Our lodge still sends summonses for every communication. It is the method we use for reserving and paying for the festive board that follows the meeting. Sadly, we get about a 25% response (typically the brothers attending). Apparently, clicking the "Regret" button is a bridge too far...
My Webster Masonic Lodge No. 538 near Rochester NY only sends Summons to all members for an Annual Report Meeting. The Past Masters also get a Summons just to them for an Annual PM Meeting (and get good replies from all capable of a reply).
Masons are legendary for their failure, sometimes their proud failure, to RSVP. I think this might be the core issue, particularly if the delinquents know that their Lodge will be represented by other Brothers.
Ignoring a Grand Master's summons is another matter that goes well beyond rudeness or laziness. Perhaps the delinquent Masons disagreed that the Grand Master had just cause for the summons. Thankfully our jurisdiction hasn't had a Grand Master in years that seemed to take undue pleasure in exerting his power, but it has happened. Without checks and balances exerting power can do great harm to our Fraternity. I can imagine that I'd side with the delinquents in some cases.
For the record, our bad RSVP habits drive me nuts.
“Masons are legendary for their failure, sometimes their proud failure, to RSVP. I think this might be the core issue…”
“For the record, our bad RSVP habits drive me nuts.”
I remember when I joined back in the mid 1990’s – I was in my 20’s, and the bulk of the Masons in District 17 were up in the World War II generation. The problem existed back then even. Back in that time, my Tenino Lodge 86 held an annual Corned Beef & Cabbage Night in March. One of the officers (correctly) insisted that we had pre-paid tickets to sell as opposed to just show up and eat. I didn’t disagree with him, but I also kept reminding him and the Lodge that the idea just didn’t work. Nobody would purchase the tickets – they just wanted to show up if they can make the time for it. The Brother insisted, and I created and printed the tickets and took them to Lodge meetings with me, stressing that we needed these tickets so we can know how much food to purchase for the meal. Some did purchase, but most didn’t. And sure enough, they’d show up at the dinner ticketless. Year after year. Thing is, they wanted to attend, but didn’t want to make the commitment in January of February for it. A common answer was “We’ll see.” Lodges had a hard time planning events, because members wouldn’t plan to attend anything. It isn’t much better now, although the younger generation would be more forthright about their commitment and would honor an RSVP deadline. It had led to lower event attendance, but at least they’re being candid about their situation.
It's even worse with degrees. You try and fill out a degree team, send it out to the brothers in question asking for acknowledgement, and maybe two brothers would reply back.
In that case, I've had to call the Brothers one at a time to get them to commit to a decision of some sort. Very tedious. Even then, some say, "Well, I don't know, let me check my calendar and I'll get back with you." Then they don't, and you have to call them yet again.
It's frustrating how our technology has gotten better, yet we have gotten worse!
It's so easy to comply, but they don't think that they should have to for whatever reason. I've seen a lot of trials from the peanut gallery and it appalls me how people just do not take things seriously. I believe these are consequences of throwing our doors wide open and letting in everyone that can fog a mirror.
“When I was Grand Master, I once had occasion to send Summonses to the primary Officers of a particular Lodge. Three showed up, two ignored the Summons they had received. No phone call, no email, no nothing.
I suspended those two Brothers from Masonry.”
Yeah, I remember that. There were actually 6 summonses. Two showed up, one was out of state, and the other two were suspended. The 6th summons was me, and I also showed up, although at a different time. Later, one of the suspended Brothers called the office, asking for me. I answered, and I got an earful about the suspension. He had been out of town for about 6 weeks and apparently found both the Summons and the Suspension letter at the same time in his mailbox.
“…we knew that the Summonses we received, because we sent them through the U.S. Mail, with signatures required on delivery and return receipts.” I mentioned this in the phone call, but he said that couldn’t be because he was out of town. Knowing we had the evidence otherwise, I slyly asked him if he thought we might have evidence otherwise, but he stood his ground and insisted his suspension be overturned. I told him I obviously didn’t have that power, which he knew, but I would send it up the ladder. Indeed, I kept my promise, fully knowing that there would be no overturn.
I was also at the meeting you mention that your successor sent a summons for. That was a rough meeting, with ridiculous behavior on the part of those Lodge members who were summoned. Your successor handled it very well.
