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!

Is the end really near for freemasonry ?

jermy Bell

Registered User
Thank you for everyone's input, but a few have missed the mark. This has nothing to do with selling your lodge, or getting away from maintaining a lodge. These lodges are closing because no one shows up to these lodges to fill the principal officer chairs. Members just stop showing up for anything, so at least 10 lodges I know here in southern Illinois, couldn't even open a business meeting because maybe , just maybe the master and a couple who refused to take a chair would show up. Then consolidated with a couple other lodges, and still couldn't get anyone to show up, and just finally gave up their charter.
 

Winter

Premium Member
Thank you for everyone's input, but a few have missed the mark. This has nothing to do with selling your lodge, or getting away from maintaining a lodge. These lodges are closing because no one shows up to these lodges to fill the principal officer chairs. Members just stop showing up for anything, so at least 10 lodges I know here in southern Illinois, couldn't even open a business meeting because maybe , just maybe the master and a couple who refused to take a chair would show up. Then consolidated with a couple other lodges, and still couldn't get anyone to show up, and just finally gave up their charter.

I'll reiterate my advice already given above. Have you looked into the reason that Brothers who are being suspended for NPD see no value in continuing their membership with the Lodge? If they saw a benefit to being a Mason and associating with their Lodge had value to them, they would find the means to afford it and the time to participate. If that is not happening, then the fault must lie with the Lodge's program and activities. The sheer volume of papers, articles, and books written that examine the reason that a Lodge fails to attract and keep Masons is immense. Your problem isn't new and the solution is known. And not that difficult. Have you read Laudable Pursuit? But until you fix the problem that is causing Masons to leave or not participate, trying to attract new ones will only make the problem worse.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

Winter

Premium Member
Locally quite a lot of the problem is a GL that likes to centralise power, sell temples and pay bonuses to themselves.

Who exactly is getting these bonuses? the GL as an entity or officers of the GL? It seems to me that you are saying that the Grand Lodge is intentionally selling Lodge buildings for their benefit. Your GL must publish an annual budget with accounting records. What are they doing with this ill gotten treasure? Cui bono? I wholeheartedly agree that Grand Lodges sometimes dictate programs that their constituent Lodges must follow that do more harm than good *cough* ODC *cough* but I think the intent is coming from a desire to help. Never attribute to malicious planning what is more likely ineptitude. But I could be wrong. Your GL could be nefarious and benefiting from Lodges folding and taking over their properties.

A couple of local lodges have broken away and are now independent. It is unclear that independence is sufficient for survival.

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works. At least not here in the US that I have ever heard of or know about. How is a Lodge that breaks away from its Grand Lodge not immediately have their Charter seized and doors closed? That's not independence, that's clandestine. You say a couple lodges local to you have broken away. What Lodges? I assume that event made the Masonic news somewhere. I honestly want to know more about this.
 

Winter

Premium Member
The Grand Lodge gave away almost all properties to the Masonic charity. Then it turned the charity into a public charity under the relevant Act. Thus the funds could not come back to the GL.
The GL appointed its favorites to the board of the charity where they now receive salaries and bonuses. Bonuses are needed to motivate the hard task of giving away money.
Now the GL enthusiastically sells temples from underneath lodges.

If that's the case then it does sound like it could be concerning. As has been stated previously, let them sell all the buildings. That's a finite resource and Lodges don't need them to operate anyway.

I have just been on the phone to an ex-member of my local lodge. He tells me that 10 lodges in the state have broken away from the GL.
Perhaps we will return to the ancient Scottish practice where any 7 regularly made brethren can form a new lodge without requiring a charter - because there was no GL in those times.
My lodge originally had a Scottish charter.

Good luck with that. Since all mainstream GL's as well as PHA GL's in the US claim authority over a geographical area (the individual states and District of Columbia) those Lodges will in effect be setting up a clandestine organization that calls itself Freemasonry but will not be recognized as such. You can't turn back the clock to pre 1717 without a TARDIS.
 

Winter

Premium Member
I find it curious that GLs claim monopolies over territory. It seems very colonial and anti-competitive. Which GL could be improved by competition? Mine could.

Perhaps the GLs have secret charters from the GAOTU.
It serves a purpose in keeping every group of disaffected Masons from taking their aprons and forming their own Freemasonry every time Grand Lodge gets their back up. There's enough pseudo-Masonry running around the states already.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
It serves a purpose in keeping every group of disaffected Masons from taking their aprons and forming their own Freemasonry every time Grand Lodge gets their back up. There's enough pseudo-Masonry running around the states already.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
Agreed.
 

GKA

Premium Member
There is always a push to build membership numbers, at least at the lodges I am familiar with. There have been many people admitted which IMO were not masonic material. These members actually took over a lodge and even installed a bar on the top floor, not acceptable action for a blue lodge. It is no surprise that those whom sought out Freemasonry eventually gave up attending with these activities going on.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
There is always a push to build membership numbers, at least at the lodges I am familiar with. There have been many people admitted which IMO were not masonic material. These members actually took over a lodge and even installed a bar on the top floor, not acceptable action for a blue lodge. It is no surprise that those whom sought out Freemasonry eventually gave up attending with these activities going on.
Apparently, bars are prohibited in your constitution?
 
