veterans' and hereditary organizations in the years between 1865 and 1890 represented
an ambiguous response to the economic and social disquiet that resulted from rapid post-war industrialization. Although it was believedthat the mechanisms of the industrial order would give meaning to the act of Union and eventually lead to the realization of a national fraternity, this belief, for many,
appeared without substance. Variously confronted with the
anonymity of urban life, the constant?^ threat of unemployment,
the changes wrought by increased immigration and changes in
immigration patterns, members of fraternal, veterans' and hereditary organizations attempted to maintain a sense of
continuity by accommodating the myths of their past to their
present circumstances. -48-
Unlike members of veterans' or hereditary associations, however, those who joined secret fraternal societies had no concrete basis for fraternity. They had not participated in the war that had made America indivisible. Neither could they claim kinship with those who had founded the great nation.
Those who joined fraternal societies had a less specific role in their country's providential history. Divided by the for• ces of industrialization that, ostensibly, were to unite them, they could allow only the vaguest of fraternal understandings.
The grandness of their ritual and decoration compensated for the fraternity they could not afford. "For all their Joves and Neptunes , their rituals and myths of gay dogs who have left their wives at home" what were members of fraternal
5 orders "but homesick tribesmen hunting for their lost clans?" -49-
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER TWO
Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty •Million Brothers: A Panorama
of American .Lodges: and Clubs. (New York: Farrar and Rine•
hart, Inc., 193 7), pp.. 3-4.
Charles Merz, "Sweet Land of Secrecy: The Strange Spectacle of American Fraternalism", Harper's Magazine, vol. 154,
(Feb. 19 27), p. 334.
Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade: The Story of
Veterans' and Hereditary Organizations in America, 1773-1900.
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955), p. 123.
See Arthur M. Schlesinger Sr., "Biography of a Nation of
Joiners", American Historical Review, vol. 50, no. 1,
(Oct. 19 44) , pp. 1-25.
Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973), p. 373.
For a discussion of the American Civil Religion as a revi•
talization movement see John F. Wilson, Public Religion in
America (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1979) ,
pp.:16 5-173.
Wilson Carey McWilliams:,: The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: "University of California Press,
1973) , p. 372. -50-
Arthur M. Schlesinger Sr., "Biography of a Nation of Joi•
ners", American Historical Review, vol. 50, no. 1, (Oct.
1944)., p. 16.
Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973), p. 372.
10 Havana Mumford Jones, The Age of Energy: Varieties of Ame•
rican Experience, 1865-1915. (New York: The Viking Press,
1971), p. 9.
11 Wilson Carey McWilliam, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973) , p. 373.
12 Ibid, p. 381.
13 Ibid, p. 378.
14 Ibid, p. 379.
15 Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade: Veterans' and
Hereditary organizations in America, 1783-1900. (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1955), pp. 119-138.
16 Wallace Davies describes in detail the various social as•
pects of veterans' and hereditary societies. All litera•
ture on fraternal organizations used in this chapter dis•
cusses the conviviality of lodge life. -51ft
17 Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade: Veterans' and
Hereditary Organizations in America, 1783-1900. (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1955), p. 136.
18 Ibid, p. 137.
19 Ibid, p. 123.
20 For a list of some of the more extravagant titles of office
see Howard S. Benedict, "Brethren, the Neophyte Waits
Without", The Nation, vol. 120, (April, 1925), p. 405.
21 Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade: Veterans' and
Hereditary Organizations in America, 1783-1900. (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1955), p. 123. For an account of
a United Spanish War Veterans' initiation see Howard S.
Benedict, "Brethren, the Neophyte Waits Without", The
Nation, vol. 120, (April, 1925), pp. 403-404.
22 Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty Million Brothers: A Panorama of
American Lodges and Clubs. (New York: Farrar and Rinehart,
1937) pp. 205-206.
23 For a discussion of veterans' and hereditary organizations
in relation to this cult see Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism
on Parade: Veterans' and Hereditary organizations in Ameri•
ca, 1783-1900. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955),
pp. 218-226. For the rituals of fraternal societies see
Noel Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Fraterna-
lism in the United States. (Columbia, Mo.: The University -52-
of Missouri Press, 1940), pp. 110-111.
24 Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade: Veterans' and
Hereditary Organizations in America, 1783-1900. (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1955), pp. 211-222.
25 Ibid., p. 110.
26 Ibid., p. 79.
27
Not always employed, members of women's hereditary organi•
zations were usually affluent.
2 8
Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade': Veterans ' and
Hereditary Organizations in America, 1783-1900. (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1955), p. 48. 29 Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty Million Brothers: A Panorama of American Lodges and Clubs. (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc., 1937) , p. 206. 30 ... Ibid., pp. 263-280. See also Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism
on Parade: Veterans' and Hereditary Organizations in Ameri•
ca, 1783-1790. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955),
pp. 215-249.
Wallace E. Davies discusses extensively veterans' partici•
pation in politics.
32 Ibid., pp. 123-125. Also see. all literature on fraternal
societies used in this chapter. An interesting discussion of the transition from fraternal to insurance organization is foxind in Glaf Johnson, Con• version of the Fraternal Society into an Old-Line Company:
Advisability, Tendency, • Objections. (Los Angeles, National
Convention of Insurance Commissioners, 1926).
Wallace E. Davies, Patriotism on Parade: Veterans' and
Hereditary Organizations in America, 1783-1900. (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1955), pp. 283-285.
Walter B. Hill, "The Great American Safety-Valve", Century, vol. 44, (1892), p. 383.
W.S. Harwood, "Secret Societies in the United States",
North American Review, vol. 164, (1897), pp. 622-623.
Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal
Order of Moose. (New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 19 52) , pp.
198-225.
William Sumner cited by Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles, Univer sity of California Press, 1973), p. 381.
Seattle Daily Times, cited by Arthur Preuss, A Dictionary of Secretand Other Societies. (St. Louis: B. Herder Co,
1924), p. 62.
Noel Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Fraterna• lism in the United States. (Columbia, Mo.: The University 6
Missouri Press, 19 40), p. 134. -54-
This is a recurring theme in the early literature of fra• ternal societies.
Occasionally physically disabled individuals were invited to join the lodges. These people were well-known. They were "social" members only.
Noel Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Fraterna- lism in the United States. (Columbia, Mo.: The University of Missouri Press, 19 40), p. 86.
