It’s unfortunate, but sometimes a Lodge just can’t survive.
Sometimes a Lodge will just close. Sometimes a Lodge will merge with a neighboring Lodge.
And these decisions are extremely hard, and painful, and easily put off. Sometimes a Lodge that everyone knows can’t survive hangs on for years, while the inevitable decisions are slowly made.
This is always a sad state of affairs. Sad for the Masons involved, and sad for the community.
But, during these most difficult of times, we must make just as much effort to protect the Lodge’s treasure as was taken when the Lodge was thriving.
We have to remember that nothing the Lodge has belongs to individual members. It was all, over a long span of time, given, built, and saved for the betterment of Freemasonry, not as the private property of any individual.
Given that, how can we best protect Lodge records, artifacts, money, and all the rest while the Lodge is going through the decisions to close or merge?
Just a few quick examples that I have personally witnessed:
-A Lodge I know of was the proud owner of a fine ivory gavel. That gavel never made it to the Lodge’s new and temporary home, or to the Lodge eventually merged with.
-One day I noticed the very first minute books of a Lodge in the process of slowly closing in the trunk of the Worshipful Master’s car. Where they had apparently been riding for quite some time.
-More than once I have seen the proceeds from the sale of a Masonic Temple squandered.
I am not saying that these things are intentional. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. I can’t know. Was the ivory gavel stolen by a member of the Lodge? Or was it accidentally lost in the move or thrown out somehow? Did the WM put those really old minutes in the back trunk of his car to drive them up to the Grand Lodge museum and then just didn’t get around to it? Did a Lodge, suddenly flush with cash simply temporarily forget their obligation to be good financial stewards?
I can’t know why or how any of these things happened. But, I know that they did. And I know that they shouldn’t have.
So, that begs the question. How can we, as Freemasons, best ensure that when a Lodge is going through crisis, important records aren’t lost, valuable artifacts are retained within the Craft, and fiscal responsibility is maintained?
I think that this is a really important question, and I hope that we can share some good ideas here.
Related to that, specifically to the occasional slowness when it comes to making the decisions that everyone can plainly see need to be made, when is too few, too few?
In my Jurisdiction it takes seven to open a Lodge of Entered Apprentices, five to open a Fellowcraft’s Lodge, and three to open a Lodge of Master Masons.
If we don’t regularly get seven to show up for a Stated Meeting, is it time to throw in the towel? Five? Three? When are there just not enough?
And when that decision is made, how do we protect and preserve that which needs to be saved?
As to artifact and asset protection and transfers, for those whose Lodges are in earthquake, wildfire, flood, tornado or hurricane zones, - that's just about everybody - you really ought to have already:
1. photographed every single stick of everything in your Lodge
2. given each item a number code and
3. created an inventory log
4. drawn detailed floor plans;
5. digitally scanned every sheaf of paper and old photographs etc,
6. inventoried and valued (put a value on it) all of it, and
7. parked the digital copies and photos etc both on portable hard drives you back up and check once a quarter, as well as on the Cloud,
as part of general preparedness.
An inventory system of artifacts is especially important in cases of ivory gavels and valuable antiques, but also in cases of old documents, ledgers, log books etc. Appointing an Archivist is also important - someone with the corporate knowledge to track and oversee all of that, and then train at least one other person as a legacy assistant, is also important.
Once your preparedness is in place so you can reconstruct your Lodge in case of natural or man made emergency, then it's a simple matter to use that system to close out a Lodge or merge with another.
I know a Brother in Oregon who has done a beautiful job with his Lodge and also volunteers with the Masonic Museum in Forest Grove - I'd recommend him to anyone.
Thank you for this detailed plan. I appreciate it, and hope that some of our Lodges take the ideas to heart. Not just for purposes of closing a Lodge, but as you mention, in case of emergency or disaster as well. Surely we would need all of these things if we had a fire for example.
And I second your good words about our Brother Johnny!
While in ritual the numbers are the same, Ohio requires a quorum of 8 to open a lodge and conduct business on any given occasion.
My lodge had a neighboring lodge merge into ours a number of years ago and we are still struggling to see where certain historical records and artifacts disappeared too.