Last edited:

MarkR

Premium Member
There is always a push to build membership numbers, at least at the lodges I am familiar with. There have been many people admitted which IMO were not masonic material. These members actually took over a lodge and even installed a bar on the top floor, not acceptable action for a blue lodge. It is no surprise that those whom sought out Freemasonry eventually gave up attending with these activities going on.
Don't visit any lodges in the U.K., then. Nearly every one I visited in Scotland had a bar. Come to think of it, you probably don't want to visit my lodge. We have a bar.
 

Winter

Premium Member
There is always a push to build membership numbers, at least at the lodges I am familiar with. There have been many people admitted which IMO were not masonic material. These members actually took over a lodge and even installed a bar on the top floor, not acceptable action for a blue lodge. It is no surprise that those whom sought out Freemasonry eventually gave up attending with these activities going on.
Building the bar to attract members sounds like a Shriner thing to do! But having a bar in the building for Brothers to congregate at before and after th e meeting doesn't mean unMasonic. The US is actually considered odd that most Lodges here don't have them. And even that is changing in places. My own Emulation Lodge in Wisconsin has one. And I have never seen any unMasonic behavior as a result. We're Freemasons. Not Puritans.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

Thomas Stright

Premium Member
The US is actually considered odd that most Lodges here don't have them.

If I wanted to socialize at a bar, there are plenty in my area. IMHO a lodge does not need a bar.
And if TX ever allowed a bar in blue lodges, I for one would most likely stop attending.
 

Winter

Premium Member
If I wanted to socialize at a bar, there are plenty in my area. IMHO a lodge does not need a bar.
And if TX ever allowed a bar in blue lodges, I for one would most likely stop attending.
As would absolutely be your choice. But you seem to be laboring under the same image of any location that serves intoxicating beverages as a place of drunken debauchery and unMasonic behavior. But the fact is that the evidence fully disproves this theory as countless Lodges have a bar on premises with no harm to the Craft. I reiterate my assertion that we are Masons. Not Puritans. And I believe it is ridiculous we have been allowing teatotalers to dictate our policy since the Prohibition.

Have there been cases of of Brothers forgetting their Ob. in a Craftsmans Club? Of course. But those same Brothers would have likely behaved the same in a tavern outside the Lodge. That's a failing of the Brother, not where the offense happens. I would say that by moving the social gathering location to the Lodge instead of the local bar that we are better enabled to whisper wise counsel when a Brother converts the means of refreshment into intemperance or excess.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
If I wanted to socialize at a bar, there are plenty in my area. IMHO a lodge does not need a bar.
And if TX ever allowed a bar in blue lodges, I for one would most likely stop attending.
Need? No, a bar isn’t needed. But as a convenient place to chat and enjoy one another’s comp, it’s great.

My buildings in England have bars. I don’t drink. I still enjoy my time there.
May I ask why you feel so strongly on the subject that you would stop attending?
 

GKA

Premium Member
In all due respect, I think some of you are missing the point. It is not about the bar, personally, I do not have any issues with bars, I do enjoy socializing.
The issue is this......Bars are not allowed by GL, period.
Every new member gets a copy of the constitution, they read one thing then see the lodge ignore the rules.
This is the point.
 

Winter

Premium Member
In all due respect, I think some of you are missing the point. It is not about the bar, personally, I do not have any issues with bars, I do enjoy socializing.
The issue is this......Bars are not allowed by GL, period.
Every new member gets a copy of the constitution, they read one thing then see the lodge ignore the rules.
This is the point.
Nobody is suggesting the Lodge ignore the rules. The argument is that the rule against having a bar in the Lodge makes no sense. Your statement made it seem like if your Lodge added a bar (legally according to your jurisdiction) it would cause you to quit attending.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

GKA

Premium Member
Like I stated, I have no issue with bars in lodges, and I am still an active member of my lodge (which does not have a bar)
I was simply sharing an observation and do not expect anyone else to see things the same way I do, however, loss of membership is a big problem for the fraternity. I see what I consider to be many issues which contribute to that.
Freemasonry seems to moving toward the definition of a social club driven by popularity instead of mutual respect fo opposing opinions.
 

Winter

Premium Member
Like I stated, I have no issue with bars in lodges, and I am still an active member of my lodge (which does not have a bar)
I was simply sharing an observation and do not expect anyone else to see things the same way I do, however, loss of membership is a big problem for the fraternity. I see what I consider to be many issues which contribute to that.
Freemasonry seems to moving toward the definition of a social club driven by popularity instead of mutual respect fo opposing opinions.

Still not sure how you are relating some of these issues. How exactly does a Lodge that has a social aspect for the members contribute to a decline in membership? Practicing Freemasonry and being social are not mutually exclusive.

And many of us do not see the shrinking membership of Masonry as a negative by the way.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
Don't visit any lodges in the U.K., then. Nearly every one I visited in Scotland had a bar. Come to think of it, you probably don't want to visit my lodge. We have a bar.
I don't believe that simply having a bar in, or adjacent to, a Masonic lodge in and of itself is un-masonic behavior. The Grand Lodge of Kentucky prohibits this and that sticks in my craw. I am an adult. If I want to have a beer during the dinner hour before lodge or have one after lodge that should be MY choice. The Grand Lodge should not be making that choice for me. If someone should be so undisciplined as to overindulge and behave badly then that could be dealt with.
 
Top