VWB John mentions the possibility that a Grand Master is overstepping the due bounds of exerting the position’s power. This has been shown in many cases in Jurisdictions throughout the world, so he’s not wrong at all. But in our Jurisdiction, the Grand Master SHALL present in writing the reason why he deposed a Lodge officer or arrested a Lodge Charter (for example). Not may, shall. He has to explain his actions. Both you and your successor did so with excellent detail with your situations. John mentions he could imagine “siding with the delinquents in some cases.” Sure! I can also see some of those summoned defending their stance or actions on an issue. But SHOW UP to the summons and make your case! Or if you can’t attend for reasons beyond your control, communicate with the Grand Master to set another time. I’ve seen this happen where the Grand Master collaborated with the member being summoned to set a new date for the meeting because the summoned member had a prior commitment on the original date.
Yeah, I understand what you are saying. I guess with our many obligations, and the symbolic nature of the penalties, many brothers process the obligations as symbolic as well, and in many cases they are probably right. Honestly, we have a lot of trials over our code, but how many over our obligations? Not that the obligations should be or were intended to be symbolic. The penalties were of course, but not the obligations.
I have found most people in and out of the Craft tend to prioritize the things they value. The Brother who shows early to ensure things are set up, the Brother/Partner who prepares a Lodge meal, the Secretary or Treasurer preparing for the meeting, or any number of other things needed to support our Lodges. Or the one who decided to stay home and watch the game.
I think if we value our Obligations it will show in our actions and efforts. If we do not value our commitments, why should expect anyone else to? If we work to exemplify the values contained within our ritual, upholding our share standards, what kind of Masonry would we see?
If a Stated Meeting required 100% response for meals a Brother or his Partner could better plan and preserve Lodge resources. If an event was responded to snacks/beverages could be planned for. It is a matter of mutual respect for the time of all involved that enables our Lodges to go the extra step at improving our events and experiences.
Whoa! That's a lot more heavy-handed than in my jurisdiction. We don't require a response of regrets if one cannot attend. It is just assumed they decided it wasn't within their cable tow.
And we generally send them whenever it's an unstated communication or a major point of order, such as elections or changing the bylaws.
I expect that the types of summons MW Cameron is referring to are ones that are trying to address something fairly serious, more than likely allegations of misconduct of some sort.
A few Citizens choose to not reply to a "Subpoena" from Congress (to testify)?
Our lodge still sends summonses for every communication. It is the method we use for reserving and paying for the festive board that follows the meeting. Sadly, we get about a 25% response (typically the brothers attending). Apparently, clicking the "Regret" button is a bridge too far...
My Webster Masonic Lodge No. 538 near Rochester NY only sends Summons to all members for an Annual Report Meeting. The Past Masters also get a Summons just to them for an Annual PM Meeting (and get good replies from all capable of a reply).
Masons are legendary for their failure, sometimes their proud failure, to RSVP. I think this might be the core issue, particularly if the delinquents know that their Lodge will be represented by other Brothers.
Ignoring a Grand Master's summons is another matter that goes well beyond rudeness or laziness. Perhaps the delinquent Masons disagreed that the Grand Master had just cause for the summons. Thankfully our jurisdiction hasn't had a Grand Master in years that seemed to take undue pleasure in exerting his power, but it has happened. Without checks and balances exerting power can do great harm to our Fraternity. I can imagine that I'd side with the delinquents in some cases.
For the record, our bad RSVP habits drive me nuts.
“Masons are legendary for their failure, sometimes their proud failure, to RSVP. I think this might be the core issue…”
“For the record, our bad RSVP habits drive me nuts.”
I remember when I joined back in the mid 1990’s – I was in my 20’s, and the bulk of the Masons in District 17 were up in the World War II generation. The problem existed back then even. Back in that time, my Tenino Lodge 86 held an annual Corned Beef & Cabbage Night in March. One of the officers (correctly) insisted that we had pre-paid tickets to sell as opposed to just show up and eat. I didn’t disagree with him, but I also kept reminding him and the Lodge that the idea just didn’t work. Nobody would purchase the tickets – they just wanted to show up if they can make the time for it. The Brother insisted, and I created and printed the tickets and took them to Lodge meetings with me, stressing that we needed these tickets so we can know how much food to purchase for the meal. Some did purchase, but most didn’t. And sure enough, they’d show up at the dinner ticketless. Year after year. Thing is, they wanted to attend, but didn’t want to make the commitment in January of February for it. A common answer was “We’ll see.” Lodges had a hard time planning events, because members wouldn’t plan to attend anything. It isn’t much better now, although the younger generation would be more forthright about their commitment and would honor an RSVP deadline. It had led to lower event attendance, but at least they’re being candid about their situation.
