Would you support a National Grand Lodge?

[MichianaMason45]

With all the different jurisdictions in the US(51 GLs and PHA GLs) would you support a National Grand Lodge? With a true American Grand Master? It would allow us to raise our visibility on a national level. Or would that play into the conspiracy theorist hands? With membership on the decline, would it make sense to consolidate our efforts? Maybe even regional GLs made up of several states? Just an interesting thought, what’s your take?

 

[Glen Cook]

51 GLs, but to the point, as a member of a national GL, and an officer in national Masonic groups, I would not recommend it.

You will now have an additional layer of bureaucracy between you and the decision maker, with no guarantee the decision making will be any better.

There is a financial burden to participation at a national level which is not practical for some. Think of who can afford the costs to travel to campaign for office, and then to travel to national meetings. This will exclude a large portion of the membership.

You will have the added cost of the new national grand lodge.

If you think you have politics now, you ain't seen nothing.

There is the thought that a national grand lodge will avoid policies found to be distasteful. I am not convinced that will be the case. There is the possibility such policies will be perpetuated on a national basis. Then, some states will withdraw, and we’ll back to where we started.

 

[MichianaMason45]

Couldn’t resist the 51 again? Lol

 

[David612]

What would be point?
It’s a big change and I don’t see a valuable reason to change

 

[Bill Lins]

Here's what the Law of the Grand Lodge of Texas has to say about the subject:

Art. 17. General Grand Lodge. The Grand Lodge is opposed to the formation or establishment of a General or Supreme Grand Lodge for the United States of America, and forbids its officers and Grand Representatives to participate in any meeting where any such movement shall be ever considered.

As I took a solemn obligation to obey & uphold the Laws of the Grand Lodge of Texas, I'd have to decline.

 

[LK600]

I would not support the formation of a Grand Lodge of the United States. It's difficult to be heard / make changes now... I couldn't imagine what that would be like that far removed.

 

[Warrior1256]

A big NO here!

 

[Winter]

With the formation of a national grand lodge we would more than likely still have the state level of organizational leaders for local governance. So in effect, the only thing we would likely accomplish is adding an additional layer of bureaucracy at the top of American Freemasonry with all of its attendant costs and headaches as leaders elected from one part of the country try to tell Brothers from another part of the country how to conduct themselves. How could that go wrong, right? Many Brothers today are more likely going the other direction as they wonder what benefit it actually is to have such a bloated Grand Lodge system when the work is, or should be, being done at the local Lodge level.

 

[coachn]

Would you support a National Grand Lodge?

NO!

With all the different jurisdictions in the US(51 GLs and PHA GLs) would you support a National Grand Lodge?

NO!

With a true American Grand Master?

Define "true" in contrast with "Grand Master".
See: https://buildinghiram.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-brother-asks-true-master.html

It would allow us to raise our visibility on a national level.

No, it wouldn't.

Or would that play into the conspiracy theorist hands?

No, it wouldn't.

With membership on the decline, would it make sense to consolidate our efforts?

No, it wouldn't.

Maybe even regional GLs made up of several states?

NO!

Just an interesting thought, what’s your take?

Ditch the thought entirely and replace it with a concerted effort to establish a 50 LODGE MAXIMUM for any and all GLs in existence.[/QUOTE]

 

[MichianaMason45]

NO!

NO!

Define "true" in contrast with "Grand Master".
See: https://buildinghiram.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-brother-asks-true-master.html

No, it wouldn't.

No, it wouldn't.

No, it wouldn't.

NO!

Ditch the thought entirely and replace it with a concerted effort to establish a 50 LODGE MAXIMUM for any and all GLs in existence.

[/QUOTE]

50 lodges? That doesn’t sound very Grand.

 

[CLewey44]

I assume Coach means have one per state, not a PHA GL and a non-PHA GL. I've been preaching that for four years. @coachn if I misunderstood you my apologies. Don't call me a red herring or ad hominid troglodyte lol

 

[coachn]

50 lodges?

Yep. 50, and even that might be too many.

That doesn’t sound very Grand.

