A group of Master Masons talk about topics of Masonic interest--each from their own unique perspective. You'll find a wide range of subjects including history, trivia, travel, book reviews, great quotes, and hopefully a little humor as well on topics of interest for Freemasons and those interested in the subject of Freemasonry.
Fear and Loathing on Thanksgiving
Pause for thought and Congratulations!
The recent announcement by Universal Co-Masonry through social media of their work of a beautiful new archives building in Larkspur, Colorado is an inspiring development that highlights the continued growth and vitality within certain sectors of Freemasonry. Universal Co-Masonry, which admits both men and women, has seen steady expansion in recent years even as many “mainstream” Grand Lodges have struggled with declining membership, lodge closures, and consolidation.
The fact that Universal Co-Masonry is investing in new infrastructure and has the resources to build a dedicated archives facility is a testament to the health of their organization. It demonstrates that there remains an eager population seeking out the fellowship, ritual, and teachings that Freemasonry provides.
Moreover, while the archives building represents physical growth, it is also indicative of broader success across various facets of the organization. The ability to undertake such a project suggests financial stability, effective leadership, and an engaged membership base. It prompts one to consider when “mainstream” Freemasonry last experienced growth driven by genuine increases in membership, rather than focusing on retention or trying to get more people in the door regardless of their suitability or commitment to Masonic principles.
However, most “mainstream” Grand Lodges would consider Universal Co-Masonry to be "clandestine" since it does not conform to their standards of recognition and ancient landmarks, particularly in its inclusion of female members. This raises thought-provoking questions about the future trajectory of Freemasonry.
As overall interest in joining fraternal organizations has waned in recent decades, many “mainstream” Lodges have struggled to attract new members, especially younger ones. Aging member bases, lack of public awareness, and failure to adapt to changing social norms and expectations have contributed to this decline. If these trends continue unabated, Freemasonry as practiced by “mainstream” Grand Lodges risks fading into obscurity.
So what lessons can be drawn from the comparative success of Universal Co-Masonry?
Inclusivity seems to play a key role. By welcoming female members, Universal Co-Masonry expands its potential pool of recruits and projects a more modern, equitable image that aligns with contemporary social values. This approach not only boosts numbers but also infuses the organization with fresh perspectives and talent. However, admitting women would be a seismic shift for “mainstream” Freemasonry, challenging centuries of tradition and potentially causing significant internal dissent. “Mainstream” Lodges might consider more incremental steps, such as partnering with women's auxiliaries or sponsoring inclusive community events, to signal openness without radically altering their core structure. Or even, going out on limb here, maybe recognize women-only masonic lodges and grand lodges, so there is modern parity and status with male lodges and grand lodges.
Flexibility and openness to change appear to be important factors. While “mainstream” Lodges often strictly adhere to long-standing traditions and membership requirements, Universal Co-Masonry seems more willing to innovate and adapt. Reexamining entrenched practices and restrictions could help “mainstream” Lodges remove barriers to growth and relevance. Yet too much change risks diluting the unique identity and heritage of Freemasonry. A balanced approach might involve carefully evaluating which traditions are essential to preserve and which could be modified to better serve current needs and aspirations.
Proactive outreach and public engagement can make a significant difference. Many “mainstream” Lodges have struggled with a lack of public awareness and understanding about Freemasonry, allowing misconceptions to proliferate. Universal Co-Masonry likely benefits from more effective communication strategies that raise its profile and transmit a positive message to potential members. However, excessive publicity or aggressive recruitment tactics could undermine the mystique and selectivity associated with Masonry. “mainstream” Lodges might focus on targeted outreach emphasizing their charitable works, community involvement, and personal development opportunities, while still maintaining a degree of discretion.
Providing a clear value proposition is critical in an era of countless competing demands on people's time and attention. Universal Co-Masonry seems to be successfully conveying the tangible benefits of membership, whether through fulfilling social connections, personal development programs, meaningful charitable work, or esoteric education. “mainstream” Lodges must ensure they are offering similarly compelling reasons to join and remain involved. At the same time, they should be wary of trend-chasing or diluting their core identity in an attempt to appeal to every possible audience. Striking a balance may involve focusing on the unique transformative aspects of Masonic ritual and teachings while finding fresh ways to apply them to contemporary challenges and interests.
In navigating these considerations, “mainstream” Freemasonry might benefit from adopting a "Resist-Accept-Direct" framework. The concept of Resist-Accept-Direct, as applied to organizational change and strategic planning, appears to have originated within the field of future studies and foresight. It has been used by various futurists, strategists, and consultants as a framework for helping organizations navigate complex, uncertain, and rapidly changing environments. The framework involves asking three key questions: What do we preserve? What do we allow to change? And what do we purposefully change?
