Brother, I was waiting for this topic to arise. I can think of nothing that disrupts the newly opened sacred space more than a business discussion on what kind of toilet paper the lodge should buy.
We, too, went to the bylaws to determine what business "must" be done in open lodge. It turns out, quite little. The only business we must do in open lodge is reading and voting on petitions, electing and installing officers, and making any changes to the dues structure. That was it!
As such, we limit our open lodge business discussions to those three tasks. They are always performed first and then followed by a period of silence to reset the lodge and to ready our minds for music and masonic papers.
All the actual, and nessessary, business of the lodge is handled at informal quartly meetings lead by a board of trustees (four principal officers of the lodge, three at large appointees and the secretary.) All interested brothers are invited to attend the separate business meetings.
We get a lot of visitors to our lodge, and the number one comment usually expressed by the traveling brother is their appreciation for the lack of business in our communications. It is indeed difficult to contemplate the Beauty and Grandeur of the Great Architect if brothers are arguing about the cost of garbage removal...
I really like the idea of handling the profane business of the Lodge in separate informal meetings as your Lodge does. My hunch is that (despite the precise wording of our Code) we would certainly get pushback if we tried that here, but it may well be worthy of dealing with that pushback, because in the long run things would undoubtedly be better.
And yeah, there is nothing at all sacred about arguing over the costs of a Lodge event. And no reason at all those arguments should be taking place within a sacred space.
Do you mean that it's disrupting to bring up the time, years ago, when one helped paint the ceiling of the Lodge Room while the Lodge is holding a discussion about a change to the bylaws? 🤠
The only flaw in this scenario is when the Temple Board Meeting winds up with more happening than the Stated Communication. This is what happened in Centralia Lodge in the 2000’s. The Temple Board meeting was at 7:00, with the Stated at 8:00. (Yes, in the 1990’s into the early 2000’s, almost all the Lodges in Lewis County met at 8:00 PM!) When the Gen X’ers started joining, they questioned why the meetings started so damn late, especially when many of them had to get up at 5:00 AM. This prompted Centralia Lodge (and almost all the others) to move their meetings up to 7 or 7:30. This made for a tight squeeze for the Temple Board meetings. Therefore, a couple of the Gen X’ers pushed for moving the Stated night to the 4th Monday, which succeeded only because the younger crowd outvoted the old crowd. And all I heard from that older crowd was griping about moving the Stated night and kept wanting to put it back. I asked why, and they asked why not? I answered it’d take a By-laws change, and you old coots got outvoted the last time, what makes you think you won’t get outvoted this time? Your numbers are even thinner than before! (Yeah, I know how to push the old geezers’ buttons…)
Good news for Centralia is that gradually, since the meeting time changed, the Lodge meetings had gotten much better than back in the 2000’s.
But back to you and WB Tim, if both the Building Association meetings and the Lodge meetings were run efficiently, you could pull this off.
A lot of the "business" of the lodge can be eliminated by purposeful planning. That means a detailed budget, which includes all the programming & activities for a lodge's year, is presented, discussed, and approved at a meeting for these purposes. This eliminates the need to discuss bills or financial matters on a monthly basis unless unanticipated situations occur. The minutes of previous meetings are not read at meetings. Announcements that do not contribute to the education or presentations that are not Masonically instructional are not allowed.
Basically, the "business" of the lodge becomes the intentional education of men in the art of Masonry. This includes the reading of petitions, hearing apprentice proficiencies, dialogue on the Masonic degrees and their meaning and application. This involves an intentional program of reading and education for each member in a structured and ongoing manner.
This means hard work and changing your lodge's current meeting mindset. There are lodges that have accomplished this and are quite successful, and provide a meaningful Masonic experience.
Perhaps a good starting point for lodges is to ask at a meeting, "What is the business of our lodge and what are we trying to accomplish?"
I agree, 100%, that the vast majority of profane items that a Lodge spends its time discussing and debating can be dealt with through proper planning. And, proper communication.
As you mention with proper budgeting, it can all be dealt with in one swoop! Or at least most of it can.
This comes down to agendas too. Knock the unnecessary stuff off of the agenda, and if in the East, insist that the agenda be followed.
MWPGM Bailey, Please let me make a short observation? One Masonic Lodge I visited, took the word of that Degree to open, then it was reported "That word came up aright"! I loved hearing that peculiar expression "aright"! Masonic expressions like this are very interesting!
If I can be of service in the drafting of legislation that would allow (and encourage) for untiled meetings to conduct business matters, please let me know. Barring any unexpected language, I will support and encourage others to do so.
