The Challenge Before Us

>Instead of countering your arguement, or restating it, I would ask you to
>express your opinion on what we MIGHT do to increase our memberships and
>keep them coming back. There is a saying in the military that one should
>not complain about how something is done unless they have a better idea on
>how to do it.

Ah, but I was not complaining about how something was done, only remarking on the many "solutions" that are offered without knowing the cause.

I am not one who has been offering "solutions" because I am not sure that we know the cause of our difficulties. I myself am inclined to believe--but cannot prove--that the circumstances are societal, characteristic especially of American society (but with the potential to develop elsewhere--the USA has tended to be in the vanguard of developments of new societal styles which have later on arrived elsewhere in Western societies), and not necessarily susceptible of easy resolution.

Let's take one thing as a given: Masonry is resistant to change. It was intended to be. Many Gr. Lodges have lists of Ancient Landmarks, not to be changed. A Master (or other presiding officer) is required to assent to the concept that it is not in the power of any man or group of men to make innovations in the body of Masonry. "Ne varietur" is a phrase well known in Masonry. We use rituals composed anywhere from a century to more than two centuries ago (depending on what body and jurisdiction you are considering), and we try to teach them to new members without making any inadvertent alterations. And so on.

Ergo, when we observe a major change in Masonry, such as the membership (and influence) decline that began just before 1960, it is rational to conclude that the origin or cause of the change is external to Masonry, because we did not change anything internal to Masonry at that time. So far as I know. So far as anyone has ever asserted. Does this not follow logically?

In support of this observation and reasoning, we also know that the many other social organizations in society have experienced similar declines. I cite Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone. I cite the speech/sermon given by the Executive Director of the North American Federation of Temple Brotherhoods, "Where Are All the Men?" I cite the similar complaints by leaders of other organizations--the Odd Fellows, the various clubs that have folded (all the ones I belonged to in 1975 are gone), and so on. These organizations have experienced the same decline as Masonry in the same time period.

OK. The problem is external to Freemasonry. Do we know what it is? Putnam hypothesizes that television is the cause, because people no longer need to socialize with others in order to pass the time between work and sleep. I'm willing to credit this as one factor. I also think that there are other elements of societal change: The need for two incomes to maintain a standard of living for which one income was sufficient in 1955, which means that the homemaker's chores must be compressed into time formerly available for social activities (dinner is not ready when Dad gets home, but must be prepared starting then by whoever gets home first--and it's long past Lodge start time when the dishes are finally put away). Lengthy commutes that did not exist in 1955. Child-raising paradigms that did not exist in 1955--kids want to "hang out" after school, which would lead to trouble, so that structured activities must be created and supervised by adults, and taking your kid to ballet or gymnastics or soccer almost every night leaves no time for Lodge (when I was a teenager, I was expected to be home in the evening during the week...except for Boy Scouts once a month). (For some reason, DeMolay/Rainbow/Job's Daughters is not considered as one of these alternatives.)

In addition to these time issues, and the lure of in-home entertainment (now including the Internet, video games, VCR/DVD rental, etc.), we also have the fact that Freemasonry is no longer the prestigious organization in society that it once was. In the late 19th century, everyone knew who the Masons were, and every adult male wanted to be one. Many could not pass the ballot box (black balls were commonplace and usually very well justified); some five hundred fraternal organizations sprang up in the USA to accommodate men who wanted to be part of a fraternal system but could not become Masons. Other men bought bogus degrees from mountebanks and charlatans, to their disappointment. If you were a Master Mason (let alone a Past Master, a 32 or 33 in the AASR or a Kt. Templar), you were automatically somebody and you knew, therefore, everyone who was important in your town. The Lodge was the center of town social activity, too; the Grange was for wannabes.

Now, the Masonic Lodge and the whole of the Craft has fallen off the mental radar screen of the American public. I do not know why this has happened. A mere guess (hypothesis) on my part is that it's due to the anti-establishment sentiment of the 1960s and following years. It used to be that all young males rebelled against their fathers early on, and later came to realize that the previous generation had some pretty good ideas, after all. (As Bro. Mark Twain observed, approximately, "When I was fourteen, my dad was the stupidest man in the world. When I was twenty-one, I was amazed at how much he had learned in seven years.") I don't think that my generation (the "baby boomers") ever came to a reconciliation with their parents. Encouraged in some cases by substitute mentors (college professors, e.g.), the generation of the 1960s dismissed what had gone before as worthless, because it was supposedly racist, war-mongering, fraught with capitalistic greed, and so on. Certainly the Craft in the US has something to answer for in the area of racial segregation, but confusing patriotism with chauvinism, or the work ethic with greed is erroneous. Of course, people have believed many erroneous things in history; the fact that a belief is ill-founded has not kept such a belief from being damaging.

