In some cases, Masonic clubs are not just a good idea, they are essential. For example, in Southeast Alaska, our Lodge in Ketchikan was forced to surrender its charter several years ago due to declining membership. The remaining brothers of that Lodge were given life memberships in the Lodge in Juneau. Down south, that would be fine, and the brethren could just participate in their new Lodge and maintain their Masonic ties with the brethren of their new Lodge.
Unfortunately Ketchikan is a one hour jet flight or a two day ferry trip from Juneau - not a 45 minute drive. So, the orphaned brothers in Ketchikan started a Masonic club to maintain their fraternal connections. The First City Masonic Club meets monthly for breakfast at one of the local restaurants. I plan on joining them if I can make it to Ketchikan at the right time.
That makes a lot of sense, thank you. In a situation where Masonry could not exist otherwise, a club would certainly be vastly better than nothing at all.
I'm all for Masonic fellowship outside of Lodge, be it weekly breakfasts, motorcycles, black powder, model railroading, whatever. My Friday morning breakfast group has been going strong for over 15 years, and started as a weekly visitation to a Brother in an Alzheimer's facility. When the Brother could no longer see us, we decided to continue our weekly visit at a local eatery. At any given Friday there's 250 collective years of Masonry sitting there, so we certainly can solve the world's problems and repeat some corny jokes with the best of them. We've agreed not to talk partisan politics or sectarian religion, and we don't as a rule.
But, I do think any Club should be under one simple rule: If the Grand Master deems the group to be in any violation of Masonic principles, no more Club.
The best example of 'why' goes back to the Ku Klux Clan's roots predominantly in Tennessee and Indiana, and of course later all over the Country. History shows, unfortunately, many Klansmen were loosely connected to Masonic Lodges, meeting at the Lodges, and using their Masonic and church memberships as a veneer of respectability. Hey, some were just Masons with a certain point of view based on a warped interpretation of biblical teachings. I certainly understand that that may have been of a different era, and also that you cannot control or limit the activities of an individual Brother outside of his Masonic obligations. However, I would sincerely hope that something similar today would be nipped in the bud. Just my two cents worth.
>>>But, I do think any Club should be under one simple rule: If the Grand Master deems the >>>group to be in any violation of Masonic principles, no more Club.
This is certainly in keeping with longstanding Masonic Law. If a Club of Masons were to get out of hand, the GM could put a stop to it by directing that no Mason could participate in the club, essentially putting it down. Heck, this has happened with large Appendant/Concordant bodies from time to time and Jurisdiction to Jurisdiction. Luckily in those cases, with the passage of some time, cooler heads have generally prevailed.
Are there lodges within Washington State that follow the UK model of affinity lodges? Not just all wearing the same outfits, but everything revolves around their specific special interest outside of the lodge meeting.
While most of our Lodges are based on location, I think some could be construed as “Affinity” in intent. Your Lodge, “William H Upton Naval & Military” indicates a focus on Veterans and active Military, and almost would indicate that I wouldn’t want to join that Lodge if I were not a military Veteran.
I am not sure, but it seems that the Frank S. Land Lodge No. 313 when it formed shortly after I joined the Fraternity was originally a Lodge full of Senior DeMolay members. I could see that as an affinity Lodge if it were primarily members who were in the DeMolay in their youth, as a common interest, also possibly as a Lodge that current DeMolay members might want to join when they achieve Majority.
Lodge Alba could be an affinity Lodge for those interested in the Celtic traditions.
Esoterika could be considered a Lodge for those who are interested in the Esoteric facets of our Fraternity, and as such an affinity Lodge.
And finally, the most recent operating Lodge, LuzViMinda, with its focus on Filipino traditions and customs in a Lodge setting.
So it seems that if you look at the Lodges chartered since the late 1980’s, most of them would have an affinity feel to them. They are all Lodges that meet in locations already occupied by a long-standing Masonic Lodge, at least those that are still operating.