Fair warning - For some reason, I'm feeling inspired to introduce legislation on a few other topics. I won't derail this worthy topic with a list.
1. I'm studying the code in the DC jurisdiction on the approved use of ritual in languages other than English, as well as in English and other languages recognized by jurisdictions with which they are in amity or hold historical significance. It is my understanding that the DC jurisdiction has Lodges practicing Freemasonry in 14 languages. This year's Bill P. Horn Masonic Memorial Medal recipient, RW Andrew Hammer, founded one Lodge that practices old Emulation and another that practices an Antient Scottish ritual in DC. Still doing my homework. I will ask Daylight No. 232 to introduce unless the Grand Master wants to make it his recommendation.
2. I believe we should give Lodges latitude in the standards for electing affiliated members who are MMs in good standing in this jurisdiction. There are cases where the well-being and progress of a Lodge are being blocked by one or a select few brothers exercising their right unmasonically. Lodges should be allowed to change their bylaws to require more black cubes to reject a petition for affiliation or set a simple majority or 2/3 approval standard. Olympia No. 1, St. John's No. 9, and Skykomish No. 259 all come to mind as worthy sponsors.
3. If a petitioner for the degrees is rejected by ballot, they should wait a year to petition the Lodge that rejected them, but be allowed to petition another Lodge after six months, keeping the remaining requirements of inquiry for previously rejected petitioners. One brother should not decide for the jurisdiction. St. John's No. 9 should get first right of refusal to introduce.
4. American Freemasons revere our nation's founding fathers, most especially our first President, who we sometimes refer to as our Most Worshipful Brother George Washington. In commemoration of the 250th Anniversary of The Declaration of Independence, I propose a Brother be considered clothed if wearing an apron of the type and form worn by MWB Washington. Spoiler alert, you'll likely enjoy how I'm thinking about framing the "Whereas" honoring a certain PGM in the name of his extinct Mother Lodge and his long service to the George Washington Masonic Memorial. Sponsored by Centralia No. 63? ;-)
5. Permit and encourage nontiled business meetings. Your idea, you pick the sponsor, I'll work up a draft for you, MW!
In my legislation efforts, I try to follow a couple of principles: more carrot, less stick; more prerogatives for Craft Lodges, less prescription. My only exception to this philosophy is Masonic real estate. Especially in our population centers, we need more cooperation and coordination between Lodges, which likely requires ceding some local control to Grand Lodge or a jurisdiction-wide entity. For example, we don't need five aging buildings in the Seattle city limits. We need one or two modern ones with sustainable economics. Lodges aren't buildings and buildings have become a burden to many Lodges.
I'll just use my little City as an example. We have an extremely significant Spanish speaking population. Significant enough that they sort of have their own little 'district' within our little historic downtown.
And we know that a good number of the men who live and work here share our Masonic values. Family, faith, fraternity, service. And we know, from our own Grand Lodge travels to Mexico that Lodges thrive there.
It makes no sense at all to me that we would effectively prevent these men from being able to form Lodges in Washington because we only work in a language that is difficult for them to understand.
Honestly, just imagine how hard it would be to understand the meaning of our ritual if English was one's second language.
I also really like number 4.
It is more than a little nuts that we insist that it is somehow not proper for a Washington Mason to want to wear an apron in the design worn by George Washington himself!
Number 3 and 5 make great sense to me.
I'm not certain I agree with number 2 however. But that could be because we have seen some of what I think of as abuses of plural memberships.
The three Lodges I listed as potential sponsors have all rejected brothers who would have, in my opinion, helped their respective Lodges progress forward. That said, I'd love to hear and understand the counterargument. Maybe my idea can be improved, or maybe it's fatally flawed, MW. ;-)
I don't think it is fatally flawed, and I don't know that I have any ideas for improvement.
And I do understand that sometimes plural membership petitions are rejected for absurd reasons by some Lodges.
But, on the other hand, I also think that other Lodges don't reject plural membership petitions that they absolutely should reject. Making it easier would not help that situation.
And I think that both situations can be equally damaging to the impacted Lodges.
This is certainly worth consideration! During my year in the East, we had a fairly consistent agenda. Open, Master's Message, Education 1, Business, Education 2, Good of the Order, Close.
Anything important that needed to have discussion was sent out via email weeks ahead of time so everyone had time to review and comment. That made the actual time-on-task in lodge a lot quicker. Sometimes things pop up and can't be avoided, but the majority of things can be handled outside of lodge, with only the official vote happening in the tiled recesses of the lodge.
You nailed it here, WB Tim. That's how I ran my meetings for my 2nd and 3rd terms. Likely would have happened for my first term, but E-mail was just starting to get traction in 1999. But I did have the agenda ready to go a week ahead of time and I made phone calls instead of E-mails for that term.