This information is taken from a variety of sources. How• ever, Gist gives a succinct outline of several initiation patterns. See pp. 80-10 2.
Howard Benedict, "Brethren, the Neophyte Waits Without",
The Nation, vol. 120, (April, 1925), p. 403.
Noel Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Fraterna- lism in the United States. (Columbia, Mo.: The University of Missouri Press, 1940), pp. 80-102.
Noel Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Fraterna- lism in the United States. (Columbia, Mo.: The University of Missouri Press, 1940), p. 94.
Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty Million Brothers: A Panorama of
American Lodges and Clubs). (New York: Farrar and Rinehart,
Inc., 1937), p. 356. -55-
Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America.
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1973), p. 379.
Charles Merz, "Halt Who Goes There?", The New Republic, vol. 35, (Aug., 1923), p. 328. -56-
CHAPTER THREE
HISTORICAL CONFIRMATION
In 19 23, Frank E. Campbell came to the conclusion that if he was to find an unused totem for his fledgling secret fraternal society, it would be necessary to turn from the animal kingdom to the field of botany. Campbell was the founder of Bunch No. 1 of the Order of Bananas. By the
1920's, there existed fraternal orders of Bears, Beavers,
Buffaloes, Blue Geese, Bugs, Camels, Deer, Dogs, Eagles,
Elks, Fleas, Goats, Larks, Lions, Moose, Mules, Owls, Rein• deer and White Rabbits. The animal kingdom nearly was deple• ted.^ Clearly, the associative impulse had fed upon itself.
It also had provoked the mirth of onlookers who, in turn, tweaked the serious societies with associations such as the 2
Concatenated Order of Hoo-Hoo.
The history of most of these organizations is brief and inconsequential. Three of the animal orders, however, have withstood the test of time. In the late nineteen seventies, the Fraternal Order of Eagles, the Benevolent and Protective
Order of Elks and the Loyal Order of Moose had a combined membership of three and a half million. Among their numbers, they counted Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Richard Daley and 3 J. Edgar Hoover. -57-
These three orders survived because they successfully transformed their fraternal self-understanding to accommodate, and reflect, changes in the popular understanding of the
American Civil Religion. In order to keep apace with the times, the Elks, Eagles and Moose all altered their secret rituals, their social and benevolent concerns, and their rela• tions to outsiders. The similar development and transformation of these organizations is the subject of this chapter.
Originally known as the "Jolly Corks", the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks was founded in New York in 1866 by an actor named Charles Algernon Vivian. Vivian and his theatre cohorts banded together to sidestep a law which closed the saloons on Sunday: they rented a room, bought an ample supply of liquor each Saturday and met at the week's end to revel in their drink and each other's company. Their high-
jinks became well-known and others joined their weekly meetings.
In 1868, the name Elks was chosen and the group's first con•
stitution was drawn up. Its preamble stated that the organi•
zation intended to "promote, protect and enhance the welfare 4 and happiness" of all Elks.
The great success of the Elks doubtless was an influence
in the decisions to organize the Loyal Order of Moose and the
Fraternal Order of Eagles. The first Moose was a physician
from Louisville, Kentucky. In 1888, John Henry Wilson decided
to create a secret fraternal society that would combine the -58-
"religious fervour" of the Knights of Pythias and the "fun
and games" of the Elks. He founded a social organization he
called the Loyal Order of Moose. Ten years later, a small
group of Seattle, Washington theatre owners decided to form a
similar organization. Their object was "fun". Under the
leadership of John Cort, the "Seattle Order of Good Times"
came into existence. Shortly after, the "Order of Good Times" was renamed the Fraternal Order of Eagles.
Although thirty-two years separate the birth of the
first and last of this trio of animal organizations, the early
history of all three associations is remarkably similar.
Until the beginning years of the twentieth century, the Elks,
the Moose and, obviously to a lesser degree, the Eagles all
responded to the same issues that confronted their country's
intellectual and spiritual leaders. In the post Civil War.
years a synthetic fraternity had been maintained by the belief
that industrial expansion eventually would redeem the nation.
In the closing decades of the century, however, this convic•
tion increasingly was threatened by the social and economic
tensions wrought by classical laissez-faire and the general
failure of liberal principles. The introduction of progressi•
ve ideologies proved a panacea for this downward spiral, and
it is significant, therefore, that the older orders of the
Elk and Moose date their modern \history from the beginning
years of the twentieth century.6 Progressivism brought a new -59- emphasis to the American Civil Religion. The adoption of this emphasis was a turning point within all three fraternal orders.
The relentless intrusion of economic and social crises
in the 1880's and 1890's seriously undermined America's com• placent trust in the unfettered mechanisms of the industrial order. The formation of labour parties and the bloodiness of
strike-busting, the ugliness of the cities and the blight of poverty, the call for more stringent immigration regulations,
and the beginnings of the Social Gospel all were symptomatic
of a progress which had gone astray. The effects of indus•
trialization appeared the antithesis of fraternity. American
reformers, however, were too well trained in the liberal
tradition to abandon its precepts. Instead, they attempted to
discover a "new formula" which would reconcile the fraternity 8
of equality with the liberty of individualism.
The progressives laid a new emphasis on the Enlighten•
ment teaching that change affirms the fraternal destiny of man
by indicating a willingness to abandon the confines of insti•
tutions merely developed to solve proximate concerns. The
progressives moved beyond their predecessors: they asserted
that existing institutions had run their course. Claiming
that industrial monopolies had robbed man of individual ini•
tiative as well as community, the progressives demanded that
universal solidarity become "the means as well as the end of
progress". The progressives believed that if the tyranny of
monopolies and political parties was eliminated, the distinc- -60- tions separating men also would vanish. Without the inter• vention of "artificial"' secondary groups, the nation would assume the qualities of a primary group. Guided by the ethic of service, the citizenry, would merge into an undifferentia-
9 ted fraternal whole.
Popular understandings of progressive doctrine penetra•
ted and transformed the societies of the Elks, Eagles and
Moose. They became characterized by their belief in service,
their pride in nationhood and their understanding of the need
for government regulation of some aspects of life. While the
superficial optimism that accompanied Union coalesced imper•
ceptibly with increased sentiments of nationalism, the empha•
sis on service and the awareness of the possibilities of
government regulation marked a new self-consciousness on the
part of the lodges. This self-consciousness manifested itself
in the rituals and benevolent projects of the orders, and both
proved an enticement for "joining".