It's even worse with degrees. You try and fill out a degree team, send it out to the brothers in question asking for acknowledgement, and maybe two brothers would reply back.
In that case, I've had to call the Brothers one at a time to get them to commit to a decision of some sort. Very tedious. Even then, some say, "Well, I don't know, let me check my calendar and I'll get back with you." Then they don't, and you have to call them yet again.
It's frustrating how our technology has gotten better, yet we have gotten worse!
It's so easy to comply, but they don't think that they should have to for whatever reason. I've seen a lot of trials from the peanut gallery and it appalls me how people just do not take things seriously. I believe these are consequences of throwing our doors wide open and letting in everyone that can fog a mirror.
“When I was Grand Master, I once had occasion to send Summonses to the primary Officers of a particular Lodge. Three showed up, two ignored the Summons they had received. No phone call, no email, no nothing.
I suspended those two Brothers from Masonry.”
Yeah, I remember that. There were actually 6 summonses. Two showed up, one was out of state, and the other two were suspended. The 6th summons was me, and I also showed up, although at a different time. Later, one of the suspended Brothers called the office, asking for me. I answered, and I got an earful about the suspension. He had been out of town for about 6 weeks and apparently found both the Summons and the Suspension letter at the same time in his mailbox.
“…we knew that the Summonses we received, because we sent them through the U.S. Mail, with signatures required on delivery and return receipts.” I mentioned this in the phone call, but he said that couldn’t be because he was out of town. Knowing we had the evidence otherwise, I slyly asked him if he thought we might have evidence otherwise, but he stood his ground and insisted his suspension be overturned. I told him I obviously didn’t have that power, which he knew, but I would send it up the ladder. Indeed, I kept my promise, fully knowing that there would be no overturn.
I was also at the meeting you mention that your successor sent a summons for. That was a rough meeting, with ridiculous behavior on the part of those Lodge members who were summoned. Your successor handled it very well.
VWB John mentions the possibility that a Grand Master is overstepping the due bounds of exerting the position’s power. This has been shown in many cases in Jurisdictions throughout the world, so he’s not wrong at all. But in our Jurisdiction, the Grand Master SHALL present in writing the reason why he deposed a Lodge officer or arrested a Lodge Charter (for example). Not may, shall. He has to explain his actions. Both you and your successor did so with excellent detail with your situations. John mentions he could imagine “siding with the delinquents in some cases.” Sure! I can also see some of those summoned defending their stance or actions on an issue. But SHOW UP to the summons and make your case! Or if you can’t attend for reasons beyond your control, communicate with the Grand Master to set another time. I’ve seen this happen where the Grand Master collaborated with the member being summoned to set a new date for the meeting because the summoned member had a prior commitment on the original date.
Yeah, I understand what you are saying. I guess with our many obligations, and the symbolic nature of the penalties, many brothers process the obligations as symbolic as well, and in many cases they are probably right. Honestly, we have a lot of trials over our code, but how many over our obligations? Not that the obligations should be or were intended to be symbolic. The penalties were of course, but not the obligations.
I have found most people in and out of the Craft tend to prioritize the things they value. The Brother who shows early to ensure things are set up, the Brother/Partner who prepares a Lodge meal, the Secretary or Treasurer preparing for the meeting, or any number of other things needed to support our Lodges. Or the one who decided to stay home and watch the game.
I think if we value our Obligations it will show in our actions and efforts. If we do not value our commitments, why should expect anyone else to? If we work to exemplify the values contained within our ritual, upholding our share standards, what kind of Masonry would we see?
If a Stated Meeting required 100% response for meals a Brother or his Partner could better plan and preserve Lodge resources. If an event was responded to snacks/beverages could be planned for. It is a matter of mutual respect for the time of all involved that enables our Lodges to go the extra step at improving our events and experiences.
Whoa! That's a lot more heavy-handed than in my jurisdiction. We don't require a response of regrets if one cannot attend. It is just assumed they decided it wasn't within their cable tow.
And we generally send them whenever it's an unstated communication or a major point of order, such as elections or changing the bylaws.
I expect that the types of summons MW Cameron is referring to are ones that are trying to address something fairly serious, more than likely allegations of misconduct of some sort.