# Membership and participation in Freemasonry today



## amhdive (Oct 25, 2013)

The lack of membership and participation is one of the things I think most lodges are faced with today. It has such a profound impact on the future of Masonry, the workings of the lodge, movement of the line and the funding stream. I'm curious how your lodges are approaching it, what new and creative ideas you may have?

Thank You,




My Freemasonry HD


----------



## Zack (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I have no "new and creative ideas".  Remember the ones already tried...one day classes, no catechisms, forgiveness of back dues, a general lowering of standards, etc, etc, etc.  

Neither am I particularly worried about the lack of numbers.  I think that the great influx of members after WW2 thru the 60's, the Golden Age as some refer to it, was an anomaly that did not do Freemasonry any great favor in the long run.  That is why we are faced with budgets that can't be met and buildings we can't maintain and GLs we can no longer afford.  I think the membership is coming back to where it always should have been.  As hard as it may be, Freemasonry is going to have to adjust.

I was concerned with these "problems", but no longer.  I have decided to enjoy my Masonic participation.  I show-up and do my part.  If a few Brothers show up that is great and enjoyable.  If not....  I refuse to let others rain on my parade.


My opinion only.


----------



## Brother_Steve (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

It is on the shoulders of the members and the Worshipful Master equally.

The sitting WM has to feel the brethren are willing to come to lodge and the brethren expect magic every time they attend lodge.

There has to be a middle ground or an understanding. The W.M. doing his part with the help of his two Wardens and the brethren doing their part by attempting to make the meetings to see what has been prepared. Even if phone calls or emails have to go out to notify members of a guest speaker ETC.


----------



## cemab4y (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Masonry has been losing members for many years. Most Masons do not see this as a problem, and do not wish to discuss it. "Beating it to death", is what I usually hear.


----------



## streeter (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

hello,

this is a serious subject and we need to deal with it...
I have authored a book that directly addresses this issue and I invite you to explore the website...
the work is of course one man's personal opinion - and that is all it really is - an opinion - but you might find it interesting - hope so...

kindly,

Robert Streeter.


----------



## cemab4y (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Check out this link

http://msana.com/msastats.asp

When I try to tell Masons about the decline in membership, most people respond "There is no problem, my lodge had three new EAs last year". No one wants to discuss the reality.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> Check out this link
> 
> http://msana.com/msastats.asp
> 
> When I try to tell Masons about the decline in membership, most people respond "There is no problem, my lodge had three new EAs last year". No one wants to discuss the reality.



Membership numbers are not an issue. Truly. The issues are things like Lodge buildings that were designed to house much larger numbers than they currently do, Lodge buildings whose maintenance has been neglected to the point that effective repairs are ruinously expensive, a dues structure that has not kept up with inflation, let alone the disproportionately large expense of maintaining big, old Lodge buildings, etc. You get the idea. 

Our labor can be done with a handful of Masons. If that work is done properly, the membership, buildings, etc. will take care of itself.


----------



## Zack (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

We do not have a membership problem*.  
*We have a retention problem.
My jurisdiction loses more members every year due to non payment of dues than to death.


----------



## JJones (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

"There is nothing new under the sun".  I believe this was said several thousand years ago so it can only ring more true today.

What's funny is all these shortcuts we've introduced to gain more membership hasn't had much impact on anything aside from lowering the quality of the initiatic experiences for incoming masons.  That being said, I'm aware of programs being implemented that have been very successful but they don't involve anything new...in fact all they really do is get back to the basics and traditions of Freemasonry.

So I suppose the answer is that if you want to attract new members and retain them, offer them something more traditional.  Focus lodge efforts less on fundraisers and more on education and creating a memorable experience for everyone.


----------



## BroBook (Oct 25, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



JJones said:


> "There is nothing new under the sun".  I believe this was said several thousand years ago so it can only ring more true today.
> 
> What's funny is all these shortcuts we've introduced to gain more membership hasn't had much impact on anything aside from lowering the quality of the initiatic experiences for incoming masons.  That being said, I'm aware of programs being implemented that have been very successful but they don't involve anything new...in fact all they really do is get back to the basics and traditions of Freemasonry.
> 
> So I suppose the answer is that if you want to attract new members and retain them, offer them something more traditional.  Focus lodge efforts less on fundraisers and more on education and creating a memorable experience for everyone.



"Build it they will come " Masons must be like part of a building that has not been finished but those watching know it is going to be something  
And want to get involved , my next step in this great undertaking will be to get healed and therefore ever afterwards to serve H.I.M. 


My Freemasonry HD


----------



## rhitland (Oct 29, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I do not believe we can "fix" masonry and it's membership woes the craft is made to fix us not vice versa.


----------



## Blake Bowden (Oct 29, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



amhdive said:


> The lack of membership and participation is one of the things I think most lodges are faced with today. It has such a profound impact on the future of Masonry, the workings of the lodge, movement of the line and the funding stream. I'm curious how your lodges are approaching it, what new and creative ideas you may have?
> 
> Thank You,
> 
> ...



http://www.myfreemasonry.com/showthread.php/17849-45-Ways-To-Improve-Lodge-Attendance?


----------



## Zaden (Oct 29, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



BroBook said:


> "Build it they will come " Masons must be like part of a building that has not been finished but those watching know it is going to be something
> And want to get involved , my next step in this great undertaking will be to get healed and therefore ever afterwards to serve H.I.M.
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry HD



Brother, 

As it appears to be an acronym I do not know could you elaborate on "H.I.M."?

