A more reasonable level?
My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Would you support a National Grand Lodge?
- Thread starter MichianaMason45
- Start date
A more reasonable level?
jermy Bell
Registered User
I don't know where you are from , but Illinois G.L. likes to get their hands on as much money they can squeeze from lodges. There are a tin in southern and central Illinois that will be closed in the next 5 years due to lack of members and rising dues.
One of my Lodges in Wisconsin is $400 a year now ($200 if you live out of state) and no Lodge I belong to is less than $100. Too many lodges are trying to cling to the $60 dues and operating at a net loss every year where they have to rely on one or more fundraising events just to keep the lights on. Which ends up being the catalyst for making it easier to join to get more members (read: dues) to join.
Its easy to say "raise dues" but what we really need is a full blown reform on how we manage our Lodges. If you have 10 dedicated Brothers doing the work, you cannot afford, or need, a building that accommodates hundreds. Operate like lodges of old in a back room or basement. The Work is what is important. Not the posh digs.
My drive-by post of reasonable dues was more tongue in cheek I think. I don't believe a national GL would fix that, in fact, if you read my earlier posts I believe it would make it worse because required operating expenses.
On an unrelated note, did we run the OP off? lol
That’s not my experience. My UGLE subscriptions are about double my GL Utah dues—before lodge subs.
Sorry! The sarcasm didn't come through. I need to remember to put the "/s".
Brother_Steve
Premium Member
Hey guys, we're taking the traveling gavel to Hawaii next week. Plan your baby sitters accordingly
CLewey44
Registered User
A National GL would be great if they were governed by someone that met my expectations and goals for Freemasonry. If it did not, then I'd be opposed to it. Sort of like federal government, it's great when the people running it share your ideals but terrible when they don't. It'd probably be pretty hit or miss and overall a disaster after some pondering. Too many states and opinions. It's not like a small country with one GL, we have like 100 GLs and a little over 1M opinions on Masonry.