Thanks for letting us know about the requirements in Ohio. Here in Washington, if there are three, and one of them happens to be the WM or a Warden, (or a Special Deputy appointed by the GM for the purpose) business can be done. I worry though, that business can't be well done in a circumstance like that.
It is terribly sad when we loose records and artifacts, and I do think we have to do a much better job as a Craft to ensure that things like your Lodge is having to deal with don't happen so often.
Our Lodge is currently going through the process of absorbing a neighboring Lodge. We are facing all the issues brought up in the article, as well as a uniquely Alaskan problem. Our neighboring Lodge is 250 miles away by air, and 300 by boat. There are no roads. When they have closed their doors, surrendered their charter, and sold their building, our brothers, while still Masons and life members of our Lodge, will be challenged to continue practicing Masonry. I guess they can attend Grand Lodge once a year, or fly here for fellowship, but I fear they will be done.
And as for their history, furnishings, and ornaments, no one has a clue how we will decide what does or does not need to be saved, and how to preserve what should not be lost. We will figure something out in the short term, but our own Lodge does not have room to store our own historical documents, and certainly has no room for an additional library and all the fixtures from a 100+ year-old Lodge.
These are issues that we will need to deal with, and will certainly be the source of much discussion and debate. Wish us well.
That is quite a unique and challenging problem. I've never had the opportunity to visit Alaska, but would certainly like to spend a lot of time exploring its wide open spaces someday. Especially when I'm stuck on the Freeway in downtown Seattle! 😁
I do wish you well with the merger, but I fear you are correct, it will likely be too hard for the Brothers becoming members of your Lodge through the merger to attend.
But, maybe there could be something like a BBQ or Picnic scheduled in the name of the old Lodge, in its old town once a summer or something? An event to remember the old Lodge, and honor its members?
We have the space problem you mention at the Lodge in my little City. We actually have a great deal of space, and we've never merged with another Lodge, but about ten bazillion York Rite Bodies seem to have merged into our York Rite, and they have all brought their stuff with them! It has, over time, eaten up pretty much all available space.
Thanks for this! I know that a lot of our Grand Lodges also maintain museums and libraries that are able to take important records and other treasures.
Having watched many mergers from a distance and been master of a reviving lodge I’ve seen a lot of this.
Members oftentimes feel the lodge building and its contents are their personal property. I know of one lodge that frivolously spent part of their money paying members, for their “hard work over the years” after they sold the building. The lodge they merged with had a temple board and many believe the temple board took a lot of it. Finally of the 40-50k anticipated by the receiving lodge 3k showed up. They asked the receiving lodge Secretary if he had all the records and he said no and it eventually led to him leaving the fraternity the very night they closed the books on the merger.
The lodge that merged with us had an old Bible that “mysteriously” disappeared as well other things. It was par for the course that all the junk they left for us to dispose of. Further, to this day of the 15 members we picked up I can count the number of times on 1 hand any have attended.
Our lodge has pre-civil war minutes in which a report was made about a Union scout. Things like that are too valuable to lose to a merger, but I can imagine someone carrying it off.
At the end of the day this kind on nonsense comes from low standards on who we allow to call themselves masons.
>>>Members oftentimes feel the lodge building and its contents are their personal property.
I think that this is a lot of it.
>>>At the end of the day this kind on nonsense comes from low standards on who we allow to >>>call themselves masons.
And this hits the nail directly on the head I think. We seem to be content taking virtually anyone into our Lodges. Until we get comfortable with the Black Cube, we will continue to lose our treasure.
I do have to wonder if we should attempt legal/criminal recourse when things like this happen?
This is not a popular position to take. But it seems to me that our Grand Lodge has a responsibility to see that Lodges succeed through a myriad of ways. If a Lodge is not sustainable, there should be a process to close or merge a Lodge to ensure its continued success. The artifacts from closed Lodges should be preserved by the Masonic Library and Museum instead of winding up on e-Bay. Assets from closed Lodges should be rolled into a special account managed by Grand Lodge. It serves no purpose or good if a Lodge does not have members or the will to survive.