Fraternally,
WH


----------



## brother josh (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

There is a lodge right now in ky that has 120 members and I would say 7-10 show up on a meeting night and I can't say that I blame them u go through the whole initiation process that is so awesome then u become a MM and now all we do is discuss bills breakfast and dinner for the next meeting and I get that as well I know u gotta pay bills and u have to do stuff to keep the lodge running and in the publics eye but when we as masons meet in our secret chambers the younger crowd wants to learn MASONRY education during the meeting should be required but I'm a no body so take what I say with a grain of salt 


My Freemasonry


----------



## crono782 (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



brother josh said:


> There is a lodge right now in ky that has 120 members and I would say 7-10 show up on a meeting night and I can't say that I blame them u go through the whole initiation process that is so awesome then u become a MM and now all we do is discuss bills breakfast and dinner for the next meeting and I get that as well I know u gotta pay bills and u have to do stuff to keep the lodge running and in the publics eye but when we as masons meet in our secret chambers the younger crowd wants to learn MASONRY education during the meeting should be required but I'm a no body so take what I say with a grain of salt



You may think yourself a nobody without a voice, but you speak the truth brother, make no mistake. A lot of lone voices make for a pretty loud roar.


----------



## BroBook (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



Zaden said:


> Brother,
> 
> As it appears to be an acronym I do not know could you elaborate on "H.I.M."?
> 
> ...



His Imperial Majesty!!!


My Freemasonry


----------



## amhdive (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Shortly after I posted this question I had the opportunity to sit with our Grand Master and he challenged us to form a group of Masons 40 and under to discuss this topic. He thinks this group may be able to find ways to connect with the newer generations and may bring some fresh and new perspectives. Let them run as long as they stay in the boundaries of our tenants. 

It appear so many of us face the same issues with membership, education and managing the business side of the house. 


My Freemasonry


----------



## dfreybur (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



amhdive said:


> Shortly after I posted this question I had the opportunity to sit with our Grand Master and he challenged us to form a group of Masons 40 and under to discuss this topic. He thinks this group may be able to find ways to connect with the newer generations and may bring some fresh and new perspectives. Let them run as long as they stay in the boundaries of our tenants.
> 
> It appear so many of us face the same issues with membership, education and managing the business side of the house.



There are separate issues that need to be treated as such -

1) There was a golden age of fraternities that ended around 1960s.  During peak large facilities were constructed on the assumption the peak would never end.  It did end.  Membership is now approaching a more reasonable level but it's not large enough to maintain those large facilities.  This point says our facilities are in trouble but Masonry is not.  We're just riding out the result of a bubble.

2) There is a century long swing in popularity up and down.  We are now again in an upswing.  Point 1 above says that the previous upswing was a very large one so these two points are not in conflict.  Point 1 is about the previous upswing.  Point 2 is about the trends across several centuries.  We can expect the number of petitioners to grow faster than many lodges can handle, but also slower than is needed by the lodges that are in the worst trouble.  This point says some of our lodges are thriving and will continue to do so, some of our lodges are dying and will continue to do so and this is to be expected.  The trend is long enough that 50 year Masons have seen us in decline their entire time.  Now 0-year Masons will eventually be 50-year Masons who will see us in growth their entire time.  The perception of decline is because of the long time scale of the cycle and the excessive size of the previous high point.

3) Each generation or century saw Masonry focus on something different.  In the 1700s it was a mixture of mystical systems, then a focus on social connections.  In the 1800s we faced the anti-Masonic movement and emerged from it focusing on financial charities and service.  Near the turn of the centuries there was a movement against drink plus political activism to push public schools paid for by taxes.  Between the wars it was building social events.  The trend of Masonry as a social club peaked about the time our oldest members petitioned.

So what's the focus of the next generation and next century?  That's your question.  It's not "How to build membership" because we are already seeing young men petition in droves.  It's "how to keep them attending when it's not a social club they are looking for".

I'm Darwinian about it.  Every lodge should try something different.  Watch what lodges thrive.  Imitate them.


----------



## JJones (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



> Shortly after I posted this question I had the opportunity to sit with our Grand Master and he challenged us to form a group of Masons 40 and under to discuss this topic. He thinks this group may be able to find ways to connect with the newer generations and may bring some fresh and new perspectives. Let them run as long as they stay in the boundaries of our tenants.



I'm probably sticking my nose where it doesn't belong...but I'm in the '40 and under' crowd and would be glad to share my thoughts if you're ever interested.  Granted, I think many folks here know where I stand on several ideas already. 



> So what's the focus of the next generation and next century? That's your question. It's not "How to build membership" because we are already seeing young men petition in droves. It's "how to keep them attending when it's not a social club they are looking for".
> 
> I'm Darwinian about it. Every lodge should try something different. Watch what lodges thrive. Imitate them.



Yep, the members are coming but we don't have the retention.  I think in many cases this is because lodges aren't offering the kind of Freemasonry they are looking for.  I can join the Elks Lodge or Lion's Club if I want to fry fish.

I agree about the Darwinian aspect as well.  Lodges should have a bit of freedom to get creative...within reason and without changing the ritual.