Agreed. Email discussions in advance can make everything go much quicker and smoother. As a side benefit, they also allow everyone to feel as if their voice has been heard, which sometimes might not be the case in Lodge for various reasons.
The only hiccup I have found is that one guy (I assume that every Lodge has at least one) who consistently claims he didn't receive the email, despite the fact that he did receive the email. I've learned that such complaints are best ignored. And I say that as someone who probably 'doesn't receive' lots of emails, because I avoid checking my email like the plague. 😎
“The only hiccup I have found is that one guy (I assume that every Lodge has at least one) who consistently claims he didn't receive the email, despite the fact that he did receive the email.”
This happened during both my second and third terms in the East. And the response is similar to yours, just move forward; if those who complain they’re out of the loop are serious that they want to stay in that loop, they’ll talk with you and try to hammer out something mutually beneficial. It almost always works.
What really drives me nuts is the younger generation on this one. You’ve heard the story countless times – the older generation only answers phone calls and ignores text messages, while the younger generation does exactly the opposite; they don’t answer phone calls or have voicemail even set up, yet they’ll answer a text within seconds. Yeah, I know… we should be tailoring our communications to the future generations, but in this case, that’s crap. I get the older guys not wanting to dabble in the technology or fumbling with the text apps or social media, etc. on their phones. But the younger generations deliberately NOT using a communication technology, I don’t care how old or new it is, is not something to condone or work around. Use the options you have at your disposal!
MWB Bailey, I appreciate the concerns of ensuring the sanctity of the space. Though I wonder if business is an essential part of many Lodges survival and health in more than one way.
Masonry, in my personal opinion, is a holistic approach to personal development. Mind, body, and spirit. If we fail to develop any of these aspects, the alchemical process is altered, as is the desired result. The Lodge much like a body has parts that require care, attention, and maintenance.
I am concerned that the removal of business could result in the lack of knowledge our Brethren will one day need to sit the line. Business, much like ritual, when frequently and intentionally performed, is likely to improve, though arguably disastrous, if left unattended.
The Craft promises to make its Brothers better, wiser, and consequently happier. If we fail to impart the professional skillsets needed to operate a Lodge, when will that Lodge cease to operate as such? How will that Brother gain skillsets he might otherwise never encounter? Will that Brother find their way to higher education, employment, or office?
I wholeheartedly agree that time must be made for Masonic education and the sanctity of the experience. I fear that meetings established for the sole purpose of performing and teaching the business of a Lodge, are likely to be as well attended as many of the education nights I have been to, or hosted…
Perhaps we can find ways to improve our ritual and summarize our business topics, enabling us to maintain a comprehensive approach. Or perhaps it is merely a matter of perspective? That that these votes, while appearing mundane, indelibly tie each Brother to the success and continuity of their Lodge.
I don't fundamentally disagree that business can be taken care of in an Open Lodge, and maybe you are right that it is valuable to do so. Certainly that's the way it has been done for as long as I've been a Mason.
But, I do think that it absolutely can't be the focus of an Open Lodge. The fundamental focus of an Open Lodge needs to be Freemasonry, not business. And I guess to my mind, if a man goes home feeling as if he had just attended a business meeting, that is a very bad thing.
If however he feels like he was educated, or experienced great Brotherhood, or experienced great ritual, or had a wonderful philosophical discussion, then I think that is a very good thing.
Perhaps business can be done and still avoid the first result, perhaps not, and it should be separated out.
Brother, I was waiting for this topic to arise. I can think of nothing that disrupts the newly opened sacred space more than a business discussion on what kind of toilet paper the lodge should buy.
We, too, went to the bylaws to determine what business "must" be done in open lodge. It turns out, quite little. The only business we must do in open lodge is reading and voting on petitions, electing and installing officers, and making any changes to the dues structure. That was it!
As such, we limit our open lodge business discussions to those three tasks. They are always performed first and then followed by a period of silence to reset the lodge and to ready our minds for music and masonic papers.
All the actual, and nessessary, business of the lodge is handled at informal quartly meetings lead by a board of trustees (four principal officers of the lodge, three at large appointees and the secretary.) All interested brothers are invited to attend the separate business meetings.
We get a lot of visitors to our lodge, and the number one comment usually expressed by the traveling brother is their appreciation for the lack of business in our communications. It is indeed difficult to contemplate the Beauty and Grandeur of the Great Architect if brothers are arguing about the cost of garbage removal...