Well, according to the WMC, a lodge that closes (not merges) gives up it's assets to GL, including the building, records, furniture, investments, etc. I'd agree that in that particular case it would be the responsibility of GL to oversee such events for accountability.
I think that there is an argument to be made that if a Lodge can not function, and is taking no steps to improve its situation, there should be a mechanism for the Grand Lodge to step in before the records are lost, the artifacts stolen, and the moneys squandered.
I know that some Brothers are trying to figure out how such a mechanism can be created. But, I don't think such a thing would easily pass into the Masonic Code.
Just wanted to add some additional thoughts to this discussion.
First, a reminder that my first thought is that this is an unpopular position to take. I think everyone has agreed this is one hot topic that Grand Lodge will not take because it is unpopular.
But let’s look at the alternative.
A Lodge that is not functioning, sees a diminishing return on member ownership, its property is generally in disrepair, its finances provide no return on investment.
The result? An eyesore in the community, an embarrassment to the larger organization.
An organization without a program or an ability to get brothers to put together a meaningful program offers no real value proposition. This results no new members and a diminishing number of members who want to participate.
In fact, it probably means no plan to create a sustainable organization not only for today, but also for tomorrow and the next generation of Masons.
Nobody wants to be part of a looming shipwreck.
We all want to be part of a successful lodge with good leadership, good programs and a strong foundation. We all want our Grand Lodge to be proud of the quality Lodges we have in our jurisdiction measured in terms of membership, good programs, community involvement and financial strength.
Who’s responsible if a Lodge leadership’s only focus is 60-90 minutes each month of reading minutes and approving bills or listening to a Master who drones on with no end, logic or relevance in sight? Is this a good use of Lodge time. More importantly, is it a good use of “my time” as a member? And how do we deal with Lodge leaders who are unwilling to change or rule by tyranny?
Yes, it would be difficult to pass something in the Washington Masonic Code, but if we don’t take responsibility as a jurisdiction, who will? Do we allow failing Lodges to take the rest of us down?
Many successful businesses have written standards for performance. If a business unit is not performing, it gets sold or shut down.
It’s the same with non-profit organizations. In today’s world, we are competing for time, treasure and talent with other worthwhile organizations such as Rotary, Lions, American Legion and others. There are numerous research papers that identify a shrinking number of the population are no longer engaged in non-profits in the way our parents were engaged in civic organizations. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, “the times they are ‘a changing.”
Peter Drucker advanced the now common concept that you “can’t manage something if you can’t measure it.” That without measurement you can’t tell if management’s decisions are making things better or worse. A key problem with sustainability measurement is that you can’t measure something if you can’t define it. So, what should our Lodge standards be going forward?
In some cases, Lodge leadership may not know how to turn a Lodge around. Starting with defined standards would begin to provide a guidepost. Grand Lodge via District Deputies should provide guidance and provide a timeline for a Lodge to get its house in order. Otherwise, we will become what we already are in some Lodges, a disintegrating outdated non-profit organization.
In the Volume of Sacred Law, we are all advised to “be sure you know the condition of your flocks, give careful attention to your herds; for riches do not endure forever, and a crown is not secure for all generations. (NIV: Proverbs 27:23). In Proverbs 6:8 and 30:25 “The ant stores its provisions in summer and gathers its food at harvest. Ants are creatures of little strength, yet they store up their food in the summer.” Many of our Lodges are living month to month.
Let’s use another cultural analogy. Many of you, my brothers, grew up in the 1960’s or thereabouts. Have you ever wondered why The Rolling Stones or Bruce Springsteen are still going strong, while Jefferson Airplane or Fleetwood Mac have “gone their own way?” Actually, Mick Fleetwood’s band had the answer, but didn’t execute when we were all asked to “don’t stop thinking about tomorrow.”
I don't disagree with any of your points. Indeed, I think the McDonald's analogy holds true for Masonry.
If there was a McDonalds that put out food far below normal McDonald's quality standards, giving all who ate there a poor impression of Freemasonry, McDonalds would eventually take the franchise away.
And I think Freemasonry needs to be the same way. If there is a Lodge that puts out an experience far below a reasonable standard, giving everyone who visits it, or worse yet seeks membership in in, a bad impression of our Craft, eventually we as a Craft need to take away that Lodge's ability to remain as such.