----------



## Zaden (Oct 30, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



BroBook said:


> His Imperial Majesty!!!
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry


Thank you, brother.


----------



## cog41 (Oct 31, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

This is a topic that has been debated many times, and it will continue to be discussed in the future.

I don't have a one fits all answer. I agree that each local lodge must be allowed to be creative. Is that enough? Will revamping the procedures for a regular meeting be enough?
The introduction of moments/minutes for masonic, personal and or spiritual reflection, encouragement and education be enough? Will Grand Lodge rules or Masonic law have to stretched, bent or broken? Hope not, but who knows?
I think it would depend on the membership of each lodge and their leadership.

How about having a meeting on the subject? List ideas, proposals etc. etc.. Do so without threats of heresy. 
Don't settle for one meeting. Objective communication and cooperation is the key to this process.

Look in the mirror and perform a serious and thorough examination individually and collectively.

Just my humble opinion.

Heck I probably wont be able to make it anyway.


----------



## The SERVICE (Oct 31, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I hear you bro. Let's lead by example! 

My Freemasonry


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 1, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Back in the 1980's a group of Grand Masters (primarily from the Southern USA grand Lodges) met at Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri. The meeting was sponsored by the Scottish Rite USA(Southern Jurisdiction). The meeting was to discuss the overall trends in membership (membership has been declining since the mid 1950's). The participants agreed to set up a "Masonic renewal Task Force" ,for the USA, and come up with solutions to reverse the trends and get Masonry back to growing again. 

The group developed some materials and issued at least one report (available from Amazon.com). The results of the task force were generally ignored, as most Masons and most Grand lodges were not convinced there was a problem. The task force was abandoned.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 1, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

One book prepared by the task force, was "101 ideas to revitalize the lodge" (not sure about the title). The information in the book was excellent, but it was ignored by most Masons. Maybe I am optimistic, but I believe that there could be a way to recommission the MRTF. The Scottish Rite (SJ), or some other Masonic organization (nationally, and outside of the direct control of any Grand Lodge) , could sponsor the task force. 

I believe that (nationally) Freemasonry, could take a "holistic" approach, and re-examine Freemasonry, top-to-bottom, and see what we are doing right, and what we are doing wrong. With the internet, and social media, we could see a real "renaissance" in Freemasonry. We could drop the obsolete and suicidal prohibition against inviting men to join. 

This has always been a real irritant to me. 75 years ago, when the USA was a much more stable society, and men participated in the activities that their fathers and grandfathers participated in, the prohibition against recruiting might have made sense. But since WW2, and the population being scattered all over the country, the prohibition is obsolete.


----------



## MarkR (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> ...We could drop the obsolete and suicidal prohibition against inviting men to join.
> 
> This has always been a real irritant to me. 75 years ago, when the USA was a much more stable society, and men participated in the activities that their fathers and grandfathers participated in, the prohibition against recruiting might have made sense. But since WW2, and the population being scattered all over the country, the prohibition is obsolete.


Minnesota now permits us to ask a good candidate if they would be interested, but only once.  Then we must let it drop.


----------



## Zack (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> We could drop the obsolete and suicidal prohibition against inviting men to join.
> 
> This has always been a real irritant to me. 75 years ago, when the USA was a much more stable society, and men participated in the activities that their fathers and grandfathers participated in, the prohibition against recruiting might have made sense. But since WW2, and the population being scattered all over the country, the prohibition is obsolete.



Would you be in a favor of doing away with the unanimous ballot and investigation committees?
Some jurisdictions have done away the catechisms, at least in part.  Perhaps we should omit the first 2 degrees and just make a man a MM upon application.  What you're advocating is,  "throw enough against the wall and maybe some stick".

I say again.....We do not have a membership problem...we have a retention problem.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Would you be in a favor of doing away with the unanimous ballot and investigation committees?
Some jurisdictions have done away the catechisms, at least in part. Perhaps we should omit the first 2 degrees and just make a man a MM upon application. What you're advocating is, "throw enough against the wall and maybe some stick".

I say again.....We do not have a membership problem...we have a retention problem.

===============

I am NOT in favor of dropping the unanimous ballot, nor am I in favor of dropping the investigation committee. And I am certainly not in favor of dropping the EA/FC degrees. If you see my previous posts, you will see that I am 1000% in favor of keeping the ancient landmarks. We can stay "true to our roots", and still make the masonic experience more relevant to the 21st century. 

We have BOTH a membership problem and a retention problem. Look up an article called "there's a hole in our bucket", and you will what I am talking about. 

With the advancing age of our membership, I would like to see more "daylight" lodges , so that men who cannot get out at night, can participate in Masonry. You can agree, that making Masonry more accessible to shift workers and older members, is not a change in our Fraternity, but more of an "adaptation". 

I personally, enjoyed the memory work. Some jurisdictions have modified the work, or are using cypher books. I believe that each Grand Lodge will have to find the policy that they wish to use, and go with it. 

Virginia had the "You would make a good Mason" program some years ago. It was a way to introduce good men to Masonry, without "recruiting". I believe that there are many men who would make excellent Masons, but they do not know about the Fraternity, or they are waiting for an invitation that will never come.

I have absolutely no problem with "open houses", where Masonry can be introducted to the community. These get great publicity for the Craft, and men who would otherwise never have heard of Freemasonry can learn about the Craft, and the petitioning process. 