Between 1890 and 1905, the Elks modified their ritual
considerably. In 1890, the number of degrees required for
full membership was reduced from two to one. Then to quote
an Elk historian: "The apron went in 189 5. The 'secret pass•
word' expired in 1899. The badge and grip died natural deaths
in 1902 and 1904 respectively. The test oath and a few other
extraneous things disappeared and the Elks began to be them•
selves and look less like a cross between the Masons and a college f raternity" .J "u Initiation came to be conducted with dignity and decorum. Devoid of any features which would em• barrass or annoy the candidate, it no longer subjected him "to ridicule or to any discomfort, physical or •mental":.11
This new propriety stood in marked contrast with earlier
Elk ritual. In the order's beginning years, initiation fre• quently had been a terrifying and humiliating experience.
"You were led into the lodge blindfolded, and that blindfold remained on until after you had taken the oath ... Following that you were seated, and suddenly the door opened and six robed figures, sometimes carrying candles, entered the room, bearing a coffin. This was placed in a suitable position ... before the altar. Now entered another robed figure, who began to intone ... 'To him, who in the love of nature holds commu• nion with her visible forms' ... When it was finished the coffin was carried from the room and the initiation was over.
Well, not quite over!'. There remained the final degree and
"it was fun for the brothers who looked on". For example,
in the branding process, the new member was flung blindfolded
to the floor where he could feel the heat of a poker and smell
the burning flesh of a piece of steak. His belly was cauteri- 12
zed with ice, and a rubber stamp was applied.
The gradual elimination of such pomposity and indignities was significant. In the period of Reconstruction, secret fra•
ternal rituals had reconciled successfully the promised
grandeur of industrialization and the nostalgic yearning for -62-
"the old community". The inherited fraternal synthesis had not eroded sufficiently so that men doubted their ability to be lions and tigers; and community still existed to a degree that challenges to these aspirations remained relatively un• known. However, as the problems of daily living became more and more acute, the old assumptions slowly died. Unable to
recapture a lost fraternity, and equally unable to wait for
the fulfillment of a "fraternal destiny",men turned to a more
immediate brotherhood. They adopted the ethic of protective
service. Lacking the distinction "between warmth generally
and fraternity specifically", this new brotherhood emphasized 13 • harmony and solidarity, not conflict. The modified rituals
of the lodges gave expression to this new fraternal under•
standing.
To facilitate a more practical brotherhood, it was ne•
cessary to broaden and more firmly regulate the payment of
fraternal benefits. No longer was it feasible to keep direct
assessments within the local lodge: in times of extreme hard•
ship, payment of benefits threatened lodge solvency; and in•
creased levies and reduced aid were only self-defeating mea•
sures by which to stave off bankruptcy. The Elks, Eagles and
Moose never considered insurance to be their principal raison-
d'etre, and in this respect, they differed fundamentally from
the specifically fraternal benefit societies. The benefit
societies, however, provided an organizational example which -63-
the three animal orders emulated. By 1906, the Elks, Eagles and Moose all had a three tiered system of representational
government (national, state and local) which co-ordinated and 14 more equitably distributed sick and funereal benefits.
In 1886, representatives of sixteen fraternal benefit societies met in Washington as founders of the National Fra•
ternal Congress. They joined together "to obtain sympathetic
supervision by state insurance departments and constructive
legislation from state legislatures and Congress" and to
obtain laws defining the scope of their operations in order
to protect their reputations "from the odium raised by 15
fraudulents". The Elks were the only organization of the
animal trio that existed in 1886, and it did not participate
in the activities of the Congress. Still, the two objectives
stressed by the N.F.C. came to permeate and influence the
social concerns of all three animal orders. First, there was
an awareness that local concerns could be realized by appeal•
ing to stronger regulatory powers existing beyond the local
level. Second, there was the realization that government
regulation could alleviate the suffering of well-intended
groups whose misfortune was undeserved.
From its early days, the Fraternal Order of Eagles
realized its voting strength and the potential political
influence which accompanied it. In 190 8, the Eagles sponsored
America's first mother's pension law, the first of a series of
bills whose proposals included workmen's compensation, the -64-
eli.nri.nation of the poor house and old age pensions."1" The spirit underlying these proposals is illustrated in a news• paper article., "Why Eagles Champion the Cause of the Aged."
Written at a later date, it still reflects the earlier senti• ment: "These workers grown old are not idlers. They are not spendthrifts or degenerates. They are simply victims of an economic system ... with no surplus for the evil day when the 17 earning capacity has ceased".
The Elks, Eagles and Moose all considered distressed women and children to be deserving of their benevolence. Sig• nificantly, when the languishing Moose were revived under the skilled direction of "Our Jim" Davis in 1906, attention 18 quickly focused on the possibility of creating mooseheart.
First thought of in 1909, and only a circus tent in a field by
1913, Mooseheart is now an incorporated village covering 1200
acres near Aurora, Illinois. Providing a home for widows and orphans of deceased Moose, Mooseheart grew from the early
dream to create an "educational institution for the training
and instruction of the orphans and children of this order and 19
such others as may enter". In the scaled down ritual of
the Loyal Order of Moose, there is provision for the "Nine
O'clock Ceremony". With bowed heads and folded arms, members
turn toward Mooseheart. Silently they pray1: "'Suffer little
children to come unto me and forbid them not for such is the 20 Kingdom of Heaven'. God bless Mooseheart". -65-
The security of Mooseheart, the enticement of protecti• ve benefit schemes, a growing participation in community affairs, and the introduction of rituals suited to the tone of the age all encouraged the rapid growth of the Moose, Elks and Eagles. In 189 3, only 1000 Moose met at fifteen Watering
Places; by 1910, the herd numbered 100,000.21 In the same
22 year, there were nearly 30 5,000 Elks. Quickly expanding, 23 in 1919-, there were 329,000 men belonging to Eagle Aeries.