But, I don't know that the Craft as a whole would ever consent to giving that authority to anyone, or any organization.
We don't have anything in the WMC which gives GL the power to force Lodges to Merge. This topic is something that is very close to my heart. I wish others took this as seriously as you
The overwhelming majority of Masons want to do the right thing. If we talk about bad things that have happened in other Lodges, things that most would have probably never heard about, they will be vigilant if their Lodge is ever in such a situation. That's my hope anyway.
An old boyfriend of my daughter knew I was a freemason, and I had given him a tour of our lodge. He was travelling through colorado when he saw in the window of an antique/second hand store boaz and jachin sitting there.
Having gone though a merger of two lodges myself, it was the best thing that could have happened, although at the time there was a lot of fighting over it. While there is the argument that as a fraternity in this state we'd hate to lose a presence in an area. For some areas, it doesn't matter as those small towns across the state are dying anyway. Urbanization of the country continues to kill off those rural communities as the younger people move away from country life to the big city.
The worst thing a lodge can do is just give up t's charter to GL. Not that I have anything against GL, but that money and property could be better served to benefit another lodge that is struggling financially. A significant windfall could be just the ticket it needs to rebuild itself. Giving that to GL is just throwing money into a giant pot.
As I said, I was a part of a merger several years ago. At that time, the GL was harping on local lodges to protect themselves from losing their assets (money) in case of an accident. Lodges should never keep huge amounts of money in the temple board coffers, instead, the lodge(es) should keep the funds, and dole out money as necessary to the TB. If someone slips and falls and breaks a leg, they would sue the temple board, as custodians of the building. If the TB is broke, then there isn't much the injured party can do except file a claim with the TB insurance (they do have insurance, right?). At least this was all talked about during our merge. So, when the building was sold for a quite hefty sum, the money was kept in lodge investments, not the temple board. And of course, when a lodge is sitting on a pile of cash like that, it's going to spend some of it. Certainly, a lion's share of spending was done for temple improvements. Roofs, kitchen ventilation, furnace, etc, big ticket items that the lodge desperately needed. And to be fair, the lodge has been excellent stewards of that money. It's far easier to do when it's governed by a lodge instead of a couple guys on the temple board.
As Lucas said, the issues we've had with mismanagement and outright fraud comes from the loose standards of guarding the west gate. Hopefully over time this gets fixed.
This is solid advice, thank you. Sometimes, as in your situation, mergers do work out quite well. If the Brothers deal honestly and keep Freemasonry in mind. Unfortunately, a lot of them, perhaps most of them go poorly.
>>>The worst thing a lodge can do is just give up t's charter to GL. Not that I have anything >>>against GL, but that money and property could be better served to benefit another lodge that >>>is struggling financially. A significant windfall could be just the ticket it needs to rebuild itself. >>>Giving that to GL is just throwing money into a giant pot.
Agreed. A couple hundred grand would make zero difference to the Grand Lodge's financial situation. But it could make a massive difference for a Lodge.
In my Jurisdiction (Washington State,) we do not have any formal, codified ceremony for closing a Masonic Lodge, either by consolidation or by surrender of their Charter.
I've thought about this for the last couple of days, ever since you posted your question.
As VW Clayton says, we don't in Washington. I'm not sure about elsewhere.
But, what has had me thinking is that we should. An honorable and dignified ceremony for closing a Lodge, or even transitioning a Masonic Temple to other use would be a really positive thing for the men involved I think. At a time when that would be particularly important.
I think that it could also help with some of the problems discussed in this post and comments.
This is with the viewpoint from a metropolitan area.
I'm certain that there are exceptions where lodges merging is good. However, the vast majority that I see do not benefit the merged lodge. They lose their identity and most Brothers stop attending lodge.
Instead, why not use the assets to buy memberships in a lodge of each member's choosing? Find the place where they would like to practice, participate and contribute?
Most mergers I have seen yield results similar to what you mention. And if both Lodges are weak, the result of the merger is nothing more than a week Lodge.
But... I have seen mergers go extremely well. In those cases, it was done with a couple of really particular moves.