I am not in favor of "throwing the baby out with the bath water"!.. I believe that all Masons, and especially all Grand Lodges, should take a "holistic" approach, and have the courage to examine the Masonic experience "top to bottom", and see how we can make Masonry more relevant and accessible to 21st Century America. We ignore the challenge at our peril!


----------



## JJones (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I'll be honest, if we start inviting people to join then I'll probably demit.

A man has to decide, on his own, that he wishes to become a better person and take the next step.  There's something very powerful about that and it's woven very heavily into the ritual as well.  I couldn't fathom throwing that out the window.

I also feel a program like this would be another example of trying to increase membership/retention without trying to fix the problem.  Weather you invite them or make them ask to join you'll still end up with the same kind of retention if you aren't meeting  incoming member expectations for Freemasonry.  In fact, retention might even be lower with invitation...nothing like asking someone to join and then making them steward or asking them to fry fish. They might get the impression they were asked to join because everyone else was burned out on cooking all the time.


----------



## crono782 (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I think no invitation should stay that way. I see little harm in name dropping the craft into conversation with a man you believe would make a good mason. Through normal conversation, if he will likely get curious. Then invite him to a stated for dinner and conversation. The decision to ask is still his, but you've merely brought the topic to light. Again most won't ask if they don't know about it. But yeah, there is something quite powerful about someone who SEEKS rather than is OFFERED light. 


My Freemasonry


----------



## Brother JC (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I feel the "invitation rule" has been ignored for decades, leading to the present wall of crony-ism many younger Brothers are experiencing. If anything, I think we should get tougher on people bringing their buddies in "just because."
Exactly what is wrong with lodges of less than 100 dedicated members? IMO it beats the heck out of 400 DGF members.


----------



## Angler (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I am not surprised that most of these comments seem to look backwards rather than forward.  The ritual should be reinforced and preserved for everyone.  But recruiting, investigating, training and retention should be changed to reflect the values of the modern world. Lodges in large metro areas should be centralized and sometimes merged to gain financial economies.  Communications needs to be developed to allow ALL members to be better notified of Masonic activities and news.

It's like an old preacher that refuse to let his congregation dance.


----------



## jwhoff (Nov 2, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



rhitland said:


> I do not believe we can "fix" masonry and it's membership woes the craft is made to fix us not vice versa.



Agreed!  Quality, never numbers.  Why are we constantly wringing our hands about the phenomena brought on by WWII mobilization?  

Who among us can make the statement that all who came into the fraternity were equally qualified or that they furthered masonry more than the smaller numbers before or since?  Yes, numbers are great when stacking bricks and mortar.  But quality prevails and perpetuates the enlightenment that will carry civilization through the many pitfalls of history.

Brethren, should we not be more concerned about the large number of masonic disciplinary issues that face our grand jurisdictions across the planet.  

Should we not pay attention to the few number of newcomers who actually make it through to Master Mason each year?   Have you ever thought serious about all those who don't have enough interest to even show back up after their EA degree?

Should we not see that our lodges are spending less and less time on masonic teaching and more and more time on things that neither inspire or encourage the serious mason?  How many Worshipful Masters among us stare blankly when a brother approaches him with the hope of introducing masonic education into the lodge activities?  How many men in a stated meeting could hold a knowledgeable conversation about masonic history, philosophy or the tenants of the order?  

Are these not symptoms of packing our lodges with folks who may not be true initiates?  


I again suggest that were we to teach masonry in lodges and have a renaissance in our hearts that we would draw the attention of those worthy of initiation.  Then, and only then, will we become relevant and grow the fraternity to it's rightful place in the world.


----------



## Zack (Nov 3, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



RayW said:


> I am not surprised that most of these comments seem to look backwards rather than forward.  The ritual should be reinforced and preserved for everyone.  But recruiting, investigating, training and retention should be changed to reflect the values of the modern world. Lodges in large metro areas should be centralized and sometimes merged to gain financial economies.  Communications needs to be developed to allow ALL members to be better notified of Masonic activities and news.
> 
> It's like an old preacher that refuse to let his congregation dance.



I agree about the communication being improved.
In the never ending quest for membership numbers the Fraternity has been cheapened and the standards lowered to absurd levels.
Except for the Ritual of our initiations,  the biggest difference between Freemasonry and every other social and service club is we wear aprons and one guy wears a hat.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 3, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Masonry experienced a huge "bump" in membrship in the post WW2 years. This phenomenon had many impacts on the Craft. The numbers levelled off, and began declining. I believe that Masonry can work with the new demographic realities, and still flourish. 

There will be some consolidations, lodges will close down and merge.

We can keep our standards high, and still attract good men. We can also embrace new technologies, and still keep true to our ancient landmarks and traditions. 

Mother Teresa of Calcutta won the Nobel Prize, and the Medal of Freedom. One of her leadership policies was, that the word "problem" was forbidden. The sisters had to use the word "gift", instead. 

Masonry can use the decline of membership, as a methodology to work towards, a smaller, and more efficient Masonic experience. We can adopt more of the new technologies. Print newsletters are obsolete and expensive. Masonic news can be more easily disseminated by electronic media.


----------



## Zack (Nov 3, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> Masonry experienced a huge "bump" in membrship in the post WW2 years. This phenomenon had many impacts on the Craft. The numbers levelled off, and began declining. I believe that Masonry can work with the new demographic realities, and still flourish.
> 
> There will be some consolidations, lodges will close down and merge.
> 
> ...