Although this dramatic increase in membership levelled off during the years Of the first world war, the animal trio continued to prosper. Building on the foundations of their old beliefs, the orders found new meaning and purpose. The
Elks, Eagles and Moose all agreed with President Wilson who argued that: "From the beginning, the first thought of the people of the United States turned to something more than winning this war. Sociologist W. Lloyd Warner had argued convincingly that it is in times of war that the "average" American living in small towns and cities "gets his deepest satisfactions as a -66- member of his society".'"3 Wax activities strengthen communi• ty integration: systematically organized into groups where everyone is: involved and In which "there is an intense aware• ness of oneness", community also is increased by feelings of strength and autonomy brought about by competition in war • • 27 activities with neighbouring communities". The animal trio's sense of .their own importance was strengthened by the belief that their sacrifices were for the common good of the nation. Fultz proudly recounts that In Olympia, Washington "community singing was a great morale builder in the war bond drive; ... 'There's a Long, Long Trail a 'Winding1. 'Tipperary', and 'Smiles' [were heard] in the Lodge meetings ... and outdoors in the drives; the Elks band was available whenever called 2 6 upon". As well, with the aid of scores of Elks wives, tons of absorbent vegetation were dried and sacked and forwarded to the medical corps in France, "to soak up the blood of the 29 wounded dough-boys". In 19 25, the Fraternal Order of Eagles could look back with pride on the fact that 50,000 Eagles had joined the ranks of the military. The organization could remind its members that the Grand Aerie had voted unanimously to pay the dues of members in service. It could also point to its "Patriotic Fund" which had dispensed one and a half million dollars - one thousand dollars to each child whose Eagle father had surrendered his life to protect"the American Way".30 -6 7- However, the return of the "dough-boys" brought with it a new set of problems for the lodges. Randolph Bourne descri• bed the crisis of the nineteen-twenties as the need to choose between a "'trans-national America' united by values which included but transcended cultural diversity, and a sub-natio- 31 nal America, a society of isolated and anxious mass men". But for America to be "trans-national" it was necessary that there be lesser nations, smaller communities and fraternities, 32 and these rapidly were eroding. The nation and the state, which had been one during the war, were again separated; and the impersonal power of the Machine threatened to de-stabilize even the community found in family. It was an era when "human society was transformed between the infancy and old age of an average man. The urban dweller born in an era of coal-oil lamps, horse cars, and four story buildings died amidst the roar and rumble of a city of incon- 33 descent lighting,.'automobiles and skycrapers". It was a time when mechanization freed women from many of their traditional household responsibilities. It was also an age when mechaniza• tion seriously affected more than the externals of life. The principle of standardization, vital for Industrial efficiency, became one of the animating principles of society. "Standardi• zed newspapers, magazines, books, movies, plays [caused people] not only to use the same slang, sing the same melodies, and wear the same clothes, but even to feel the same emotions and 34 think the same thoughts". -6 8- Standardization impelled men to embrace the myths of their age for, in diminishing individuality, it narrowed the possibilities: for alternative world-views. There were few who challenged America's fraternal destiny: most continued to affirm their fundamental brotherhood: and, of necessity, they averted their eyes from the increased social anonymity and growing economic differences that made even local community impossible. As McWilliams comments, if the twenties "roared" it was because silence was unbearable and speech no longer was 35 able to build the bridge of communion between men. The twenties, therefore, was the decade that most lodges lurched silently to their deaths - slowly killed by the more private 36 attractions of the automobile,radio and cinema. Unlike their more unfortunate counterparts, the Elks, Eagles, and Moose endured, experiencing decline only with the advent of the depression. The animal trio survived because they shifted their fraternal emphasis to reflect the dominant mood of the age: through talent nights and interlodge compe• tition, they offered their members opportunities for self- aggrandizement; and through increased philanthropic activity, they established a strong sense of community that did not threaten members' individualized and private concerns. Fitness classes, reports on member's holidays, glee clubs, minstrel shows', vaudeville nights, and "live-wire" clubs, which were designed to increase membership In competi- tion with other lodges, all came to play an important role in the lives of the Eagles, Elks and Moose- Band and drill con• tests were Instituted at the state level, the result being "An Increased interest felt by the individual members In 37 their own lodge activities" . Of the various mterlodge ac• tivities, ritual contests were most popular for, in addition to the satisfaction of winning, victory frequently was recog• nized with pennants, cups, trophies and cash awards. This thrust for social recognition carried over to the philanthropic activities of the orders. The Elks, for exam• ple, were advised to publicize their acts of benevolence, not of course to "partake of a boast, but rather to afford inform- 3 8 ation which the public is always eager to have". The nature and spirit of the orders' philanthrophy remained much the same. The Moose instituted Moosehaven near Jacksonville, Florida, a village "Where Life Begins" for elderly Moose and 39 their spouses. The Eagles continued to labour for the old- age pension; and the Elks became engaged in helping disabled children, setting aside the first Monday of August as "Crippled 40 Kiddies Day". The belief persisted that anybody could be• come somebody merely by exerting enough effort, but, for those whose inability was apparent, help should be offered. More than the other two orders, the Moose succeeded in ferret.ting out human abilities: in order to avoid the Ignominy of chari• ty, those inhabitants of Moosehaven who were unable to work were given the title "Sunshiners" and an accompanying wage 41 for brightening up the days of others. Although In many ways succumbing to the forces of their age, the animal trio persisted in maintaining the sanctity of the home. Refusing to allow their last bastion of community to be undermined, they established a variety of benevolent programs, social activities, and rituals which were designed to safeguard family unity. Youth clubs and scouting groups inculcated the duties of citizenship; educational trusts provided access to higher learning and incentive to demonstra• te individual worth; dinners and picnics brought families to• gether; and the dignity of motherhood was loudly proclaimed. Mother's Day, first suggested in 1904 by Eagle Magazine editor Frank Hering, came to be