1. The Officer lines of both Lodges were braided together. In other words, the WM from Lodge A, The SW from Lodge B, The JW from Lodge A, and so on.
2. Steps were taken to hold on to the old Lodge's programs. Moneys were set aside so that whatever the old Lodge used to do would continue to be funded and done moving forward indefinitely.
But... I really like this idea:
>>>why not use the assets to buy memberships in a lodge of each member's choosing? Find the >>>place where they would like to practice, participate and contribute?
I am aware of a Lodge that had to close, based in an extremely rural part of Eastern Washington. It's only viable merger partner was as I recall, over an hour drive each way. Given the distance, the whole thing didn't work, and I don't think it could have worked no matter how hard anyone might have tried.
But, the Lodge that had to close was quite close to the Oregon border, and Oregon has a Lodge right there. Those members would have, I assume, been served quite well by joining that Lodge in a neighboring Jurisdiction.
As to artifact and asset protection and transfers, for those whose Lodges are in earthquake, wildfire, flood, tornado or hurricane zones, - that's just about everybody - you really ought to have already:
1. photographed every single stick of everything in your Lodge
2. given each item a number code and
3. created an inventory log
4. drawn detailed floor plans;
5. digitally scanned every sheaf of paper and old photographs etc,
6. inventoried and valued (put a value on it) all of it, and
7. parked the digital copies and photos etc both on portable hard drives you back up and check once a quarter, as well as on the Cloud,
as part of general preparedness.
An inventory system of artifacts is especially important in cases of ivory gavels and valuable antiques, but also in cases of old documents, ledgers, log books etc. Appointing an Archivist is also important - someone with the corporate knowledge to track and oversee all of that, and then train at least one other person as a legacy assistant, is also important.
Once your preparedness is in place so you can reconstruct your Lodge in case of natural or man made emergency, then it's a simple matter to use that system to close out a Lodge or merge with another.
I know a Brother in Oregon who has done a beautiful job with his Lodge and also volunteers with the Masonic Museum in Forest Grove - I'd recommend him to anyone.
All excellent ideas, but a Lodge needs members able and willing to take on such a project.
Truth.
I think that all of these things are best done when a Lodge is thriving, for use when it isn't.
Thank you for this detailed plan. I appreciate it, and hope that some of our Lodges take the ideas to heart. Not just for purposes of closing a Lodge, but as you mention, in case of emergency or disaster as well. Surely we would need all of these things if we had a fire for example.
And I second your good words about our Brother Johnny!
He's a pearl beyond price.
While in ritual the numbers are the same, Ohio requires a quorum of 8 to open a lodge and conduct business on any given occasion.
My lodge had a neighboring lodge merge into ours a number of years ago and we are still struggling to see where certain historical records and artifacts disappeared too.
Thanks for letting us know about the requirements in Ohio. Here in Washington, if there are three, and one of them happens to be the WM or a Warden, (or a Special Deputy appointed by the GM for the purpose) business can be done. I worry though, that business can't be well done in a circumstance like that.
It is terribly sad when we loose records and artifacts, and I do think we have to do a much better job as a Craft to ensure that things like your Lodge is having to deal with don't happen so often.
Our Lodge is currently going through the process of absorbing a neighboring Lodge. We are facing all the issues brought up in the article, as well as a uniquely Alaskan problem. Our neighboring Lodge is 250 miles away by air, and 300 by boat. There are no roads. When they have closed their doors, surrendered their charter, and sold their building, our brothers, while still Masons and life members of our Lodge, will be challenged to continue practicing Masonry. I guess they can attend Grand Lodge once a year, or fly here for fellowship, but I fear they will be done.
And as for their history, furnishings, and ornaments, no one has a clue how we will decide what does or does not need to be saved, and how to preserve what should not be lost. We will figure something out in the short term, but our own Lodge does not have room to store our own historical documents, and certainly has no room for an additional library and all the fixtures from a 100+ year-old Lodge.
These are issues that we will need to deal with, and will certainly be the source of much discussion and debate. Wish us well.
That is quite a unique and challenging problem. I've never had the opportunity to visit Alaska, but would certainly like to spend a lot of time exploring its wide open spaces someday. Especially when I'm stuck on the Freeway in downtown Seattle! 😁
I do wish you well with the merger, but I fear you are correct, it will likely be too hard for the Brothers becoming members of your Lodge through the merger to attend.