Quite a departure from your usual "doom and gloom" and "the sky is falling" pertaining to this subject.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 4, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Many masons are not convinced that there is a "gift" at all. They see the decline in membership, the advancing age of the membership, and the closing of lodges, and see nothing wrong at all. I see an opportunity to adjust our administrative procedures, and make some necessary changes, and move the Craft forward to a more meaningful experience in the 21st Century. ( I am experienced in statistical analysis with the Commerce Department, Bureau of the Census). 

Once the cohort of post-WW2 masons is out of the picture, the median age of US Masons will decline. When the younger men take over the leadership positions, we will be faced with the realities of smaller membership numbers, and fewer lodges, and consolidations. With a membership cohort more versed in the technologies of the internet and social media, the Craft can adapt and tailor the Masonic experience to the new realities.


----------



## JJones (Nov 4, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

So our numbers are returning to their pre-ww2 averages? (Taking population changes into account)

I wonder if our pre-ww2 brothers were as worried about numbers as so many of us are today?


----------



## Zack (Nov 4, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



JJones said:


> So our numbers are returning to their pre-ww2 averages? (Taking population changes into account)
> 
> I wonder if our pre-ww2 brothers were as worried about numbers as so many of us are today?



I don't know how accurate it is but I have read that the percentages of the male population, pre-WW2 vs today, is about the same.

I have no idea what our pre-WW2 Brethren were thinking about membership numbers, but I have read minutes from my Mother Lodge from late 1920's, and they were concerned about lack of attendance and participation not membership numbers.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 4, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

It is difficult to say what men were thinking 90 years ago.  I find it instructive to look back at the time immediately following the Morgan affair in the 1820s. Every lodge in the entire state of Vermont had to close. New York lost over half the membership. Lodges closed and declined all over the USA. But Masonry survived, and the numbers picked back up. I cannot predict the future, but I can look at the demographic realities. A few things are certain:

-The overall membership numbers will continue to decline (absent some major national effort to increase membership)
-The median age of the membership will advance for some years, and then decline, as the post WW2 membership dies off.
-Lodges will close and consolidate, as the membership numbers decline, and fewer numbers are available to keep the lodges open.
-Rural lodges will see some of the greatest losses, as the population continues to "urbanize".

I think that all Masons, who are concerned about the survival of the Craft ,should be concerned. I would love to see more cooperation and idea-sharing among the various Grand Lodges in the USA. What baffles me, is the silence coming from the appendant bodies. Their survival depends on the survival and growth of Craft Masonry.


----------



## dfreybur (Nov 5, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> We could drop the obsolete and suicidal prohibition against inviting men to join.



There are jurisdictions in the world that use invitations as their standard method.  I remember a talk on it one of the years I attended GL in California 97-99.  One or more of the European countries.  I would love to be membership data for those jurisdictions to see if they have historical swings in popularity the way most US jurisdictions do.  Having data leads to informed decisions.  Not having data leads to guesswork.

If the issue is about membership "More men in Freemasonry" then we should loosen the strings on invitations.

Thing is I am no longer convinced that invitations are about the number of members.  If you don't hold the tiler of the boat you drift with the winds.  As we now depend on men coming to us because they randomly happened upon the fact that we don't do invitations, our incoming pipeline is random.  Should we decide to use invitations we could begin with the more eminent men, whatever that means to any one of us.  We could men up making it about "More Masonry in men" if we go about it carefully.


----------



## nfasson (Nov 5, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I retract my earlier post...


----------



## BroBook (Nov 5, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I like that "more masonry in men"


My Freemasonry


----------



## rhitland (Nov 5, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

148 invested in a website that quickly paid for itself.  Very powerful tool for a lodge.


----------



## MarkR (Nov 6, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



rhitland said:


> 148 invested in a website that quickly paid for itself.  Very powerful tool for a lodge.


Yep.  We were a pretty moribund lodge until we launched our web site.  Since then, we've had petitioners to initiate, pass, and raise on a regular basis, and almost all of them came as a result of queries through the web site.  Enough of them have stayed active that our entire progressive line is made up of men 40 and under, with no Past Masters in the line, plus young men on the sidelines waiting for a chance to get in the line.

If young men today have a question about anything, their first move is to do a web search.  Your lodge should be the first thing that comes up on a Google search for "[your town] masons."


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 8, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I am ashamed to say, that my mother lodge does not have a webpage, and has no plans to obtain one. The membership is not convinced of the value of the internet. I was glad to see when the Grand Lodge of Ohio, announced a regulation that all subordinate lodges must have an internet site. 

I predict that more lodges and Grand Lodges will be utilizing the internet. We may even see a Grand Lodge office "Grand Webmaster", to advise subordinate lodges on how to exploit the internet to the fullest.

Try to imagine what a young man must feel , when he sees one of the excellent programs about Freemasonry on "History" or "Discovery" channel. Then he checks to see if there is a lodge in his town, and nothing pops up on google. He may decide that there is no Freemasonry in his town!

I believe that the internet is ideal for Freemasonry. At least one Grand Lodge (PA) gives all masons the option of paying their dues on line.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 8, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

check out

http://www.freemasoninformation.com/2011/01/freemasonry-and-the-internet/


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (Nov 9, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> I am ashamed to say, that my mother lodge does not have a webpage, and has no plans to obtain one. The membership is not convinced of the value of the internet.