The first question, "What do we preserve?" calls for clear identification and fierce protection of the core elements of Masonic tradition, ritual, and teachings that define the Craft's distinct identity. These might include the essential initiatic experiences, the use of symbols and allegory to convey moral and spiritual lessons, and the emphasis on personal growth and brotherly love. By resisting any dilution or alteration of these fundamental aspects, Lodges ensures that Freemasonry remains a unique and transformative path for those who seek it out.
The second question, "What do we allow to change?" recognizes that some degree of organic evolution is natural and even necessary for Freemasonry to remain relevant in changing times. This might encompass gradual shifts in the demographics of membership, the incorporation of new technologies in Lodge operations and communications, or the updating of certain ceremonial elements to reflect contemporary language and sensibilities. The key is to accept these changes gracefully when they arise from within the Craft while ensuring they do not compromise the essential nature and purpose of Masonry.
The third question, "What do we purposefully change?" advocates for proactive, intentional initiatives to address areas where Freemasonry has struggled to adapt. For example, Lodges might choose to purposefully change their public outreach strategies, developing a more engaging online presence, participating in community events, and collaborating with local organizations to showcase the positive impact of Masonry. They might purposefully change their membership processes, streamline application procedures, offer flexible dues structures, and create mentorship programs to better integrate and retain new brothers. Or they might purposefully change their leadership development approach, providing training in modern management techniques and encouraging younger members to take on progressive roles and responsibilities.
“Mainstream” Freemasonry could begin to address these questions through a thoughtful and inclusive process of self-assessment and strategic planning. This might involve surveying members to gather insights on what they value most about the Craft and where they see opportunities for improvement. It could include forming study groups or task forces to examine specific issues and propose recommendations for change. It would certainly require open and honest dialogue among Lodge leaders and members, as well as a willingness to experiment with new approaches and learn from the successes and challenges of other jurisdictions.
Importantly, this process should be guided by a shared commitment to preserving the timeless essence of Freemasonry while also ensuring its continued vitality and relevance. By striking a balance between resistance and acceptance, tradition and innovation, “mainstream” Lodges can chart a purposeful course toward a stronger, more vibrant future.
By identifying the core elements of Masonic tradition, ritual, and teachings that must be zealously guarded, Lodges can ensure they maintain a distinct identity rooted in centuries of history and wisdom. At the same time, acknowledging areas where flexibility and organic evolution can be accommodated allows for gradual adaptation to changing social contexts without forcing the issue. Finally, proactively initiating certain changes, such as in the areas of public outreach, membership processes, or leadership development, affords Lodges greater control over their future direction.
Ultimately, the path forward for “mainstream” Grand Lodges is not an easy one, but it may require taking inspiration from the success stories in Masonry, even if they come from unfamiliar or unrecognized quarters. The Universal Co-Masonry archives project is a reminder that Freemasonry still holds appeal and relevance for many. The question is whether “mainstream” Lodges can adapt to tap into that potential before it is too late. By carefully weighing the pros and cons of different approaches, seeking a middle path between tradition and innovation, and applying a framework of purposeful change balanced with preservation of core identity, “mainstream” Freemasonry may yet find a way to thrive in the 21st century.
No matter the current direction of any Masonic organization, I give hearty congratulations to Universal Co-Masonry and all their current and future endeavors!
~JH
Jack Heide is Junior Deacon of Beverly-Riverside Lodge No. 107 in Riverside, New Jersey. He holds a Masters of Community and Regional Planning degree from the University of Oregon, and Masters in Homeland Security and Defense from the Naval Postgraduate School. He works in the field of emergency management in the New York, New Jersey Region, where he resides with wife and daughter.
A crisis of conscience
When a person begins to live according to their gender identity, rather than the birth sex they were thought to be when they were born, this is called gender transition. Possible steps in a gender transition may or may not include changing clothing, appearance, name, or the pronoun people use to refer to the individual. If they can, some people change their identification documents, like their driver’s license or passport, to better reflect their gender identity. Some undergo hormone therapy or other medical procedures to change their physical characteristics and make their bodies match the gender they know themselves to be. (https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-transgender-people-the-basics)
Freemasonry has a membership problem (which has caused a leadership problem)
- Freemasonry as an organization has no stance, responsibility, or obligation to teach Leadership.
- Leadership can be learned within Freemasonry, but it is no different than how it is learned in other organizations – including real-life work experience. We are not special – which means, it isn’t our mission.