I had a conversation with another brother about our lodge labeling itself as a "naval and military" lodge a while back. In the end we both agreed that our lodge while having that name, doesn't live up to it's designation as a military lodge. Outside of having a small flag display of the various branches of the armed forces (save the newly formed space command), we do nothing outside of the lodge military themed. We don't even march in the annual armed forces parade here in town. Other lodges in the area attract as many or more military members within our district, it's all due to geography, having two major military installations within 20 minutes of each other. We also don't expect men applying for membership to be military, or even associated with the military (IE, workers at the shipyard as civilians). Basically we're not a military lodge except in name only. Perhaps at one time it was thought that way, but not anymore. I'd rather see we drop the "naval and military" and just honor our namesake instead, and at one time it was just "W. H. Upton" lodge, until older members demanded it be changed back.
To me, an affinity lodge would be one around a common hobby or interest - say "Seattle Seahawks Lodge" - where all members are fans of the football team, and attend games together, or have parties to watch the games at local bars, or draft parties etc. The lodge room would have Seahawks decorations, everyone wore team jerseys, etc.
To my knowledge, the only one in Washington that truly meets the definition you mention is the Railroad Lodge in Skykomish. At least that is how it was when I was an active member there.
It wasn't just the shirts, everything was railroads and railroading.
Your thoughts on Masonic clubs immediately brought to mind two questions that MWB Dwight Smith asked in his essay "Whither Are We Traveling?" He was addressing the current problems of Freemasonry in the early 1960’s and asked ten questions. The two I refer to are these:
1. What can we expect when we have permitted Freemasonry to become subdivided into a score of organizations?
2. Are there not too many well-meaning Brethren who are working overtime to make Freemasonry something other than Freemasonry?
In the first question, MWB Smith was referring to the many subordinate organizations relying on Masonic membership to join. He observed that many joined Masonry because it was a requirement to belong to something else. He said, “We have spread ourselves thin, and Ancient Craft Masonry is the loser.” In my opinion, Masonic clubs would draw attention and effort away from the real purposes of a Masonic lodge.
MWB Smith explained the second question this way, “It was an unhappy day when some eager beaver conceived the idea that our Craft should adopt the methods of the service Club, or the luncheon group, or the civic league, or the Playboy outfit. Whoever the eager beaver was, he lost sight of the fact that one of the reasons our Fraternity is prized so highly is that it does not operate like other organizations.”
Using an interest group to attract men to join your lodge suggests to me that your lodge has not yet developed a message that clearly explains Masonry to a prospective member. You should be able to express that Masonry improves the individual man morally, spiritually, intellectually, and socially. This type of message is more indicative of our ancient and honored past than “Hey, join our lodge, we have a great club that is interested in _____________(fill in the blank with something unrelated to Masonry).
I believe the fraternity has spent far too much time trying to attract as many men as possible, when it should be focusing on those seeking transformation to a moral way of life and on providing the methods that accomplish that.
MWB Smith concluded his essay with these words, “I come to the conclusion of this series of exploratory articles with my faith in the basic worth of our ancient Craft unshaken, convinced that the solution to Freemasonry's problems is Freemasonry. Why do we not try it?”
“I believe the fraternity has spent far too much time trying to attract as many men as possible, when it should be focusing on those seeking transformation to a moral way of life and on providing the methods that accomplish that.”
I live in the same city and county as our MWB Cameron. While the city was a hub of commerce and is still a decent-sized city for Southwest Washington State, the region is still largely rural and blue-collar, with farming and logging still in practice, although not nearly at the levels of the early-mid 20th Century. I look back at the Past Masters of our Centralia Lodge, and among them were mostly downtown business owners, teachers and other professionals, as well as local civic leaders. Not too many blue-collar working men were members in the mid-20th Century. They were more likely to join the several Granges that were found throughout Lewis County. Many of those Granges are still going. But when it comes to the focus you mention, I toss it out there in our local discussions that our county’s residents are more inclined to head to a local tavern and have a beer than to join a Fraternal organization and pay dues. I have been countered with the following: How many people live in Lewis County? 82,149. And they tell me that out of all 80,000 people that I can’t find 4 dozen men who would be interested in what Freemasonry has to offer? They had a point. And, actually, with the growth in our Lodge with younger members, this is proving to be correct. We’re on the right path.