Those words seem to have resonated with me, provoking much thought.

First of all, IMHO, if a the membership of a particular lodge wants to avoid any visibility or availability via the Internet, that's fine. They should be free to do so. I can see the possibility that such a group of Masons might, upon careful consideration, decided that they did not want or need such things. I can envision, for instance, a small but thriving T.O. lodge that values "Masonry in men" (winks at Doug) more than the number of men in Masonry. They are small and exclusive, and they like it that way. More power to them, I say.  

I rather doubt, however, that such considerations are really the case. More likely, it is a bunch of stodgy old men who don't understand the thing and are thus unaware it's potential, or are even afraid of it. And that, IMO, is inexcusable. 

The Internet, or more precisely, the various mediums that are enabled by the Internet, are now and for evermore a part of our community. One of the great things about the technology is that it can broaden that community in so many ways (not just geographically). We (the community in general, and Freemasonry in particular) have only begun to see some of the ways that technology will change things. Some of those changes are obvious - a web presence is, arguably, more important than a phone book listing. Some changes less so - the ability to pay one's dues using PayPal or similar. Some are still unrealized dreams - the extension of an open lodge, via telepresence, to members who could not otherwise attend. Such a thing might add rather substantially to the Tyler's required qualifications, perhaps even a redefinition of the role, but certainly there are no technical boundaries to it. Mind you, I'm not suggesting that it's a replacement for traditional "meatspace" meetings, only that it might be a worthy adjunct for those who, for various reasons, might not be able to attend in person.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

You will find that most lodges have a "buzzard's row", who will hold up, derail, and stop any new project or idea that comes along. The usual response is "We never did it that way before" or "We never had an internet page before". Once this statement is proffered, the project/idea/program is derailed.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I  would love for more Grand Lodges to follow Ohio's example, and mandate (force) all subordinate lodges to have some internet presence and/or web page.  The internet is the "wave of the present", and I cannot fathom why so many lodges have not embraced it.

I reside in metro WashDC. (I work internationally). Many (not all) of the lodges in my area have web pages. Some get a majority of their new petitions from their webpage. Fredericksburg #4(VA) no longer has a print newsletter, all information is disseminated via their internet newsletter.


----------



## JJones (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Or we could allow lodges to do what they feel works best for them and not force anyone into doing anything against their will?

Having an online presence is nice but I've found that it's impact has been pretty minimal so far, we've certainly received no petitions from it.  It may be because my lodge is rural, I'll admit, but I couldn't tell you one way or another.

What about a lodge that doesn't have the resources/capability to build a website?  Granted, it's not terribly expensive but it does take more than a basic level of skill to design a webpage that looks appealing and I'd suggest that no website at all is better than some of the lodge (and some GL) websites I've seen over the years.


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Or we could allow lodges to do what they feel works best for them and not force anyone into doing anything against their will?

--Every subordinate lodge MUST follow the rules/constitution/by-laws of their Grand Lodge. When a Grand Lodge issues new legislation, lodges must obey. This is how it works. If a lodge is unwilling to follow the directives of their Grand Lodge, then they must turn in their charter, and cease operations. "Suck it up" is how it works. 

Lodges do get a great deal of leeway in how they operate, but the Grand Lodge is BOSS. 

Having an online presence is nice but I've found that it's impact has been pretty minimal so far, we've certainly received no petitions from it. 

--If your lodge has not received any petitions from the internet, yet. They will in the future. Lodges in my district (Northern VA), get a majority of their petitions from their internet presence. One lodge in my town got 17 new petitions in one month, all from the 'net. 


It may be because my lodge is rural, I'll admit, but I couldn't tell you one way or another.

What about a lodge that doesn't have the resources/capability to build a website? 

--In case like this, the Grand Lodge will have to provide support and guidance. Grand Lodges will establish an office of "Grand Webmaster", to provide subordinate lodges with advice and directives. This way, every lodge will not to "re-invent the wheel". Also, Grand Lodge control, will ensure that all lodge websites "toe the line", and present Freemasonry properly, and not open the lodge to legal action, or have the possibility of a conflict of interest, or copyright violations, etc. 



Granted, it's not terribly expensive but it does take more than a basic level of skill to design a webpage that looks appealing and I'd suggest that no website at all is better than some of the lodge (and some GL) websites I've seen over the years. 


--All the more reason for assistance from the Grand Lodge. I have seen many masonic websites. Some are excellent, some are mediocre, some are an embarrassment. I agree, that no website is better than a crappy website. 

All the more reason for Grand Lodges to establish a "template" so that all subordinate lodges will have a minimum standard. I get a pain in my chest, when I see a masonic website, that lists an event which occured two years ago, and it is still advertised on the site!

Grand Lodges can also establish a "competition" where all lodge sites would compete for "blue ribbons", for which subordinate lodge has the best overall website. 

Resistance to all change is endemic to our lodges. Grand Lodges are going to have to mandate that lodges have websites, and drag the subordinate lodges into the 21st century. 

​


----------



## Brother JC (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> You will find that most lodges have a "buzzard's row", who will hold up, derail, and stop any new project or idea that comes along. The usual response is "We never did it that way before" or "We never had an internet page before". Once this statement is proffered, the project/idea/program is derailed.