- There is nothing wrong with hosting leadership training as long as it is: 1. Secondary or tertiary to the understanding, application, and continuing study of the Philosophy of Freemasonry. 2. Does not demand a Grand Lodge Budget line-item expense that surpasses that of Masonic Education. 3. Qualified individuals who are leaders in the real world, with actual credentials, and have resumes that have been validated, must lead these workshops or camps.
- They have communication issues.
- They are in constant conflict with other managers or employees.
- Difficulty dealing with their employee's demands.
- They are resistant to change.
- Their employees have low morale.
- They do not take responsibility for their decisions or have no initiative to make decisions.
- Their employees have low motivation.
- They use an outdated leadership style, usually one which is authoritarian.1
Does it really matter?
Causation or Correlation?
About Those “Glory Days”
Membership Numbers… Note: As always I would like to presage the following with this disclaimer: In no way, shape, manner or form am I trying to disparage anyone or any body. What follows is an argument based purely on Masonic fact that needs no footnotes, for it proves itself in both meaning as well as its use of symbology.
This is a discussion for “Adults Only.” Both figuratively and literally, while also being slightly in-your-face enough to move the needle for context to address current numbers and their possible implications.
So with all that now on the table, here we go…
If you’ve heard it once you’ve heard it a thousand times, “Back in the day we came to Lodge because of our commitment to blah, blah, blah.”
I have no doubt there was true commitment from many Brothers of those times and since. However, I would like to take issue with a bit of it - and maybe - put some additional context around all that “glory days” swagger of times gone by using artifacts from that very same past.
Masons do research into how the Craft came about centuries ago, and both ponder as well as project their thoughts into formulating any impetus and intents.
Many of us also dwell upon the “good ol’ days” when Lodge rooms were filled to the brim and new Temples erected at a pace that would make a Wall Street real estate tycoon blush during the mid-20th century. Then, as was eloquently professed by Bill Murray in the opening scenes of “Stripes” (1981 Columbia Pictures) “…depression set in.”
Why?
Everyone talks about “After the war…” when referring to what’s colloquially known as the “Age of Fraternalism” and with it, give reasonings as to why it had such an impact on the fraternity.
In and around the middle of 1945, as there was resettlement into what we might call “normal life” and the collective world breathed a sigh of relief. Many embarked on what some might call “Living life to its fullest via any and all of life’s adult pleasures.” After all, many of this era thought every passing day could be their last, so now living life was to be put through all its zeal.
No one could (or should) blame them, for it was also a different time. But now, since we’ve put time on the table, let’s put it in chart form so we can view and postulate in real-time. To wit:
The above charts out membership via the Masonic Service Assoc. since they began and is the most referred to when numbers enter the picture. The notations are my own, and we’ll discuss them. Just note, although their record keeping begins in 1924, there’s still a lot we can speculate if we want to possibly open the doors for some true introspective assertions on current membership. And I will.
Warning: As I stated prior this is an “Adults Only” conversation, so if you find yourself wanting to yell at me through your screens in a “How dare you insinuate…!” manner. Remember, I’m using actual masonic artifacts and trying to put the pieces together for better understanding using both the history of the time and the underpinnings of the human condition, that we are always trying to scrutinize for possible improvement, nothing more. i.e., I’m only a messenger.
As you can see in the graph above, I made a notation regarding the “Temperance Movement” (TM). The reason for it is relevant to that other question I posed “causation or correlation?”
“And the relevance for all that is?” you may be asking. Great question, let’s see, shall we?
The TM really got going in the early 1800s gaining steam across the globe, and by 1909 a world prohibition conference in London formed the foundation of an International Prohibition Confederation. (source: Britannica.com) Here in the U.S., this culminated in what we now know as “Prohibition” in the 1920s and 30s with a constitutional amendment.
The date of 1909 and the idea behind its revelation is that in the U.S., just about at that same time, a little-known organization thrust itself onto the Masonic scene. They’re known as “Jesters.”
Founded in 1911 the Royal Order of Jesters functions in connection with Freemasonry and the Shriners. It is said to be an “invite only” Order. (source: royalorderofjesters.weebly.com)
“Why are you pointing this out in particular? After all, don’t we basically do this regarding Lodge, anyway?” Again, great question, but let’s remember some of those dates and relate them to the graph.
To use today’s vernacular “The hammer was coming down, hard!” regarding anything alcohol and more, especially so in 1911. Or said differently, with insinuation - you didn’t want to be “seen” having anything to do with alcohol during this period.
And then, in less time than most can memorize a lecture - it would be illegal to do so here in the U.S.
Now look at that graph again and notice precisely it was during this time membership numbers were exploding higher.