From whose perspective? The self-proclaimed Premier Grand Lodge had only 4?

 

[coachn]

I assume Coach means have one per state, not a PHA GL and a non-PHA GL. I've been preaching that for four years. @coachn if I misunderstood you my apologies. Don't call me a red herring or ad hominid troglodyte lol

LOL!

Only 50 lodges per Grand Lodge.

 

[MichianaMason45]

From whose perspective? The self-proclaimed Premier Grand Lodge had only 4?[/QUOTE]

Obviously mine. And that Grand lodge ceased to exist in that small number a long time ago. This is about the future.

 

[coachn]

From whose perspective? The self-proclaimed Premier Grand Lodge had only 4?

Obviously mine.

Yep. Mine says to downsize the Grand Lodges. It's a smarter move than creating yet another layer of insanity.

And that Grand lodge ceased to exist in that small number a long time ago.

And as a result, a continuous erosion of the local lodges ensued and further subjugation of our members to things that contribute nothing and costs plenty.

This is about the future.

Yes. And the future requires smarter organizational structures, like downsizing.

 

[Winter]

With all the different jurisdictions in the US(51 GLs and PHA GLs) would you support a National Grand Lodge? With a true American Grand Master? It would allow us to raise our visibility on a national level. Or would that play into the conspiracy theorist hands? With membership on the decline, would it make sense to consolidate our efforts? Maybe even regional GLs made up of several states? Just an interesting thought, what’s your take?

The only arguments I see you putting forward for the formation of a national GL is that it will raise our visibility and would somehow alleviate the membership decline. As far as raising our visibility, I feel it cheapens our Order to have billboards and radio / TV ads. It makes us look like just another club on a recruiting drive. I think our "visibility" is too great already. Men who should be a part of us will come looking. Which leads right into the declining membership. You can find a dozen discussions here just in the last month arguing that point with many holding the same view that the decline is actually a good thing as we return back to a realistic number.

I doubt you are going to find many supporting the argument for the formation of a national GL unless there is a solid argument of how it will actually benefit us.

 

[coachn]

...I doubt you are going to find many supporting the argument for the formation of a national GL unless there is a solid argument of how it will actually benefit us.

What he said!

 

[MichianaMason45]

*Soap box rant alert* Although I am new to freemasonry I do fall into two categories that not Everyone here does:

1) I’m new and came in cold(not having any friends or family as Masons) so I can share a unique experience about joining recently.

2) I’m in my early 30’s and I am apart of the age demographic Freemasonry will have to attractive and retain to stay viable(according to many long time Freemasons I’ve read or talked to about this).
I say that to say this:

I enjoy a good debate and love the exchange of ideas(thus the reason I made this thread) but the level of arrogance that seeems to radiate off of some of these replies here (coach N)is very disappointing. If this is a hot button issues in freemasonry please advise me as such.

 

[Keith C]

No way!

The GL of PA would NEVER agree to that, as it would inevitably lead to the end of the original "Antient" ritual work.

 

[Winter]

I enjoy a good debate and love the exchange of ideas(thus the reason I made this thread) but the level of arrogance that seeems to radiate off of some of these replies here (coach N)is very disappointing. If this is a hot button issues in freemasonry please advise me as such.

Hot button? No. Because it is a non starter. Nobody is proposing or backing the formation of a national GL. It won't happen because that is not how Freemasonry in the United States operates. If experienced Brothers like myself telling you why it is not feasible or desirable comes across as arrogance, I apologize. That was not my intention. But you really have not proposed the move in any way that would benefit the Order. As a new Brother, I believe your time would be far better spent learning how Freemasonry in your Jurisdiction, and others, does operate to give yourself a better informed opinion on the subject. Study Masonic history and jurisprudence, particularly how the jurisdictions we have today have formed over time and what their relationship to each other is. That may help you better formulate an argument for against the subject. And don't take any one Brother's opinion here as law or the end all be all of the discussion. Freemasons and the various jurisdictions are diverse enough you will encounter some practice or laws that make you scratch your head.