One sitting Master I know began gaveling down the "buzzards," as such commentary disrupts the harmony of the Lodge. He also imposed a series of fines for interruptions, and speaking without using the proper etiquette (stand, sign, be recognized).


----------



## dfreybur (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



BroBook said:


> I like that "more masonry in men"



It combines a couple of sources.  The quantity versus quality issue does get phrased as "More men in Masonry or more Masonry in men?"  Also Bro Nagy defines Freemasonry as the organization and process thus favoring quantity, Masonry as the individual process thus favoring quality.

The phrasing ends up "More men in Freemasonry or more Masonry in men?"  With that context it becomes clear the answer is yes to both.  As Freemasons we want more candidates for our lodges.  As Masons we want to practice our principles.  The Ying and Yang.


----------



## dfreybur (Nov 11, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



trysquare said:


> One sitting Master I know began gaveling down the "buzzards," as such commentary disrupts the harmony of the Lodge.



It's hard to do the first time.  It gets easier over time not the least reason is once the lodge knows the Master is in charge they follow knowingly instead of out of habit.  More than just it being our obligation, it makes sense to follow a man who has demonstrated such leadership.  It's also very easy to tell when a brother has started abusing the oriental gavel so abuse it once and the brothers find it getting easier over time to sit and wait for his year to be over.

A WM needs skill at both leadership and administration.  They are very different skills not often taught as such.  In the military they are taught in NCO school and staff college so Navy folks who have dealt with "khakis and flags" will know the difference.  Other branches will use other terms, the enlisted folks who moved from senior technical to first sergeant moving towards sergeant major and generals/admirals.


----------



## brother josh (Nov 12, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



cemab4y said:


> I  would love for more Grand Lodges to follow Ohio's example, and mandate (force) all subordinate lodges to have some internet presence and/or web page.  The internet is the "wave of the present", and I cannot fathom why so many lodges have not embraced it.
> 
> I reside in metro WashDC. (I work internationally). Many (not all) of the lodges in my area have web pages. Some get a majority of their new petitions from their webpage. Fredericksburg #4(VA) no longer has a print newsletter, all information is disseminated via their internet newsletter.



Only problem with that is if we give grand lodge that type of authority to force a lodge to do what it wants then we lose the idea of independence of each lodge governs itself 


My Freemasonry


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 12, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



brother josh said:


> Only problem with that is if we give grand lodge that type of authority to force a lodge to do what it wants then we lose the idea of independence of each lodge governs itself
> 
> 
> My Freemasonry




===Subordinate lodges do NOT "give" authority to their Grand Lodge.  Grand Lodges give authority to subordinate lodges to operate. Grand Lodges have constitutions/by-laws and regulations. 

Lodges are not independent, they operate under the supervision of the Grand Lodge which holds their charter. 

The Grand Lodge of Ohio voted in convention, to require all subordinate lodges to obtain a webpage. The regulation was made properly, by majority vote.


----------



## dfreybur (Nov 12, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



brother josh said:


> Only problem with that is if we give grand lodge that type of authority to force a lodge to do what it wants then we lose the idea of independence of each lodge governs itself



Masonry works like a federated republic.

Each lodge elects some of its officers and sends them as representatives to GL - Whether a lodge counts as a republic depends on the details of your exact definition.  Each lodge is supposed to have "control" over its "territory" in the sense of drawing candidates from its cable tow.  As the number of lodges have grown this limited level of independence has dwindled.

Each GL is composed of the representatives of its constituent lodges, with the details of who votes varying by jurisdiction.  On the one hand lodges can't exist without a GL.  On the other hand the lodges hold veto over GL by voting in the annual communication.

So what does it even mean when discussing authority that flows two ways like that?  I don't know but I've read that W Bro George Washington said or quoted "He who rules least rules best".  if there's a way to get it done without a mandate that should be tried first.


----------



## JJones (Nov 12, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*



> if there's a way to get it done without a mandate that should be tried first.



Agreed.  We're all required to accept GL law, there's no dispute about that, my argument was about if mandates are really necessary.  Just because some people think every lodge should have a website does it mean that they're right?  Furthermore, just because some people think every lodge should have a website and have the ability to make requiring one a mandate, does that make it right?

Every lodge is unique and it's a bad idea to treat them like they're not in my opinion.  We should give lodges the freedom to determine if certain things are best for them or not.


----------



## brother josh (Nov 12, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

I find both answers from you brother to be of a reasonable mind as long as we all GL included can meet on the level without anything being force by one lodge or another then I feel brotherly love will overcome 


My Freemasonry


----------



## cemab4y (Nov 13, 2013)

*Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*

Mandates are sometimes necessary. Example: The Grand Lodge of North Carolina voted some years ago to extend full fraternal relations to MW Prince Hall Grand Lodge of North Carolina. Not all lodges were thrilled with this action. But, the Grand Master pushed and got 2/3 of the lodges to adopt the regulation. All lodges and all NC masons must accept this decision. "Suck it up" is the rule. 

If "some people", meaning a majority of the lodges in a particular Grand Lodge makes the proposal, and it carries, then ALL lodges must accept the directive. Does this make it "right"? I don't know. But- It makes it mandatory, and since all lodges which are chartered by the Grand Lodge, then it must be done. Lodges and individual Masons are required to "cheerfully conform" to all of the laws, rules and regulations of the Grand Lodge. The discussion is over.