(Note: Yes, even though the graph begins in ’24, we can safely assume as we’ve parsed through other literature of times prior membership was in the accent going into ’24 and continuing through.)
Then, we begin to drop off a cliff.
Guess what happened precisely at that time frame? “WW2” you say?
Yes, there’s that, but it’s also the end of prohibition, e.g., officially 1933, unofficially circa 1931/32. Suddenly being “seen” is no longer a paramount consideration. Then, there’s the war.
Membership numbers remain flat for all intents and purposes till about 1945ish with good reason. Then, we begin to explode again. Why? Many have their inclinations and insinuations, but here’s one many may not fully comprehend for both its draw as well as efficacy to these now returning men to be “seen” partaking in.
So let’s now see if this prior insinuation holds any argument as we go through some decades…
For your consideration I offer the following, let’s begin with the back of a brochure for a Masonic gathering which at its time was all the rage. To wit:
But then, much in tangent with the fall of membership, so to did the drapes of polite society and it was no longer risqué or anything else of risk that needed to be held in close quarters or behind closed doors. i.e., No longer did men need to find other like-minded, fun-loving others to partake in these venues. After all, you now had versions of “What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.” Replacing the need of the Jester motto or any other wink to secrecy.
Again, to reiterate the insinuation point: There was no longer a need to find others or partake in closed quarter fashion with those others to partake in fare “others” may not have a particular passion for. Yet, it was fully accepted by all those that both were of like minds, or better yet, of like mouths as for keeping them shut. Again - Vegas anyone?
So now that I’ve probably got a few of you swearing under your breath, believing I’m making disparaging insinuations or commentary against the Shrine or any other Body.
To that, I would answer wholeheartedly - absolutely not!
And if you do, then it is you that is willingly not understanding my premise and need to, if, you want to argue or contemplate membership going forward. Period, full stop.
What I am insinuating (because all of it is complete conjecture, even those that use the war argument as a basis) is that - like it or not and argue that it is or it isn’t - the fact that our structure or system for membership that has been copied by countless other organizations, just so happened to be, the perfect structure for men of like minds that wanted to partake in entertainment that was either frowned upon or other by polite society, and all it took for the “price of admission” was to join Lodge then move into the concordant Body. Is an exercise of ignorance-is-bliss to anyone trying to sort causation and correlation arguments seriously.
In other words, let me use this example…
It’s like a willingness to dare not look under the carpet where there’s a noticeable hump next to the 5-year-old standing there holding a broom saying “I swept the floor for you!” You’re going to praise, thank, or whatever. But you know you’re going to have to look, like it or not. You just hope it’s what you want to be there, not what you dare not try to think about might be.
Today the Craft is doing many things trying to retain and increase membership back to the “glory days” level.
The problem is: It’s trying to do so without the tools, slogans, events, and other aspects that are no longer considered acceptable to Masons.
Think about it, can you imagine the uproar today if the Shrine itself put on another event mimicking the one above, even though it was actually, perfectly acceptable at the time and did?
You can’t be looking to replicate numbers that may have been achieved using enticements that today are completely anathema to the Craft. It’s beyond foolish and leads to nothing but complete and utter frustration for those that keep trying. For it won’t work and needs to stop and be thought through for better tactics and achievable and appropriate results going forward.
i.e., Those “working tools” of the past no longer apply, they actually hinder.
Think I’m off base? Fair enough, so consider the following for your own contemplation exercise. Ready?
I would bet dollars to doughnuts that using the above 1946 example as a construct that if a Masonic Con was announced using Masonic Education as the lead - then using “Sally” as the finale, there would be such an uproar that Masonic trials, suspensions and more would shake the very Earth with their weight in numbers hitting Solomon’s floor.
But I would also bet…
It would be the most popular, most well attended, and would probably gain new members in drove if the midsection held a one-day class as mandatory to view the finale.
Think about it.
To reiterate, I am not proposing that we do anything of the sort. However, what I am advocating is: that this is why you need to look at membership rolls with a more discerning eye going forward. For the “entertainment value” of yesteryear are no longer part of our community. And last time I looked…
Booze and sex still have quite an attraction, but we don’t associate with either anymore.
Again, don’t let that point be lost. Truly think about it, and we can plan ahead accordingly. Be willfully ignorant of the possibilities for explaining the past--And you’re planning for oblivion.
Oh, and one last thing for those that maybe think I have no idea what that “Golden age of adult theater” might have entailed. I just leave with the following. To wit:
Lili just so happens to be that era's biggest star.
But then again, what would I know about any of that, right?
~Bro. Mark St.Cyr Freemason