The Grange is undoubtedly an important organization throughout Washington State. While Freemasonry had a vital influence on our State's history, so has the Grange. One difference between the two organizations is that while Freemasonry avoids politics like the plague, the Grange actively seeks effective political involvement.
And up until pretty darn recently, maybe the past 15 years or so, that organization remained a very powerful force in our State's politics.
I'm unsure why that force has declined, I presume though a combination of shrinking membership and lower quality leadership, but I think there is a very strong correlation between the decline of the Grange's influence in State politics, and the decline in the quality of governance of our State. Both have gone down, hand in hand.
Bottom line in my mind...
Sometimes we have a Brother become a Mason, and then get frustrated that Masonry doesn't discuss or get involved with politics. Those Brothers would have been better directed away from Masonry, and towards the Grange.
And as someone who is a member of both (although I'm not active in the Grange) I believe that both organizations can and do compliment each other.
I remember in 2015 when the State Grange had a lobbyist that was part of them. We worked pretty well together. But that was the one year. After that, they hired out a firm to lobby for them. I was considering continuing to work with the Grange on projects up at the Capitol, but I think it would have been cumbersome. I’m not sure if that was a factor in the decline you speak of. It might be a small one, as I’m thinking the generation with the political leadership has passed away from old age and the current membership is looking more at the individual Community Grange level. Maybe thinking that if we throw ideas at the hired lobbyist firm and pay them to work with it, that they’re not getting the results at the Legislative level that someone with a membership would achieve. Kind of like a small business vs. a corporation in that kind of sense.
Your idea: “Sometimes we have a Brother become a Mason, and then get frustrated that Masonry doesn't discuss or get involved with politics. Those Brothers would have been better directed away from Masonry, and towards the Grange.” It would help if we and other Fraternal organizations did that, but they’d have to build up enough membership to change the inertia and the course back to the way they were back in the “Granger Railroad” era.
“And as someone who is a member of both (although I'm not active in the Grange) I believe that both organizations can and do complement each other.” I’ll mention it in case anyone who reads this didn’t know this, but my brother and I were in the Junior Grange, but when it came time to join the Grange Proper and the Masonic Lodge, I had to choose one, as they both met on the same days. I don’t regret the choice I made, but the cool thing is we’re still in correspondence. My brother still visits the local Grange when they have open events and he catches up with the members, and when I visit the Grange booth at the county Fair, I get to catch up with them myself. They know I work at the Grand Lodge office, and they know I’m WAY too busy to join them and become an active member, although they’d love to have me anyway. I think that’s great, and it also cements the decision I made when I got out of college, as I’m almost certain I wouldn’t be as much in correspondence with the Masonic Lodges if I had joined the Grange instead.
Yes, the Grange's influence collapsed in the State Legislature when they no longer employed an active Granger to do their lobbying, and instead moved to a contract Lobbyist.
This is actually rather interesting to me, because generally speaking a contract Lobbyist (in my experience) will typically be a much more effective advocate than an in house person doing the same work. Business, local government, and non profits all do very well with contract lobbying. But, that was a disaster for the Grange.
All I can figure is that of course the Grange, like Masonry, operates on a Fraternal Grand Lodge - Lodges system, and I don't think a person who is not a part of a system like that can really understand all the nuances like that. Hence, whomever the Grange hired to do the work on a contract basis probably had trouble answering questions about the Grange. Like Freemasonry, how does one really fully explain it if one isn't a part of it?
So yeah, the decision to move away from an active member representing the organization, to an outside firm doing so was an absolute disaster for the Grange's influence.
All that said, I do think that here in the West, where the Grange is so prevalent, do well to direct our Brothers who want a politically involved Fraternity to seek out the Grange, for they can find that political involvement there that they will never find in Freemasonry.
