We had our presentation last night. I have been doing other things so i've been unable to read his book yet, but from what i hear from the brethren that have in my lodge i was under the impression that he was against any of the appendant bodies.
After meeting him last night its apparent that thats not the case as he's an officer in his Commandery. He did come off as if he didnt have a lot of respect for the Rite's and ironically it seemed as though he didnt have a high opinion of Christianity being involved in any part of Masonry... but he's a Templar so that would apparently be contradicting.
The presentation he gave was really good though. When he's on his main idea i really agree with a lot he was saying. Specifically, his opinions about Masonry not needing to be worried about the 'amount' of people we have and more about the 'quality' of people we have. He says, and i agree, that by watering down the degrees and streamlining membership we actually take away from the selective and secretive nature that Freemasonry was founded on. He made the point that before the Morgan Affair and the Anti-Masonry political parties when Freemasonry was at its peak, lodges that were more than 30 or so members would split off and create their own lodge.
He went on to say, and i was very disturbed by it if its true, that in London they have taken the consequences of violating your obligation out of the degree work because of the violence. He said they explain that portion after the catechism. That was shocking to me and i hope that doesnt make it over here.
He congratulated us and the rest of the southern states for staying the truest to the tenets of Freemasonry and that gave me a little glow of pride. He may tell that same thing to every region he goes to, but none the less it was a nice complement.
I bought the book and i'll put it in line of books that i im reading.