Put Them Out Of Their Misery

How failing Lodges harm our Ancient Craft

I’m stealing this analogy from a Mason I really admire in Seattle. Alas though, I feel compelled to change the restaurant. I must assume that between the two of us, I’ve got better taste in Fast Food, proven by the fact that he’s a skinny guy, and I’m certainly not.

The cool analogy is his, but the conclusion is mine, so if you think my conclusion is bad, I’m the guy to blame. He is completely innocent.

Photo by Frankie Lopez on Unsplash

It is an undisputed fact that here in the State of Washington, the finest of all fast food restaurants are our local chain, Taco Time. Anyone who disagrees with me about this does so because they were born with broken taste buds.

So, you go to Taco Time, order your Crisp Beef Tacos (the more the better) and your Mexi Fries (otherwise known as tater tots) and you are assured of a truly sublime fast food meal.

But, what if there was a Taco Time that didn’t put out good food? (Perish the thought.)

What if all the Taco Time’s were great, except this one. At this one, when you ordered your Crisp Beef Taco, the shell was stale, the beef portion was too small, the lettuce had started turning brown, and the tomato was wrinkly. Not to mention the overcooked Mexi Fries.

Well, if you were a regular devotee of Taco Time, as all good Washingtonians should be, you would think to yourself…

‘This Taco Time sucks. Next time I’ll make sure to go to the one in the next town over.’

You wouldn’t return to the bad Taco Time.

But, what if you had never been to a Taco Time before?

If this was your first visit to a Taco Time, you would think something quite different. You would think to yourself…

‘Taco Time sucks. I’m never again going to Taco Time.’

In this latter case, Taco Time would lose a potential customer forever. Harm wouldn’t have been done to a single Taco Time restaurant, rather harm would have been done to the entire chain of restaurants.

It is the same in our Lodges.

Relatively speaking, we receive very few inquiries from men suitable to be Made into Masons. Each of them is precious and of immeasurable value.

If we send them to a Lodge that is vibrant and energetic, that performs good quality Degrees, that has solid educational programs, and that enjoys superb fellowship, it is likely that they will remain Masons for life. Finding fulfilment and thriving within our Craft.

But, if we send them to a Lodge that is down and just going through the motions, that can’t put on a good Degree, that offers no education or meaningful fellowship, it is most likely the man will never advance to become a Master Mason, let alone a Mason for life.

It is easy to hold the view that this is simply and only a Lodge hurting itself.

But, that isn’t true.

The truth is, this is a Lodge doing real harm to the entire Jurisdiction, indeed to Freemasonry as a whole.

Because Freemasonry as a whole has lost a good man who would not have been lost had he been Initiated into a solid Lodge instead of a questionable Lodge.

We don’t have all that many good men knocking on our doors. We therefore can’t be shoving aside good men who do knock by allowing them to receive less than quality experiences.

Bottom line, if a Lodge can’t provide a new Mason with a good experience, the Lodge has no right to harm our Craft by providing him with a bad one.

I’ve heard a lot of questionable talk over the past few months about “saving a Lodge.” I say questionable talk because of what the Masons doing the talking consider “saving a Lodge” to be.

I’ve heard Masons assert, multiple times over the past months, that they have helped to save a Lodge by filling a hole in the Officer Line so that one Lodge or another didn’t have to merge or lose its Charter.

But ensuring that there are five primary Officers elected and Installed as required to maintain a Charter in my Jurisdiction is not “saving a Lodge.”

It is simply prolonging the inevitable.

It is putting off, for another day, the medicine that would put a Lodge in the throes of agony out of its misery.

But it is also something much more serious…

It is allowing a Lodge that is not providing a good experience, to continue providing bad experiences to brand new Masons, driving them out of Freemasonry forever.

And that is unacceptable.

Saving a Lodge is a commendable thing. But saving a Lodge is not putting our name to a piece of paper so that the Lodge can meet the bare minimum requirements to remain a Lodge.

Saving a Lodge is bringing energy and vitality into the group. It is taking the time to learn how to Confer quality Degrees. It is bringing in great presenters for Masonic educational programs, and it is creating opportunities for truly meaningful fellowship.

If we are willing to do these things, then we are justified in our efforts to save a Lodge.

If we aren’t, we need to put it out of its misery, the sooner the better, so that it stops doing harm to Freemasonry as a whole.