Yes, the Grange's influence collapsed in the State Legislature when they no longer employed an active Granger to do their lobbying, and instead moved to a contract Lobbyist.
This is actually rather interesting to me, because generally speaking a contract Lobbyist (in my experience) will typically be a much more effective advocate than an in house person doing the same work. Business, local government, and non profits all do very well with contract lobbying. But, that was a disaster for the Grange.
All I can figure is that of course the Grange, like Masonry, operates on a Fraternal Grand Lodge - Lodges system, and I don't think a person who is not a part of a system like that can really understand all the nuances like that. Hence, whomever the Grange hired to do the work on a contract basis probably had trouble answering questions about the Grange. Like Freemasonry, how does one really fully explain it if one isn't a part of it?
So yeah, the decision to move away from an active member representing the organization, to an outside firm doing so was an absolute disaster for the Grange's influence.
All that said, I do think that here in the West, where the Grange is so prevalent, do well to direct our Brothers who want a politically involved Fraternity to seek out the Grange, for they can find that political involvement there that they will never find in Freemasonry.
There is a Westerners Corrall in Spokane MW, and I've attended several lectures/programs in the past. Wonderful, unpublicized club with many interesting members within. You'd be a hit, Sir...
It almost seems to me that the designation of a 501.c8 in my unprofessional opinion almost forces the issue. In order to qualify for consideration as a c8/10 you must have a fraternal shared purpose, meet under the Lodge structure, and some form of member benefits.
I can think of no better way than to have shared hobbies and interests that continually rekindle the flames of Brotherhood. It is also often a great way to meet new people and draw in members from the public.
How many Lodges might thrive rather than survive with a common reason to regularly get together and participate, outside of the ritual and the standard work?
In some cases, Masonic clubs are not just a good idea, they are essential. For example, in Southeast Alaska, our Lodge in Ketchikan was forced to surrender its charter several years ago due to declining membership. The remaining brothers of that Lodge were given life memberships in the Lodge in Juneau. Down south, that would be fine, and the brethren could just participate in their new Lodge and maintain their Masonic ties with the brethren of their new Lodge.
Unfortunately Ketchikan is a one hour jet flight or a two day ferry trip from Juneau - not a 45 minute drive. So, the orphaned brothers in Ketchikan started a Masonic club to maintain their fraternal connections. The First City Masonic Club meets monthly for breakfast at one of the local restaurants. I plan on joining them if I can make it to Ketchikan at the right time.
That makes a lot of sense, thank you. In a situation where Masonry could not exist otherwise, a club would certainly be vastly better than nothing at all.
I'm all for Masonic fellowship outside of Lodge, be it weekly breakfasts, motorcycles, black powder, model railroading, whatever. My Friday morning breakfast group has been going strong for over 15 years, and started as a weekly visitation to a Brother in an Alzheimer's facility. When the Brother could no longer see us, we decided to continue our weekly visit at a local eatery. At any given Friday there's 250 collective years of Masonry sitting there, so we certainly can solve the world's problems and repeat some corny jokes with the best of them. We've agreed not to talk partisan politics or sectarian religion, and we don't as a rule.
But, I do think any Club should be under one simple rule: If the Grand Master deems the group to be in any violation of Masonic principles, no more Club.
The best example of 'why' goes back to the Ku Klux Clan's roots predominantly in Tennessee and Indiana, and of course later all over the Country. History shows, unfortunately, many Klansmen were loosely connected to Masonic Lodges, meeting at the Lodges, and using their Masonic and church memberships as a veneer of respectability. Hey, some were just Masons with a certain point of view based on a warped interpretation of biblical teachings. I certainly understand that that may have been of a different era, and also that you cannot control or limit the activities of an individual Brother outside of his Masonic obligations. However, I would sincerely hope that something similar today would be nipped in the bud. Just my two cents worth.
>>>But, I do think any Club should be under one simple rule: If the Grand Master deems the >>>group to be in any violation of Masonic principles, no more Club.
