Like drowning men Masons everywhere are flailing the water in a desperate
attempt to stay afloat. Any swim instructor or lifeguard will tell a non-swimmer
the most important thing to remember when lie finds himself in deep water is, “Don’t
panic”. But these Brethren have panicked! They just “know” that Masonry is
doomed to extinction and apparently intend to prove themselves right.
Freemasonry is replete with examples of this type of behavior, as intelligent
men are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and countless hours, and all
to no avail. It is tragic to see this futile activity go on, year after year.
These Masons are following their intuitions in the face of failure after
failure. Many others have followed these same intuitions and doubtless many
more will do so in the future.
While I am not aware of all activities in all Grand jurisdictions,
several examples of fruitless attempts to increase membership are worth noting. Some of these same or similar experiments
have been conducted in more than one state and, although precise results may
vary, we know that none have been successful since all states except Alaska and
Hawaii have continued to lose membership during at least tile last decade.
To avoid embarrassment and possible offense to the Brethren of
other Grand jurisdictions, those jurisdictions used as examples will not be
named in this paper. The numbers used from which the conclusions are drawn are based
on membership figures shown in List of Lodges, Masonic, published annually by
Pantagraph Printing and Stationery Company, Bloomington, Illinois.
This Company obtains its information directly from the respective
Grand Lodges.
One of America’s largest Grand jurisdictions (in terms of
membership) embarked upon a much heralded program in the early to mid 1980’s
with the avowed intent of increasing membership by some twenty percent within four
years. (The account I read stated it in absolute numbers but I converted it to
percent to avoid too strong a clue as to which state I refer). Among other
things they published information for distribution to non-Masons and offered an
award to any Mason who brought in a prescribed number of new candidates.
If not outright solicitation, their program came very close and certainly
was repugnant to many of us. Sadly but predictably, their numbers have decreased
by almost seventeen percent since 1985, about the same as Georgia, which has no
such program. I recently heard the Grand Secretary of that jurisdiction make
this statement: “We [his Grand Lodge] have spent hundreds and hundreds and
hundreds of thousands of dollars over the past several years on programs to
increase membership and the only measurable effect has been a marked increase
in the number of cases of gross un-Masonic conduct” (emphasis mine). That Grand
Secretary is one of long standing and is one of the best known and most highly
respected Grand Secretaries in America.
This is a sad testimonial to Such a well intended program. But the
saddest part of this, or any of the following stories, is that there never
seems to be any turning back. When an experiment such as this proves to be a
total failure, instead of admitting the error and reverting to the former practice,
another equally bad experiment is undertaken in an attempt to offset the damage
done by the first. That same Grand Jurisdiction has recently revamped their
program and with ‘renewed enthusiasm are talking as if they have struck gold.
Some ten years ago the Grand Master of another state eliminated
the requirement for standing examination on the catechism in his Grand Jurisdiction.
About two years later I attended a conference where lie spoke extolling the
virtues of his decision and belittling the importance of requiring a busy young
man to devote the necessary time to learn the catechism. When he invited
questions he was asked if the membership losses in his state had been reversed.
His answer? “No, but they’re smaller.” Membership in that Grand jurisdiction
has declined nearly twenty-nine percent since that answer. This is more than
one and one-half times the decline in Georgia during the same period. And,
those “smaller” losses totaled about 7.5 in the past two years alone.
More recently, at least one Grand jurisdiction published a “catechism”,
if it’s proper to call it that, to be given to the candidate after each degree,
which he can take home and study at his leisure. While this experiment may be
too new to draw any Conclusions, their recent losses have been about the same
as they were in prior years. No miracle has occurred and I predict it will
prove as ineffective as all of the rest.
Several years ago another state eliminated the requirement for a unanimous
ballot for election. In fact, that Grand Jurisdiction now requires only a majority
vote to elect a candidate for the degrees. Since that didn’t help, they have
now adopted a policy of direct solicitation. So far that hasn’t stopped the
decline either. They have lost nearly thirty percent since the mid eighties—four
percent during the last year.
At a Masonic gathering more than a year ago two Brethren from yet another
Grand jurisdiction came with a well prepared presentation. Their enthusiasm would
have led you to believe they had discovered the “fountain of youth”.
They cited example after example of successfully signing up
candidates for Masonry at what Sounded like membership “rallies”. The events
they discussed took place mostly in 1992 but I suppose have continued since.
Than Grand jurisdiction lost more than nine percent during the past two years!
For comparison, their losses amounted to less than seven percent during the two
year period of 1989-90.