And even men from Masonic families, who don't have these problems of not knowing what Masonry is, face the time issues. My grandfathers were both Masons (one a 33 and Past Master). My father, his brother, and other uncles and great-uncles were all Masons. In my generation of the family, going out to second cousins, there are at least a dozen men. I am the only Freemason among them. An entire generation lost.

I'll pare these down:

1. Masons don't become or stay active in the Masonic Lodge because it is not all that interesting to them, or because it takes too much time.
2. Men don't become Masons because
   1. They have never heard of us
   2. If they have heard of us, they have a negative impression
   3. They don't have time to be Masons anyway (see #1)

• Make meetings--and ALL of Masonry--more interesting and enjoyable. This is a challenge that will be hard to accomplish. How do we compete with "The West Wing?" Do we need more social activity? I once saw a Lodge bulletin from 1925 or so for my Lodge in St. Paul, MN. In addition to two stated communications and a like number of communications called for degrees, there were dinners, dances, card parties, and outings. In today's world, we have to include the children more. I wish I had some good ideas, but I have to admit that my personal interests are different from those of most of my Brothers.

  But I do know of Lodges (and other groups) with "canned" programs that they present at other Masonic bodies around the region. OK. I've seen that. Come up with something new, now. My memory isn't that far gone!

  I do think that there is something in the European system of Masonry. They require a paper presented in Lodge before advancement to the next degree. I'm not saying we should do that--it's hard enough to get men to memorize and present a catechism someone has written for them in order to advance. But once one is a Master Mason, one has a duty to participate in the Work. If a Mason isn't a line officer and isn't discharging some onerous committee assignment (getting the parking lot repaved, e.g.), he should be coming up with some ideas about Masonry that he should share in Lodge. The job of Worshipful Master is not supposed to be that of entertaining the indolent Brethren!

  How do we make our members look forward to Lodge night, rather than thinking of it as a duty or something to be done if TV is in reruns? This is a challenge for all Masons, not just the leadership, because only each individual Brother knows what his personal turn-ons are. Only he can work to make sure that Lodge is interesting for him.

• Public relations. The anti-Masons aren't shy about trying to publicize their lies about us. But Masonry's tradition of secrecy has drawn a veil far beyond the inner precincts of the institution. We need to find the time and money to be visible in society. It isn't going to be easy, because most mainstream journalists are part of that "baby boomer" group suspicious of a group with our beliefs. As Bernard Goldberg pointed out in yesterday's Wall St. Journal, they think that their views are middle-of-the-road moderate (they know no one personally who was ever in the military; they know no one personally who does not have a college education; they know no one personally who has a blue-collar job) and have no conception that there might be ideas in America different from their own but which are hardly "extremist."

  I'd envision some local access TV, perhaps. Or how about public service announcements on topics inherent to Freemasonry: Patriotism. Civic responsibility. Individual responsibility. The work ethic. Not about who we are, except at the end of the spot, "Brought to you by the Freemasons--men working to make your community better." The LDS (Mormons) have a very good set of PSAs on making time for the family--nothing of LDS doctrine, no proselytization. Just something to make a positive impression associated with LDS (a group with a lot more negative current impressions than the Masons, too).

  The Scottish Rite (SJ of the US) has redacted the 17th Degree, I understand, into a form which contains no esoteric material and can be presented to a mixed audience. Maybe this is something that could be prepared for a local-access cable channel in your town. I'm afraid that this would be harder for the York Rite degrees. Maybe someone could write a new Masonic play, though.

• More emphasis on the youth groups. Although Job's Daughters requires a Masonic relationship, DeMolay and Rainbow do not. We may not be able to recruit for the Lodge, but that doesn't mean we can't make it known that we have opportunities for young people. (I suppose that the public schools won't allow any message of this nature through their system, because of the religious requirements associated with all Masonic bodies, but there are other channels.)

• Being more Masonic. In the good old days, a Mason didn't have to worry about unemployment, because he knew the business leaders in town, and one of them would make sure that a Brother was not out of work. Today, society somehow views networking of this sort--at least among men--as suspect. But it's OK to go on the dole, to use the British phrase (where Masonic business contacts are condemned...). Masonry needs to resume the role it once had, because that role is still needed. It's an odd kind of society in which paying one's taxes has replaced the concept of charity and relief toward one's fellow man. I wonder if Freemasonry shouldn't be talking to John DiIulio's office of faith-based assistance in the Bush Administration. If we haven't forgotten how to do it...

Roger M. Firestone, 33

PS. A Masonic leader requested my thoughts on our situation a few months back. I've been "incubating" them for some time since. I've sent him a bcc of this, in case he is not reading the mailing list. My most important feeling is that it is not enough for leaders to come up with a program. The entire mass of the membership must sign on to it, not simply by agreeing with it, but by taking action. What are you doing to make your Lodge, Chapter, Council, Commandery, or Valley a place that you and your Brothers/Companions will want to spend more time at?