This is certainly in keeping with longstanding Masonic Law. If a Club of Masons were to get out of hand, the GM could put a stop to it by directing that no Mason could participate in the club, essentially putting it down. Heck, this has happened with large Appendant/Concordant bodies from time to time and Jurisdiction to Jurisdiction. Luckily in those cases, with the passage of some time, cooler heads have generally prevailed.
Are there lodges within Washington State that follow the UK model of affinity lodges? Not just all wearing the same outfits, but everything revolves around their specific special interest outside of the lodge meeting.
While most of our Lodges are based on location, I think some could be construed as “Affinity” in intent. Your Lodge, “William H Upton Naval & Military” indicates a focus on Veterans and active Military, and almost would indicate that I wouldn’t want to join that Lodge if I were not a military Veteran.
I am not sure, but it seems that the Frank S. Land Lodge No. 313 when it formed shortly after I joined the Fraternity was originally a Lodge full of Senior DeMolay members. I could see that as an affinity Lodge if it were primarily members who were in the DeMolay in their youth, as a common interest, also possibly as a Lodge that current DeMolay members might want to join when they achieve Majority.
Lodge Alba could be an affinity Lodge for those interested in the Celtic traditions.
Esoterika could be considered a Lodge for those who are interested in the Esoteric facets of our Fraternity, and as such an affinity Lodge.
And finally, the most recent operating Lodge, LuzViMinda, with its focus on Filipino traditions and customs in a Lodge setting.
So it seems that if you look at the Lodges chartered since the late 1980’s, most of them would have an affinity feel to them. They are all Lodges that meet in locations already occupied by a long-standing Masonic Lodge, at least those that are still operating.
I had a conversation with another brother about our lodge labeling itself as a "naval and military" lodge a while back. In the end we both agreed that our lodge while having that name, doesn't live up to it's designation as a military lodge. Outside of having a small flag display of the various branches of the armed forces (save the newly formed space command), we do nothing outside of the lodge military themed. We don't even march in the annual armed forces parade here in town. Other lodges in the area attract as many or more military members within our district, it's all due to geography, having two major military installations within 20 minutes of each other. We also don't expect men applying for membership to be military, or even associated with the military (IE, workers at the shipyard as civilians). Basically we're not a military lodge except in name only. Perhaps at one time it was thought that way, but not anymore. I'd rather see we drop the "naval and military" and just honor our namesake instead, and at one time it was just "W. H. Upton" lodge, until older members demanded it be changed back.
To me, an affinity lodge would be one around a common hobby or interest - say "Seattle Seahawks Lodge" - where all members are fans of the football team, and attend games together, or have parties to watch the games at local bars, or draft parties etc. The lodge room would have Seahawks decorations, everyone wore team jerseys, etc.
I'd hate to be the Master of a Seahawks Lodge, such a thing would be loud and rowdy! 😎
Kind of like our Jurisdiction's District 13...
To my knowledge, the only one in Washington that truly meets the definition you mention is the Railroad Lodge in Skykomish. At least that is how it was when I was an active member there.
It wasn't just the shirts, everything was railroads and railroading.
Your thoughts on Masonic clubs immediately brought to mind two questions that MWB Dwight Smith asked in his essay "Whither Are We Traveling?" He was addressing the current problems of Freemasonry in the early 1960’s and asked ten questions. The two I refer to are these:
1. What can we expect when we have permitted Freemasonry to become subdivided into a score of organizations?
2. Are there not too many well-meaning Brethren who are working overtime to make Freemasonry something other than Freemasonry?
In the first question, MWB Smith was referring to the many subordinate organizations relying on Masonic membership to join. He observed that many joined Masonry because it was a requirement to belong to something else. He said, “We have spread ourselves thin, and Ancient Craft Masonry is the loser.” In my opinion, Masonic clubs would draw attention and effort away from the real purposes of a Masonic lodge.
MWB Smith explained the second question this way, “It was an unhappy day when some eager beaver conceived the idea that our Craft should adopt the methods of the service Club, or the luncheon group, or the civic league, or the Playboy outfit. Whoever the eager beaver was, he lost sight of the fact that one of the reasons our Fraternity is prized so highly is that it does not operate like other organizations.”