Several other states have adopted similar practices, all designed
to encourage membership growth with the inherent risk of electing less desirable
candidates. Again predictably, the membership loss continues in each of these
states. I suspect the only result of these efforts is a decline in quality and,
in the long run, further membership declines I know that each Grand
.Jurisdiction is sovereign and may set its own policies, but it disturbs me
that the whimpering and near hysteria has severely damaged the prestige and
reputation of the Fraternity to an extent that it would take several
generations to recover if we returned to our senses now. Actually we may never recover because the
whimpering is getting louder and louder. Brethren, we should be proud to be a
Mason, hold our heads high and instead of begging one to join, we should
consider it his misfortune if he doesn’t.
How long will it be before we realize that what was good for
Masonry in the nineteenth century would be good for Masonry in the
twenty-first? And for all time? With deteriorating morals among our society
there may not be enough “good” men to ensure our continued numerical growth
forever. Should we lower our standards
to match the standards of society? Rather than modify our definition of a “good
man” let’s just admit that there may be fewer men good enough to meet our
standards. instead of recruiting more men of lower quality, let’s purge our
ranks of those undesirables we already have!
And then let’s guard more carefully the west gate to keep more of their
ilk from entering!
Let’s put dignity back into our Lodges and into our ritual. Let’s eliminate
the frivolity and restore those teachings that have been eliminated from our degree
work. And, for those of us who are left, lets practice Masonry out of the Lodge
as well as within. Let’s forget about bigness and change our thinking that all
men should be Masons. Let’s spend more time being what we should be and less
time worrying about what others think we should be. Freemasonry has proven to be extremely durable and resilient and
would heal itself if given the opportunity. The above suggestions would require
little effort; just a change in our attitude. It would take time and it would
take a commitment from each of us to accept the financial responsibility to
maintain the Fraternity with whatever level of membership might result.
For those who are impatient, and not content to let the Fraternity
heal itself, I offer a suggestion as to how you can spend your research money wisely
and actively pursue a path to recovery. Rather than conduct surveys, or pay a
self-styled “expert” to lead us down a primrose path with intuitive suggestions
on how rebuild the Craft using timeworn ideas that have been tried over and
over with a batting average of zero, why not enlist a group of knowledgeable
and dedicated Masons to make a thorough study of Freemasonry in a successful
scenario? We know that Freemasonry has grown and prospered in other times and
that it is now growing and prospering in other places. In England, for example,
Freemasonry is healthier than in America.
In fact, the Grand Lodge of England has had an increase of more
than a thousand Lodges in the past twenty-five years, a time when American Masons
have done little constructive but much destructive. We have run off in all directions,
wringing our hands like helpless children, crying en masse about the loss in
membership. When asked why we don’t emulate England, our ready answer is, “This
isn’t England. Things are different here.” We adopted our Masonry from England
over two centuries ago and we’ve been “improving” it ever since. Let’s take
another look and see what is being done differently in England. Maybe we have
made a mistake or two. Maybe it’s not too late to return to the proper path.
Or, if you prefer, study Masonry in America in another time. Like
when a Mason was proud to be a Mason and was willing to support Masonry with his
time as well as his purse. When Masonic charity meant helping a distressed brother,
his wife, widow and orphan. When we weren’t ashamed to admit that Masonry’s
primary purpose was for our own benefit; that is, to learn and to improve
ourselves. When quality was more important than quantity, and when a Mason didn’t
think it necessary to apologize for having a few secrets or to make excuses for
parts of our ritual that our enemies don’t like!
But when asked why we don’t return to the way things were a
hundred years ago, we again have the answer. “This isn’t the nineteenth century.
Times have changed. Young men are too busy to devote time to Masonry.” Too busy
indeed! A hundred years ago few young men had a forty hour work week. Few young men slept until an hour after
sunrise and returned home from work with four hours of daylight left. Of
course, they didn’t have television that required four or five hours of their
time every day. While it’s true that these other interests, such as television,
do consume much of the modern man’s time, we aren’t going to change that with
solicitation, with cutting out the catechism or shortening the degrees. Rather
than compete head to head with television, we must have something to offer
those who want something besides television. We must offer something for those
who still place a value on what Masonry does offer. We must return to the principles
we once held dear and attract those who value those principles and leave the rest
to their own interests. By lowering our standards for membership many think we’re
enlarging our audience but we’re not. Freemasonry does not have room for
everyone of every level of morality. We must choose between our long standing
ideal of accepting only good men, or change to an organization of men of lesser
morals. For as the latter enter, we’ll find the former leaving.
I have cited several examples of well intended programs that have
failed miserably. I challenge anyone who may disagree with me to cite ONE such program
that has been even moderately successful! Still. many of you will undoubtedly
scoff at the foregoing and consider me a crackpot who doesn’t understand the
problem. Perhaps so, but your ideas have failed repeatedly.
Mine have not.