Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Skip Nielsen's avatar

Three things:

First, Washington Freemasons are lucky to have you and getting funding for lodges from the legislature is just one example of why we are lucky.

Second, as my latexFriendxand Brother Ken Wilson frequently pointed out to me Freemasons are great men but poor businessmen. They don't understand you sometimes need to spend money for the good of the lodge.

Third, when we were renovating my home lodge we found an extension cord that ran to an outlet used tp power equipment in our kitchen that was plugged into an outlet in a tennant below us (and had been there for decades). This is stuff that happens when the brothers undertake a job they aren't fully qualified to do.

We learned to leave it to the professionals and had more time to focus on Freemasonry.

John Gebhart's avatar

Yes! Plan, fund, and execute the work professionally. And if the stars just don't line up to fund professional work then it's time to get out of the building business. I often hear how sad it is that one lodge or another had to sell their building because they couldn't maintain it. Frankly, I have no interest in these pity parties. Maintain the lodge properly or sell it, it's literally that simple.

I don't take lightly that the buildings Masons no longer own were in so many cases spectacular. But look around. Masons never had a monopoly on spectacular buildings. How many churches, schools, theaters, department stores, city halls, and even train stations were once showcases of fine craftsmanship and sources of civic pride, but they're gone now. We're not the only ones who can't afford to professionally manage an aging facility. Spending any energy on being sad about this is like standing in quicksand.

Don't get me wrong, it would be great if we had the wonderful old buildings, especially if they're still wonderful. But it's not essential. Masonry is not a building. It's not even a place.

12 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?