Using an interest group to attract men to join your lodge suggests to me that your lodge has not yet developed a message that clearly explains Masonry to a prospective member. You should be able to express that Masonry improves the individual man morally, spiritually, intellectually, and socially. This type of message is more indicative of our ancient and honored past than “Hey, join our lodge, we have a great club that is interested in _____________(fill in the blank with something unrelated to Masonry).
I believe the fraternity has spent far too much time trying to attract as many men as possible, when it should be focusing on those seeking transformation to a moral way of life and on providing the methods that accomplish that.
MWB Smith concluded his essay with these words, “I come to the conclusion of this series of exploratory articles with my faith in the basic worth of our ancient Craft unshaken, convinced that the solution to Freemasonry's problems is Freemasonry. Why do we not try it?”
“I believe the fraternity has spent far too much time trying to attract as many men as possible, when it should be focusing on those seeking transformation to a moral way of life and on providing the methods that accomplish that.”
I live in the same city and county as our MWB Cameron. While the city was a hub of commerce and is still a decent-sized city for Southwest Washington State, the region is still largely rural and blue-collar, with farming and logging still in practice, although not nearly at the levels of the early-mid 20th Century. I look back at the Past Masters of our Centralia Lodge, and among them were mostly downtown business owners, teachers and other professionals, as well as local civic leaders. Not too many blue-collar working men were members in the mid-20th Century. They were more likely to join the several Granges that were found throughout Lewis County. Many of those Granges are still going. But when it comes to the focus you mention, I toss it out there in our local discussions that our county’s residents are more inclined to head to a local tavern and have a beer than to join a Fraternal organization and pay dues. I have been countered with the following: How many people live in Lewis County? 82,149. And they tell me that out of all 80,000 people that I can’t find 4 dozen men who would be interested in what Freemasonry has to offer? They had a point. And, actually, with the growth in our Lodge with younger members, this is proving to be correct. We’re on the right path.
The Grange is undoubtedly an important organization throughout Washington State. While Freemasonry had a vital influence on our State's history, so has the Grange. One difference between the two organizations is that while Freemasonry avoids politics like the plague, the Grange actively seeks effective political involvement.
And up until pretty darn recently, maybe the past 15 years or so, that organization remained a very powerful force in our State's politics.
I'm unsure why that force has declined, I presume though a combination of shrinking membership and lower quality leadership, but I think there is a very strong correlation between the decline of the Grange's influence in State politics, and the decline in the quality of governance of our State. Both have gone down, hand in hand.
Bottom line in my mind...
Sometimes we have a Brother become a Mason, and then get frustrated that Masonry doesn't discuss or get involved with politics. Those Brothers would have been better directed away from Masonry, and towards the Grange.
And as someone who is a member of both (although I'm not active in the Grange) I believe that both organizations can and do compliment each other.
I remember in 2015 when the State Grange had a lobbyist that was part of them. We worked pretty well together. But that was the one year. After that, they hired out a firm to lobby for them. I was considering continuing to work with the Grange on projects up at the Capitol, but I think it would have been cumbersome. I’m not sure if that was a factor in the decline you speak of. It might be a small one, as I’m thinking the generation with the political leadership has passed away from old age and the current membership is looking more at the individual Community Grange level. Maybe thinking that if we throw ideas at the hired lobbyist firm and pay them to work with it, that they’re not getting the results at the Legislative level that someone with a membership would achieve. Kind of like a small business vs. a corporation in that kind of sense.
Your idea: “Sometimes we have a Brother become a Mason, and then get frustrated that Masonry doesn't discuss or get involved with politics. Those Brothers would have been better directed away from Masonry, and towards the Grange.” It would help if we and other Fraternal organizations did that, but they’d have to build up enough membership to change the inertia and the course back to the way they were back in the “Granger Railroad” era.