But, maybe there could be something like a BBQ or Picnic scheduled in the name of the old Lodge, in its old town once a summer or something? An event to remember the old Lodge, and honor its members?
We have the space problem you mention at the Lodge in my little City. We actually have a great deal of space, and we've never merged with another Lodge, but about ten bazillion York Rite Bodies seem to have merged into our York Rite, and they have all brought their stuff with them! It has, over time, eaten up pretty much all available space.
If for nothing else, send it to the fraternal museum https://fraternalcenter.iu.edu
Thanks for this! I know that a lot of our Grand Lodges also maintain museums and libraries that are able to take important records and other treasures.
Having watched many mergers from a distance and been master of a reviving lodge I’ve seen a lot of this.
Members oftentimes feel the lodge building and its contents are their personal property. I know of one lodge that frivolously spent part of their money paying members, for their “hard work over the years” after they sold the building. The lodge they merged with had a temple board and many believe the temple board took a lot of it. Finally of the 40-50k anticipated by the receiving lodge 3k showed up. They asked the receiving lodge Secretary if he had all the records and he said no and it eventually led to him leaving the fraternity the very night they closed the books on the merger.
The lodge that merged with us had an old Bible that “mysteriously” disappeared as well other things. It was par for the course that all the junk they left for us to dispose of. Further, to this day of the 15 members we picked up I can count the number of times on 1 hand any have attended.
Our lodge has pre-civil war minutes in which a report was made about a Union scout. Things like that are too valuable to lose to a merger, but I can imagine someone carrying it off.
At the end of the day this kind on nonsense comes from low standards on who we allow to call themselves masons.
Thank you for this cautionary tale.
>>>Members oftentimes feel the lodge building and its contents are their personal property.
I think that this is a lot of it.
>>>At the end of the day this kind on nonsense comes from low standards on who we allow to >>>call themselves masons.
And this hits the nail directly on the head I think. We seem to be content taking virtually anyone into our Lodges. Until we get comfortable with the Black Cube, we will continue to lose our treasure.
I do have to wonder if we should attempt legal/criminal recourse when things like this happen?
We absolutely should. I have been told, it happened it’s over don’t bring it up.
>>>I have been told, it happened it’s over don’t bring it up.
Yeah, that seems to be the general reaction here as well. But that just encourages more of the same.
This is not a popular position to take. But it seems to me that our Grand Lodge has a responsibility to see that Lodges succeed through a myriad of ways. If a Lodge is not sustainable, there should be a process to close or merge a Lodge to ensure its continued success. The artifacts from closed Lodges should be preserved by the Masonic Library and Museum instead of winding up on e-Bay. Assets from closed Lodges should be rolled into a special account managed by Grand Lodge. It serves no purpose or good if a Lodge does not have members or the will to survive.
Well, according to the WMC, a lodge that closes (not merges) gives up it's assets to GL, including the building, records, furniture, investments, etc. I'd agree that in that particular case it would be the responsibility of GL to oversee such events for accountability.
I think that there is an argument to be made that if a Lodge can not function, and is taking no steps to improve its situation, there should be a mechanism for the Grand Lodge to step in before the records are lost, the artifacts stolen, and the moneys squandered.
I know that some Brothers are trying to figure out how such a mechanism can be created. But, I don't think such a thing would easily pass into the Masonic Code.
Just wanted to add some additional thoughts to this discussion.
First, a reminder that my first thought is that this is an unpopular position to take. I think everyone has agreed this is one hot topic that Grand Lodge will not take because it is unpopular.
But let’s look at the alternative.
A Lodge that is not functioning, sees a diminishing return on member ownership, its property is generally in disrepair, its finances provide no return on investment.
The result? An eyesore in the community, an embarrassment to the larger organization.
An organization without a program or an ability to get brothers to put together a meaningful program offers no real value proposition. This results no new members and a diminishing number of members who want to participate.
In fact, it probably means no plan to create a sustainable organization not only for today, but also for tomorrow and the next generation of Masons.