celebrated by all three orders. As explained in an Eagle publication^ " ... to all civilized men, since the dawn of human understanding, every day has been and always will be 'Mother's Day'. ... God gave us mothers that we 42 might understand". If men found themselves ineffective in the course of daily living, the lodges restored a sense of equilibrium by reminding them of their power and responsibility to preserve the family unit. In a poem entitled "From the Heart of a Child", published at a time when the Eagle's fledgling insu• rance program was flagging, the responsibility of fatherhood is clearly outlined: -71- Mary1s Daddy left insurance And their home will still be theirs. They're not hungry. Sometimes Mary gives me cast-off clothes she wears. They don't have to take in sewing. Mary's Momma doesn't cry For her Daddy left insurance But you didn't Daddy - why?43 In the nineteen thirties, the animal trio continued to maintain the Holy Grail of family. However, their fraternal emphasis again switched focus as socialism and communism came to be identified as the villians which threatened the "Ameri• can Way of Life". The "Americanization" work of the Elks came to stress not only the virtues of citizenship but also the perils of communism. In 1937 Charles Spencer, the Grand Exalted Ruler of the-Elks, denounced the American Federation of Teachers as "communists", as he believed they-threatened to subvert 44 the character of the country's.youth. The Eagles agreed with Spencer's pronouncement, and to do their part in battling the foe they instituted their own "Americanization" 45 committee. In pinning down an external enemy, the animal orders successfully diverted attention from their actual cultural dilemma. The effects of the depression took a heavy toll, and the task of rebuilding the economy forced many lodge members -72- to abandon themselves more completely to the business ethic. Business became the basis for brotherhood, and lodge members were encouraged to advertise in the orders 1 newspapers in order to tap new markets. Failure to applaud the "modern business creed" was considered Tan-American; it allowed the communists to make a mockery of American capitalism. The need to adopt the business creed and halt the inroads of communism was given expression In Orpheus C. Soot's poem, "Buy American": To stop the growth of poverty In this land that gave us liberty We pledge support in word and deed To that great cause of pressing need Buy American. No longer shall our tribute be To Alien lands beyond the sea But favour first our U.S.A. And always we will gladly say Buy American^6 In succumbing whole-heartedly to the business ethic, the lodges lost their already precarious basis for fraternity. Fraternity required a tension between the animal trio's under• standing of American destiny and the nation's present form. None existed. The animal orders did not regard the New Deal policies which propped up vast sections of the economy as a sign of the failure of liberal policies. Rather, for them, the New Deal demonstrated that "the goals of material progress and the mastery of nature" could be made to walk parallel -73- courses with fraternity and community . "*' In 1939, it was reported to the secretary of the Seattle Eagles that several brothers had been overheard discussing Aerie affairs in public places, and In some Instances in front of non-members. The secretary pronounced such discussions "both distasteful and degrading". He continued to state that, although the order no longer stressed secrecy to the degree it had previously, discretion was still necessary in order to 48 honour the Eagle vows. The indiscretions of these few Eagle members were symptomatic of a greater change within the animal orders. In retrospect, Charles Fultz points to 1940 as the year the Elks became a club rather than a lodge, the activities of the trustees assuming greater importance than 49 the plans of the Exalted Ruler. Without a basis for fraternity, the Eagles, Elks and Moose increasingly assumed the character of working mens1 50 "country-clubs". Membership no longer signified a recognized equality made humble by shared vision. It became a symbol of self worth. Lacking a common purpose with which to transform society, the animal orders came only to confirm it. Philanthropic activity remained a mainstay of the three associations, compassion providing solidarity without the challenges of fraternal brotherhood. Cancer research, cere• bral palsy research, the Heart fund, the March of Dimes, the Red ;Cross, and the Boy Scouts all receive support from at least -74- one of the animal orders. Given their large memberships and the nature of their philanthrophy, it is not surprising that political leaders have sought membership in the Elks, Eagles and Moose. Where the American Dream Is not questioned, they, no doubt, receive much support. -75- FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER THREE 1 Howard S. Benedict, "Brethren, the Neophyte Waits Without", The Nation, vol. 120 (April, 1925), p. 405. 2 For a discussion of the burlesque orders see Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty Million Brothers: A Panorama of American Lodges and Clubs. (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc., 1937), pp. 336-348. 3 Alvm J. Schmidt, Fraternal Organizations. (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 19B0) , pp. 94-97; 100-105; 220-223. 4 Ibid., p. 101. 5 Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal Order of Moose. (New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 1952), p.27. ^ Hollis B. Fultz, Elkdom in Olympia: A History. (Olympia, Washington: Press of Warren's Quick Print, 1966) , p. 29; Alvin J. Schmidt, Fraternal Organizations. (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 19 80), p. 10 2; Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The story of the Loyal Order of Moose. (New York: E;P. Dutton and Co., 1952), p. 27. 7 For a discussion of the effects of industrialization and the beginning of the Social Gospel see Henry F. May, Protestant Churches and Industrial America. (New York: Harper and Row, 1949), pp. 191-224. This is also a theme found in Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berke• ley and Los Angeles: University of California Press,1973), pp. 469-483. -76- Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1973) , p. 473. 9 Ibid., pp. 4 83-490.. Fehrenbach cited by Alvin J. Schmidt, Fraternal Organiza• tions . (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1980), p. 102. The apron was originally a Masonic symbol. It ha% been adopted by several orders. Made of lambskin, it is a symbol of innocence. What it Means to be an Elk, cited by William J. Whalen, Handbook of Secret Organizations. (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Co., 1966), p. 34. 12 Initiation rituals varied somewhat from lodge to lodge. This account is given by Hollis B. Fultz, Elkdom in Olympiad A History. (Olympia, Washington: Press of Warren's Quick Print, 1966), pp. 45-46. 13 Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1973), p. 481. 14 See Walter Basye, History and Operation of Fraternal Insuran- ce (Rochester, N.Y.: The Fraternal Moniter, 1919)., pp. 41-57. 