----------



## william ernest roberts (Oct 6, 2014)

Zack said:


> *Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*
> 
> I have no "new and creative ideas".  Remember the ones already tried...one day classes, no catechisms, forgiveness of back dues, a general lowering of standards, etc, etc, etc.
> 
> ...


like your comment zak I to enjoy my freemasonry ,love writing and reading about our history I have just resigned from my craft lodge but will join another soon still in side degrees which is a concern but told not to worry I could join a installed masters lodge but we shall see take care


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (Oct 6, 2014)

amhdive said:


> The lack of membership and participation is one of the things I think most lodges are faced with today. It has such a profound impact on the future of Masonry, the workings of the lodge, movement of the line and the funding stream. I'm curious how your lodges are approaching it, what new and creative ideas you may have?


Membership is not a "problem". We don't "need" more members. We need good Masons, first and foremost. Not enough dues-paying members to support the Lodge building that was built when membership was higher? Raise the dues, move to a less expensive venue, merge, whatever. Just don't think that "more members" is what "Masonry needs".


----------



## Texan92 (Oct 6, 2014)

We don't need more members we need the men who took an obligation to remember that obligation and get active again.  I don't know who came up with the idea that you only have to do so much, it is more of what have you done for me lately attitude we need.  An inactive lodge is a dead lodge the one I belong to has one foot and a toe in the grave and a slight breeze will push us on in.  There are a few of us who are fighting to keep it alive, but we have a lot of members who ( you noticed I used members not masons) who feel they have done enough and just are not active anymore.


----------



## MaineMason (Oct 6, 2014)

Texan92 said:


> We don't need more members we need the men who took an obligation to remember that obligation and get active again.  I don't know who came up with the idea that you only have to do so much, it is more of what have you done for me lately attitude we need.  An inactive lodge is a dead lodge the one I belong to has one foot and a toe in the grave and a slight breeze will push us on in.  There are a few of us who are fighting to keep it alive, but we have a lot of members who ( you noticed I used members not masons) who feel they have done enough and just are not active anymore.


Our lodge is different. Yes, we have elderly members we see infrequently or only when we're doing degree work or officer elections, but many of the line officers--including myself are under 60 and several, again including myself, are under 50. We've got a brand new DeMolay chapter, for which I am a trained Dad Advisor, and we've got Rainbow. Our Eastern Star Chapter is mostly defunct, however. We're active in the community and have a presence there for town functions. We also have an active Royal Arch Chapter, of which I am a member and many of us are both York and Scottish Rite masons. 
That being said, as active as we are, there's very few people on the sidelines at our stated communications. I would not equate that kind of situation with being "dead" as a lodge. We have initiated lots of new members in the last couple of years. If that's not the case with your lodge, well, perhaps you are correct to be worried.


----------



## MaineMason (Oct 6, 2014)

By the way, many of our newest members are active with our monthly bean suppers (we have a couple of hundred community members in for those suppers per month) and some, such as myself, got in line immediately. THAT is an active lodge.


----------



## william ernest roberts (Oct 7, 2014)

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> Membership is not a "problem". We don't "need" more members. We need good Masons, first and foremost. Not enough dues-paying members to support the Lodge building that was built when membership was higher? Raise the dues, move to a less expensive venue, merge, whatever. Just don't think that "more members" is what "Masonry needs".



True bro Johhny but small numbers are some times best our early history mentions 5/6 meeting in a lodge and as time has gone on it has been the same small and select or as bro Dr oliver writes "be very cautious whom you recommend for initiation, one false step...........keep it select great numbers are not always beneficial "   but in the modern age of today we seem to have opted for big is beautiful smiib


----------



## Warrior1256 (Oct 7, 2014)

BroBook said:


> *Re: Membership and participation in Freemasonry to*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wise words brother.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (Oct 8, 2014)

william ernest roberts said:


> True bro Johhny but small numbers are some times best our early history mentions 5/6 meeting in a lodge and as time has gone on it has been the same small and select or as bro Dr oliver writes "be very cautious whom you recommend for initiation, one false step...........keep it select great numbers are not always beneficial "   but in the modern age of today we seem to have opted for big is beautiful smiib



We agree completely, Brother. Bigger is fine, if that's what it takes to accommodate. I am always inspired by the grand Masonic venues of the early twentieth century. At the same time, I am depressed when I attend some function in one and see it 80% empty. And I am frustrated by men who seem to think that filling them up again is what Masonry is about. I'd rather sit in a Lodge opened in a rented banquet room with a dozen men truly committed to their Masonic labors than I would with a few hundred dilettantes in the grandest temple. Every time.


----------



## Jraiford (Oct 12, 2014)

Every few months we have a rib sale fundraiser for the scholarship fund. That is the greatest turnout we have. We meet on every 2nd Tuesday, and only have a meal when we have guests. Our next greatest turn out is for practice on Thursdays, where we practice an upcoming degree. If there are new officers, we sometimes practice opening and closing. The membership is around 90, but we usually have about 10 show up. You would think that as we add more and younger members, they would come to lodge. But once they get the MM they only show up every so often. We had one show up and be installed as JD and hasn't made a meeting or practice since. So instead of filling a chair, we have a void. I have to move from SS to JD to sometimes Tiler. It gets annoying but don't know how to fix it.


----------