Nobody wants to be part of a looming shipwreck.
We all want to be part of a successful lodge with good leadership, good programs and a strong foundation. We all want our Grand Lodge to be proud of the quality Lodges we have in our jurisdiction measured in terms of membership, good programs, community involvement and financial strength.
Who’s responsible if a Lodge leadership’s only focus is 60-90 minutes each month of reading minutes and approving bills or listening to a Master who drones on with no end, logic or relevance in sight? Is this a good use of Lodge time. More importantly, is it a good use of “my time” as a member? And how do we deal with Lodge leaders who are unwilling to change or rule by tyranny?
Yes, it would be difficult to pass something in the Washington Masonic Code, but if we don’t take responsibility as a jurisdiction, who will? Do we allow failing Lodges to take the rest of us down?
Many successful businesses have written standards for performance. If a business unit is not performing, it gets sold or shut down.
It’s the same with non-profit organizations. In today’s world, we are competing for time, treasure and talent with other worthwhile organizations such as Rotary, Lions, American Legion and others. There are numerous research papers that identify a shrinking number of the population are no longer engaged in non-profits in the way our parents were engaged in civic organizations. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, “the times they are ‘a changing.”
Peter Drucker advanced the now common concept that you “can’t manage something if you can’t measure it.” That without measurement you can’t tell if management’s decisions are making things better or worse. A key problem with sustainability measurement is that you can’t measure something if you can’t define it. So, what should our Lodge standards be going forward?
In some cases, Lodge leadership may not know how to turn a Lodge around. Starting with defined standards would begin to provide a guidepost. Grand Lodge via District Deputies should provide guidance and provide a timeline for a Lodge to get its house in order. Otherwise, we will become what we already are in some Lodges, a disintegrating outdated non-profit organization.
In the Volume of Sacred Law, we are all advised to “be sure you know the condition of your flocks, give careful attention to your herds; for riches do not endure forever, and a crown is not secure for all generations. (NIV: Proverbs 27:23). In Proverbs 6:8 and 30:25 “The ant stores its provisions in summer and gathers its food at harvest. Ants are creatures of little strength, yet they store up their food in the summer.” Many of our Lodges are living month to month.
Let’s use another cultural analogy. Many of you, my brothers, grew up in the 1960’s or thereabouts. Have you ever wondered why The Rolling Stones or Bruce Springsteen are still going strong, while Jefferson Airplane or Fleetwood Mac have “gone their own way?” Actually, Mick Fleetwood’s band had the answer, but didn’t execute when we were all asked to “don’t stop thinking about tomorrow.”
I don't disagree with any of your points. Indeed, I think the McDonald's analogy holds true for Masonry.
If there was a McDonalds that put out food far below normal McDonald's quality standards, giving all who ate there a poor impression of Freemasonry, McDonalds would eventually take the franchise away.
And I think Freemasonry needs to be the same way. If there is a Lodge that puts out an experience far below a reasonable standard, giving everyone who visits it, or worse yet seeks membership in in, a bad impression of our Craft, eventually we as a Craft need to take away that Lodge's ability to remain as such.
But, I don't know that the Craft as a whole would ever consent to giving that authority to anyone, or any organization.
I think i owe you a Big Mac next time I see you. :)
OK, but two plain hamburgers please. One must not eat cheese!
We don't have anything in the WMC which gives GL the power to force Lodges to Merge. This topic is something that is very close to my heart. I wish others took this as seriously as you
The overwhelming majority of Masons want to do the right thing. If we talk about bad things that have happened in other Lodges, things that most would have probably never heard about, they will be vigilant if their Lodge is ever in such a situation. That's my hope anyway.
An old boyfriend of my daughter knew I was a freemason, and I had given him a tour of our lodge. He was travelling through colorado when he saw in the window of an antique/second hand store boaz and jachin sitting there.
Having gone though a merger of two lodges myself, it was the best thing that could have happened, although at the time there was a lot of fighting over it. While there is the argument that as a fraternity in this state we'd hate to lose a presence in an area. For some areas, it doesn't matter as those small towns across the state are dying anyway. Urbanization of the country continues to kill off those rural communities as the younger people move away from country life to the big city.