15 Ibid., pp. 74-75. -77- Although- the momentum for these bills gained momentum over time, Eagle application forms give these dates. "Why Eagles Champion the Cause of the Aged", Seattle (Washington); Mother Aerie News, December, 1925, p. 6. John Henry Wilson did not possess the leadership skills of Jim Davis. Davis developed a successful recruiting program, he developed lodges further west (since the west had been less affected by the Civil War, It had fewer orders) and he shortened the ritual. See Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal Order of Moose. (New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 1952), pp. 48-64. Ibid., p. 118. Alvin J. Schmidt, Fraternal Organizations. (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 19 80), p. 221. Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty Million Brothers: A Panorama of American Lodges and Clubs. (.New Yiork: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc. 1937), p. 288; Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal Order of Moose. (New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 1952) p. 64. Charles W. Ferguson, Fifty Million Brothers, A Panorama of American Lodges and Clubs. (New York: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc., 1937), p. 283. Seattle (Washington) Mother Aerie News, November, 19 26 , p. 1; September, 1929, p. 1. -78- 24 Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 19 73). p. 50 5. 25 HoHis B. Fultz, Elkdom in Olympia: A History. (Olympia, Washington: Press of Warren's Quick Print, 1966), p. 55. 2 6 W. Lloyd Warner, American Life: Dream and Reality. (.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 19 53), p. 26. 27 Ibid., p. 26. 2 8 Hollis B. Fultz, Elkdom in Olympia: A History. (Seattle, Washington: Press of Warren's Quick Print, 1966) , pp. 70-71. 29 Ibid.,;p. 71. 30 "Address by Visiting Grand Secretary, John S. Parry", Seattle (.Washington) Mother Aerie News, November, 1925. 31 President Wilson cited by Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles, Universi-. ty of California Press, 19 73), p. 50 8. 32 Ibid., p. 508. 33 Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr., "The New Tyranny", Nothing Stands Still. (Cambridge; The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1969), p. 132. 34 Ibid., p. 1344 -79- 35 Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea ox Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1973) , pp.. 509-510. Noel D. Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Frater- nalism in the United States. (St. Louis: University of Missouri Press, 1940), p. 43. 37 Washington State Elks Association, Proceedings of the Annual Convention (Seattle, Washington: 1926), p. 13. 3^ Ibid., p. 16. 39 "Where Life Begins" is a documentary film made by the Loyal Order of Moose. For a description of Moosehaven see Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal Order of Moose. (New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 1952), pp. 168-209. 40 Washington State Elks Association, Proceedings of the Annual Convention (Seattle, Washington: 1924), pp. 39-44. 41 Warner Olivier, Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal Order of Moose. (New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 19 52), p. 184. 42 Seattle (Washington) Mother Aerie News, May, 1929, p. 1. 4 3 "From the Heart of a Child", Seattle (Washington) Mother Aerie News, April 19 27. 44 Seattle (Washington) Mother Aerie News, October 19 37, p. 7. 45 Ibid., July 1935, p. 2. -80- "Buy American", Seattle (Washington) Mother Aerie News, March, 1933. The phrase is from Wilson Carey McWilliams, The Idea of Fraternity in America. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: Universi• ty of California Press, 1973), p. 546. Seattle (Washington) Mother Aerie News, April, 19 39, p. 6. Hollis B. Fultz, Elkdom in Olympia: A History. (Olympia, Washington: Press of Warren's Quick Print, 1966), p. 105. Noel D. Gist, Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Erater-r •• nalism in the United States. (St. Louis: University of Missouri Press, 1940), p. 43. -81- CONCLUSION Written as a response to questions generated by his ori• ginal 1967 analysis of the American Civil Religion, Robert Bellah's "Civil Religion in the 1970's" (published in 1974) is an examination of the public faith from both an epistemo- logical and evaluative perspective."'- The American Civil Religion, Bellah says, Is "a social construction of reality"; and, since all groups have a religious dimension, he quickly 2 dismisses those who question the existence of a civic cult. The question, he believes, is not whether a civil religion does or should exist but, given a civil religion, how it should be interpreted so as to safeguard its transcendence and universality. The significance of the essay lies in Bellah's understanding of the implications of this question. As a symbol of the open transcendence which legitimates their democratic political order, Americans, traditionally, have invoked a jealous Biblical God. The image of a nation standing under the judgement of a transcendent deity has functioned historically to ensure that the civil religion neither degenerates into mere religious nationalism nor be• comes identified with a specific religious orthodoxy. Writing from his experience of contemporary American culture, however, Bellah sees the preservation of this openness to be contingent upon the fulfilment of two conditions. These conditions are: -82- a variety of public theologies and a revitalized sense of community. Reiterating an idea previously advanced by Martin Marty, Bellah emphasizes that, if spokesmen from different religious traditions address themselves to the nation's needs, their competing understandings of American meaning and destiny will ensure that the civil religion remains creative and transcen- 3 dent. Although not directly stating,xt, Bellah strongly im• plies that the relationships between, and within, these groups need to be informed by a sense of community not unlike that 4 envisioned by the New England Puritans. A conviction of common purpose and an acknowledgement of shared limitation will protect against the imposition of definitive content on what, of necessity, must remain a prophetic, dialectic faith. Having considered, in the preceding chapters, the history of organized secret fraternalism in relation to the American Civil Religion, it is immediately apparent that the fraternal orders increasingly have come to threaten rather than embody the conditions Bellah sets down. With the disintegration of the fraternal synthesis, America has succumbed to the convic• tion that individual liberty is the means to universal communi• ty. Americans have discouraged lesser communities. Consequent• ly, they have shaped a society in which the myths of the most powerful refuse to be challenged by or to incorporate the myths of the less powerful. In America, the myths: of the strong are experienced as orthodoxy. -83- The central myth of civil religion orthodoxy is that America is a chosen people and Americans a chosen land. This myth' allows Americans to view themselves as playing a redemptive role in universal history. Thus, their sense of nation transcends the ideological constraints of place and time. Placed In a universal framework, the myth of American destiny no longer is understood as an historical value. It is a universal absolute. When the proximate myth-making acti• vities of Americans are considered against the backdrop of this universallst myth, they too receive eternal validation. Refusing to compromise values, Americans disagree only on facts. Although experienced as eternal fact, myth in reality is an historical value. As a system of symbols, it provides a context through which the processes of daily living can be given meaning. Through the.