“And as someone who is a member of both (although I'm not active in the Grange) I believe that both organizations can and do complement each other.” I’ll mention it in case anyone who reads this didn’t know this, but my brother and I were in the Junior Grange, but when it came time to join the Grange Proper and the Masonic Lodge, I had to choose one, as they both met on the same days. I don’t regret the choice I made, but the cool thing is we’re still in correspondence. My brother still visits the local Grange when they have open events and he catches up with the members, and when I visit the Grange booth at the county Fair, I get to catch up with them myself. They know I work at the Grand Lodge office, and they know I’m WAY too busy to join them and become an active member, although they’d love to have me anyway. I think that’s great, and it also cements the decision I made when I got out of college, as I’m almost certain I wouldn’t be as much in correspondence with the Masonic Lodges if I had joined the Grange instead.
Yes, the Grange's influence collapsed in the State Legislature when they no longer employed an active Granger to do their lobbying, and instead moved to a contract Lobbyist.
This is actually rather interesting to me, because generally speaking a contract Lobbyist (in my experience) will typically be a much more effective advocate than an in house person doing the same work. Business, local government, and non profits all do very well with contract lobbying. But, that was a disaster for the Grange.
All I can figure is that of course the Grange, like Masonry, operates on a Fraternal Grand Lodge - Lodges system, and I don't think a person who is not a part of a system like that can really understand all the nuances like that. Hence, whomever the Grange hired to do the work on a contract basis probably had trouble answering questions about the Grange. Like Freemasonry, how does one really fully explain it if one isn't a part of it?
So yeah, the decision to move away from an active member representing the organization, to an outside firm doing so was an absolute disaster for the Grange's influence.
All that said, I do think that here in the West, where the Grange is so prevalent, do well to direct our Brothers who want a politically involved Fraternity to seek out the Grange, for they can find that political involvement there that they will never find in Freemasonry.
Yes, the Grange's influence collapsed in the State Legislature when they no longer employed an active Granger to do their lobbying, and instead moved to a contract Lobbyist.
This is actually rather interesting to me, because generally speaking a contract Lobbyist (in my experience) will typically be a much more effective advocate than an in house person doing the same work. Business, local government, and non profits all do very well with contract lobbying. But, that was a disaster for the Grange.
All I can figure is that of course the Grange, like Masonry, operates on a Fraternal Grand Lodge - Lodges system, and I don't think a person who is not a part of a system like that can really understand all the nuances like that. Hence, whomever the Grange hired to do the work on a contract basis probably had trouble answering questions about the Grange. Like Freemasonry, how does one really fully explain it if one isn't a part of it?
So yeah, the decision to move away from an active member representing the organization, to an outside firm doing so was an absolute disaster for the Grange's influence.
All that said, I do think that here in the West, where the Grange is so prevalent, do well to direct our Brothers who want a politically involved Fraternity to seek out the Grange, for they can find that political involvement there that they will never find in Freemasonry.
Thank you for this perspective, and for the reminder of Brother Smith's vitally important essay. Your points are well taken.
There is a Westerners Corrall in Spokane MW, and I've attended several lectures/programs in the past. Wonderful, unpublicized club with many interesting members within. You'd be a hit, Sir...
I did see the Spokane group, and it sure does look like it would be a lot of fun.
https://westernersspokane.org/
And I'm really glad to hear your first hand account of it! But, alas, I think it's just too far for me to make the drive.
But, it'd be a drive for you and your sweetie, for sure
It almost seems to me that the designation of a 501.c8 in my unprofessional opinion almost forces the issue. In order to qualify for consideration as a c8/10 you must have a fraternal shared purpose, meet under the Lodge structure, and some form of member benefits.
I can think of no better way than to have shared hobbies and interests that continually rekindle the flames of Brotherhood. It is also often a great way to meet new people and draw in members from the public.
How many Lodges might thrive rather than survive with a common reason to regularly get together and participate, outside of the ritual and the standard work?
Every Lodge does I think need a shared purpose to thrive, just as I believe every person needs a purpose to thrive.