The worst thing a lodge can do is just give up t's charter to GL. Not that I have anything against GL, but that money and property could be better served to benefit another lodge that is struggling financially. A significant windfall could be just the ticket it needs to rebuild itself. Giving that to GL is just throwing money into a giant pot.
As I said, I was a part of a merger several years ago. At that time, the GL was harping on local lodges to protect themselves from losing their assets (money) in case of an accident. Lodges should never keep huge amounts of money in the temple board coffers, instead, the lodge(es) should keep the funds, and dole out money as necessary to the TB. If someone slips and falls and breaks a leg, they would sue the temple board, as custodians of the building. If the TB is broke, then there isn't much the injured party can do except file a claim with the TB insurance (they do have insurance, right?). At least this was all talked about during our merge. So, when the building was sold for a quite hefty sum, the money was kept in lodge investments, not the temple board. And of course, when a lodge is sitting on a pile of cash like that, it's going to spend some of it. Certainly, a lion's share of spending was done for temple improvements. Roofs, kitchen ventilation, furnace, etc, big ticket items that the lodge desperately needed. And to be fair, the lodge has been excellent stewards of that money. It's far easier to do when it's governed by a lodge instead of a couple guys on the temple board.
As Lucas said, the issues we've had with mismanagement and outright fraud comes from the loose standards of guarding the west gate. Hopefully over time this gets fixed.
This is solid advice, thank you. Sometimes, as in your situation, mergers do work out quite well. If the Brothers deal honestly and keep Freemasonry in mind. Unfortunately, a lot of them, perhaps most of them go poorly.
>>>The worst thing a lodge can do is just give up t's charter to GL. Not that I have anything >>>against GL, but that money and property could be better served to benefit another lodge that >>>is struggling financially. A significant windfall could be just the ticket it needs to rebuild itself. >>>Giving that to GL is just throwing money into a giant pot.
Agreed. A couple hundred grand would make zero difference to the Grand Lodge's financial situation. But it could make a massive difference for a Lodge.
Is there an official ceremony for the closure of a Masonic lodge, similar to the de-concecration of a church?
My apologies for not answering earlier.
In my Jurisdiction (Washington State,) we do not have any formal, codified ceremony for closing a Masonic Lodge, either by consolidation or by surrender of their Charter.
I've thought about this for the last couple of days, ever since you posted your question.
As VW Clayton says, we don't in Washington. I'm not sure about elsewhere.
But, what has had me thinking is that we should. An honorable and dignified ceremony for closing a Lodge, or even transitioning a Masonic Temple to other use would be a really positive thing for the men involved I think. At a time when that would be particularly important.
I think that it could also help with some of the problems discussed in this post and comments.
Thank you Brother.
This is with the viewpoint from a metropolitan area.
I'm certain that there are exceptions where lodges merging is good. However, the vast majority that I see do not benefit the merged lodge. They lose their identity and most Brothers stop attending lodge.
Instead, why not use the assets to buy memberships in a lodge of each member's choosing? Find the place where they would like to practice, participate and contribute?
Most mergers I have seen yield results similar to what you mention. And if both Lodges are weak, the result of the merger is nothing more than a week Lodge.
But... I have seen mergers go extremely well. In those cases, it was done with a couple of really particular moves.
1. The Officer lines of both Lodges were braided together. In other words, the WM from Lodge A, The SW from Lodge B, The JW from Lodge A, and so on.
2. Steps were taken to hold on to the old Lodge's programs. Moneys were set aside so that whatever the old Lodge used to do would continue to be funded and done moving forward indefinitely.
But... I really like this idea:
>>>why not use the assets to buy memberships in a lodge of each member's choosing? Find the >>>place where they would like to practice, participate and contribute?
I am aware of a Lodge that had to close, based in an extremely rural part of Eastern Washington. It's only viable merger partner was as I recall, over an hour drive each way. Given the distance, the whole thing didn't work, and I don't think it could have worked no matter how hard anyone might have tried.
But, the Lodge that had to close was quite close to the Oregon border, and Oregon has a Lodge right there. Those members would have, I assume, been served quite well by joining that Lodge in a neighboring Jurisdiction.