^symbols of myth, individual ideals are made congruent with cultural principles. Myth can be a transforming power for it expresses the dichotomy between felt ideals and social reality. However, when the ideological basis 5 for myth is not perceived, myth becomes tyrannical. Those who join American secret fraternal orders are un• able to reject the civil religion's myths of individualism and progress. Divorced from the myth-making process, they are forced to accept as reality myths; they cannot live up to except in imagination. In order to confirm an ideal not realized in -84- their own lives, they turn to the symbolic devices of ritual and secrecy. . Through, participation in these symbolic forms, they affirm their own worth by their association with "the eternal truths" of the /American Civil Religion. But because there is too great a dichotomy between the ideals of the civil religion and the reality of their own li• ves their secrecy and ritual fails to transform and simply dissolves into banality. For example, on the Elk's altar there is a flag, a Bible and a set of antlers. The antlers are supposed to mediate between the liberty of the flag and the immediate brotherhood proclaimed in the biblical stories. The symbolism of the elk who is both free and always ready to protect the weak, however, is not strong enough to work any real transformation and therefore it only confirms a rather innocuous piety. The history of American secret fraternal societies has been characterized by a progressive elimination of the tension between social reality and cultural ideals. As a result of this process, the myths by which most Americans live today do not reflect or communicate the tensions and contradictions of their everyday social life. They do not reflect the violence in the streets, the cleavage between the races and the fact that some are more equal than others. Instead the civil reli• gion perpetuates a myth of liberty and a manifest destiny under God which, cannot be reconciled with the realities of American -85- life. Such a myth is not conducive to the preservation of a creative space between culture and society. For when society is no longer related to culture as a means to an end, there is no reason for secrecy or ritual because the possibilities of transformation for the society do not exist. In recent years, therefore the fraternal societies have dissolved into social clubs with a continuing pious interest in service to the weak and helpless. In taking this step they have not ceased to be institutions of the civil religion; they have simply abandoned the ideal of fraternity and substituted a simpler and less demanding piety. -86- FOOTNOTES TO. THE CONCLUSION Robert Bellah, "Civil Religion in the 1970's", American Civil Religion/ eds. Donald G. Jones and Russel E. Richey. CNew York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1974)., pp. 255-272. Ibid., p. 256. Ibid., pp. 258-259. Ibid., p. 268. The tyranny of many modern myths is discussed by a number of scholars. See particularly Roland Barthes, "Myth Today", Mythologies, trans. Annette Lavers. (Frogmore, St. Albans, Herts, England: Granada Publishing Limited, 19 73; Paladin, 1976), 137-142. Herbert Marcuse, "Remarks on a Redefinition of Culture", Daedalus, vol. 9 4, 1(Winter, 1965), pp. 190-207. Edmund R. Leach, "Culture and Social Cohesion: An Anthropo• logist's View", Daedalus, vol. 94, 1 (.Winter, 19 65) , pp. 24-38. -87- SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources Documents The Fraternal Insurance Compendium, Cedar Rapids, Iowa: H.R. Taylor, 1926. The Fraternal Compendium Digest. Cedar Rapids, Iowa: Taylor, Bird and Co., 1933-52. Meier, Ludtorf. Opinions Rendered by the Grand Forum of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of the Uni- ted States of America. Seattle: Grand Lodge of the Bene• volent and Protective Order of Elks, 1928. Washington State Elk's Association. Proceedings of the Annual Convention, 1924-1930. Seattle: Washington State Elk's Association. Newspapers Moose Call. (Seattle: Seattle Lodge 211, L.O.M.): vols. 14-18, 1927-1931. Mother Aerie News. (Seattle: Seattle Aerie No. 1): 1925- Seattle Eagle. (Seattle: Seattle Aerie No.l): 1932-51. Seattle Elkogram. (Seattle: Seattle Lodge No. 92, ) B.P.O.E.): vols. 19-33, 1926-53. -88- Books Fultz, Hollis B. Elkdom in Olympia: A History. Olympia, Washington: Press of Warren's Quick Print, 19 66. Johnson, Olaf H. Conversion of the Fraternal Society into an Old Line Company. Los Angeles: National Conven• tion of Insurance Commissioners, 1926. Kennedy, William Dames, Pythian History. Chicago: Pythian Historical Publishing Company, 1904. Meier, Walter F. The Heart of Elkdom. Seattle: Farwest Lithograph and Printing Co., 1925. Noble, Franklin. Thoughts for the Occasion, Fraternal and Benevolent: Reference Manual of Historical Data; Helpful in Suggesting Themes and Outlining Addresses for the Observance of Timely or Special Occasions of the Various Orders. New York: E.B. Treat and Co., 190 5. Olivier, Warner. Back of the Dream: The Story of the Loyal Order of Moose. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., [: 1952. Riegel, Emma B. Fraternal Speakers: Gems of Thought for Fraternal Speakers. New York: Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Inc., 19 32. -89- II. Secondary Sources Articles Bellah., Robert. "Civil Religion in America". Daedalus. 96, #1 (19671: 1-24. . "Response to "Commentaries on Civil Religion in America'". The Religious Situation: 19 68. Edited by D.R. Cutler. Boston: Beacon Press, 1968. Benedict, Howard S. "Brethren, the Neophyte Waits Without". The Nation. 120(April 1925): 403-405. Bohrnstedt, G.W. "Social Mobility, Aspirations and Fraternity Membership". Sociology Quarterly. 10(1969): 42-52 . Constable, J.W., "Lodge Practice Within the Missouri Synod". Concordia. 39(July-August 1968): 476-496. Douglas, Mary. "Deciphering a Meal". Daedalus. 101 #1 (Winter 1972) : 61-82. Geertz, Clifford. "Deep Play: Notes on a Balinese Cockfight". Daedalus. 101 #1(19 72): 1-38. Gerould, Katharine Fullerton. "Ritual and Regalia". Atlantic Monthly. 132(1923): 592-597. -90- Gordon, C. Wayne and Babchuck, Nicholas. "A Typology of Voluntary Associations". American; Sociology Review. 24(1959) : 22-29. Grimes, Ronald, "Ritual Studies: A Comparative Review of Theodor Gas.ter and Victor Turner" . Religious Studies Review. 2 #4(October 1976): 13-25. Hammond Phillip, "Documentary on Civil Religion in America". The Religious Situation: 1968. Boston: Beacon Press, 1968. Harger, Charles Moreau. "The Lodge". Atlantic Monthly. 97 (.1906) : 488-494. Harwood, W.S. "Secret Societies in the United States". North American Review. 164(1897): 617-624. Hawthorn, H.B. "A Test of Simmel on the Secret Society: The Doukhobors of British Columbia". American Journal of Sociology. 62 #l(July 1956): 1-7. Hazebrigg, L.E. "Re-examination of Simmel's 'The Secret and the Secret Society*: Nine Propositions". Social Forces. 47(March 1969): 323-331. Hobsbawn, E.J. "Fraternity". New Society. 27(November 1975): 471-473. -91- Isenberg, Sheldon R. and Owen, Dennis E. "Bodies Natural and Contrived: The Works of Mary Douglas". Religious Studies Review. 3 #1 (January 1977).: 1-16 . Kerri, J.N. "Studying Voluntary Associations as Adaptive Mechanisms: A Review of Anthropological Perspectives". Current Anthropology. 17(March 1976): 23-47. Klemont, F.L. "Civil War, Politics, Nationalism and Post War Myths". The Historian. 38(1976): 419-438. Leach, Edmund R. "Culture and Social Cohesion: An Anthro• pologist's View". Daedalus. 94 #l($inter 1965): 24-38. "Lodges and Their Legand". Times Literary Supplement. (December 15, 19 72). McWilliams, Carey. "Utopia, Incorporated". The New Republic. 79(1934): 255-259. Marcuse, Herbert. "Remarks on a Redefinition of Culture". Daedalus. 94 #1(Winter 1965): 190-207. Marty, Martin E. "The Spirit's Holy Errand: The Search for a Spiritual Style in Secular America". Daedalus. 96 #l(Winter 1967): 99-115. Merz, Charles. "Haiti Who Comes There?" The New Republic. 35(1923).: 327-329 . -92- ______"Sweet Land of Secrecy: The Strange Spectacle of American Fraternalism" . Harper' s Magazine . 154 CFebru- ary 19271: 329-334. Nickel, T.F. "Church and the Lodge Problem". Concordia. 36 (March 196 5) : 131-143. Schlesinger, Arthur M., Sr. "Biography of a Nation of Joiners". American: Historical Review. 50 #l(„October 1944): 1-25. Schmidt, Alvin and Babchuck, Nicholas, "The Unbrotherly Brotherhood: Discord in Fraternal Orders". Phylon. 34 (Fall 1937): 275-282. Weckman, George. "Primitive Secret Societies as Religious Organizations". Nvmen. 17(August 1970): 83-94. Books Acker, Julis. Strange Altars. St. Louis: Concordia Pu• blishing House, 19 59. Barthes, Roland. Elements of Semiology. Translated by Annette Lavers and Colin Smith. New York: Hill and Wang, 1967 . . Mythologies. Translated by Annette Lavers. St. Albans, England: Paladin, 1973. -93- Basye, Walter. History and Operation of Fraternal Insurance. Rochester, New York: The Fraternal Moniter, 1919 . Coser, Lewis A. Continuities in the Study of Social Conflict. New York: The Free Press, 1967. . The Functions of Social Conflict. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, Ltd., 1956. , ed. Georg Simmel. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1965. Davies, Wallace E. Patriotism on Parade1;. Veterans' and Hereditary Organizations in America, 1783-1900. Cam• bridge: Harvard University Press, 1955. Douglas, Mary. Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmo• logy . Harmondsworth,. England:.' Penquin Books, 1973. . Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, 1966. Douglas, Mary, and Isherwood, Baron. The World of Goods: Towards an Anthropology of Consumption. Harmondsworth, England: Penquin Books, 19 78. -94- Eliade, Mircea. Rites and Symbols of Initiation: The Mysteries of Bixth. and Rebirth.. Translated and Edited by Willard R. Trask. New York: Harper Torch Books, 1958. Ferguson, Charles W. Fifty Million Brothers: A Panorama Of American Lodges and Clubs. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, Inc., 19 37. Geertz, Clifford.. Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 19 73. Gist, Noel D. Secret Societies: A Cultural Study of Fraternalism in the United States. St. Louis: University of Missouri Press;,, 1940 . Hausknecht, Murray. The Joiners: A Sociological Descrip• tion of Voluntary Membership in the United States. New York: The Redminster Press, 1962. Heckethorn, Charles. W. The Secret Societies of All Ages and Countries, 2 vols. New York: University Books, 196 5. Jones, Donald G. and Richey, Russell E., Eds. American Civil Religion. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 19 74. Leach, Edmond R., ed. Dialectic in Practical Religion. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1968. . Levi-Strauss. London: William Collins and Co. Ltd., 1970. -95- ______Rethinking Anthropology. London: The Athlone Press, 1961. . A Runaway World? New York: Oxford University Press, 196 8. . ed. The Structural Study of Myth and Totend sm. London: Tavistock Publications, 1967. Levi-Strauss, Claude. Structural Anthropology. Trans• lated by Claire Jacobson and Brooke Grundfest Schoepf. New York: Basic Books, 196 3. Levine, Donald N., ed. Georg Simmel on Individuality and Social Forms. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1971. Luckman, Thomas. The Invisible Religion: The Problem of Religion in Modern Society. New York: MacMillan Publish• ing Co., Inc., 1967. McKenzie, Norman, ed. Secret Societies. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967. McWilliams, Wilson Carey. The Idea of Fraternity in America. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Califor• nia Press, 19 73. May, Henry F. Protestant Churches and Industrial America. New York: Harper and Row, 1949. -96- Merk, Frederick. Manifest Destiny and Mission in American Society: A Reihterpretation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1963. Moore, Sally F. and Myherhoff, Barbara, eds. Secular Ritual. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, Assen, 1977. Murphy, Robert. The Dialectics of. Social Life: Alarms and Excursions in Anthropological Theory. New York: Columbia University Press, 1971. Pike, D.W. Secret Societies. Toronto: Oxford Universi• ty Press, 1939. Preuss , Arthur., A Dictionary of Secret and Other Socie• ties . St. Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 19 29. Ratner, Lorman. Antimasonry: The Crusade and the Party. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 19 69. Roberts, J.M. The Mythology of the Secret Societies. New York: Charles Schribner's Sons, 19 72. Schlesinger, Arthur M. Nothing Stands Still. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1969. . The Rise of the Cities, 1878-189 8. vol. 10. A History of American Life. New York: MacMillan Co., 1933. -97- Schmidt, Alvin. Fraternal Organizations. Greenwood Encyclopedia of American Institutions. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1980. Simmel, Georg. Conflict and the Web of Group Affilia• tions . Translated by Kurt Wolff and Reinhard Bendix. New York: The Free Press, 19 55. The Sociology of Georg SiTnmel. Translated by Kurt Wolff. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 19 50. Smith, Elwy.n A., ed. The Religion of the Republic. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 19 71. Stevens, Albert C. The Cyclopedia of Fraternities. New York: E.B. Treat and Co., 1907. Turner, Victor. Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. New York: Cornell University Press, 1974. . The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Struc• ture . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 19 70. Turner, Victor and Turner, Edith. Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Culture, Anthropological Perspectives. New York: Columbia University Press, 19 78. -98- Van Gennep, Arnold. The Rites of Passage. . Translated by M.B. Vizedam and G.L. Caff.ee... Chicago:' University of Chicago Press, 1960. Vivian, Herbert. Secret Societies Old and New. London: Thornton Butterworth Limited, 1927. Weingartner, Rudolph. Experience and Culture: The Phi• losophy of Georg Simmel. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 196 0. Whalen, William J. Handbook of Secret Organizations. Milwaukee.: The Bruce Publishing Co., 1966 . Wilson, John F. Public Religion in American Culture. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 19 79.