I really like the idea of handling the profane business of the Lodge in separate informal meetings as your Lodge does. My hunch is that (despite the precise wording of our Code) we would certainly get pushback if we tried that here, but it may well be worthy of dealing with that pushback, because in the long run things would undoubtedly be better.
And yeah, there is nothing at all sacred about arguing over the costs of a Lodge event. And no reason at all those arguments should be taking place within a sacred space.
I like the quarterly business meeting idea. It could also be monthly or in the half hour before Lodge starts.
Wherever that meeting goes, perhaps we should require participants to have a certificate in Sticking to the Point.
Good luck finding Masons that can stick to the point! haha
Do you mean that it's disrupting to bring up the time, years ago, when one helped paint the ceiling of the Lodge Room while the Lodge is holding a discussion about a change to the bylaws? 🤠
Don't even get me started...
🤣
I hope there was some “accidental” paint splattering on the extra-windy.
To your point, 😎 yes indeed, it could happen prior to the Stated Meeting of the Lodge.
My Lodge in Skykomish does that with its Temple Board meetings. (Or at least did so when I lived near enough to be active.)
The only flaw in this scenario is when the Temple Board Meeting winds up with more happening than the Stated Communication. This is what happened in Centralia Lodge in the 2000’s. The Temple Board meeting was at 7:00, with the Stated at 8:00. (Yes, in the 1990’s into the early 2000’s, almost all the Lodges in Lewis County met at 8:00 PM!) When the Gen X’ers started joining, they questioned why the meetings started so damn late, especially when many of them had to get up at 5:00 AM. This prompted Centralia Lodge (and almost all the others) to move their meetings up to 7 or 7:30. This made for a tight squeeze for the Temple Board meetings. Therefore, a couple of the Gen X’ers pushed for moving the Stated night to the 4th Monday, which succeeded only because the younger crowd outvoted the old crowd. And all I heard from that older crowd was griping about moving the Stated night and kept wanting to put it back. I asked why, and they asked why not? I answered it’d take a By-laws change, and you old coots got outvoted the last time, what makes you think you won’t get outvoted this time? Your numbers are even thinner than before! (Yeah, I know how to push the old geezers’ buttons…)
Good news for Centralia is that gradually, since the meeting time changed, the Lodge meetings had gotten much better than back in the 2000’s.
But back to you and WB Tim, if both the Building Association meetings and the Lodge meetings were run efficiently, you could pull this off.
A lot of the "business" of the lodge can be eliminated by purposeful planning. That means a detailed budget, which includes all the programming & activities for a lodge's year, is presented, discussed, and approved at a meeting for these purposes. This eliminates the need to discuss bills or financial matters on a monthly basis unless unanticipated situations occur. The minutes of previous meetings are not read at meetings. Announcements that do not contribute to the education or presentations that are not Masonically instructional are not allowed.
Basically, the "business" of the lodge becomes the intentional education of men in the art of Masonry. This includes the reading of petitions, hearing apprentice proficiencies, dialogue on the Masonic degrees and their meaning and application. This involves an intentional program of reading and education for each member in a structured and ongoing manner.
This means hard work and changing your lodge's current meeting mindset. There are lodges that have accomplished this and are quite successful, and provide a meaningful Masonic experience.
Perhaps a good starting point for lodges is to ask at a meeting, "What is the business of our lodge and what are we trying to accomplish?"
Well said, Brother. Thank you.
I agree, 100%, that the vast majority of profane items that a Lodge spends its time discussing and debating can be dealt with through proper planning. And, proper communication.
As you mention with proper budgeting, it can all be dealt with in one swoop! Or at least most of it can.
This comes down to agendas too. Knock the unnecessary stuff off of the agenda, and if in the East, insist that the agenda be followed.
MWPGM Bailey, Please let me make a short observation? One Masonic Lodge I visited, took the word of that Degree to open, then it was reported "That word came up aright"! I loved hearing that peculiar expression "aright"! Masonic expressions like this are very interesting!
I agree, it's an interesting word!
If I can be of service in the drafting of legislation that would allow (and encourage) for untiled meetings to conduct business matters, please let me know. Barring any unexpected language, I will support and encourage others to do so.
Fair warning - For some reason, I'm feeling inspired to introduce legislation on a few other topics. I won't derail this worthy topic with a list.
Drafting, and introducing, is always wonderful! As long as I don't have to do it! 🤠
I look forward to your list!
Well, if you insist MW. ;-)
1. I'm studying the code in the DC jurisdiction on the approved use of ritual in languages other than English, as well as in English and other languages recognized by jurisdictions with which they are in amity or hold historical significance. It is my understanding that the DC jurisdiction has Lodges practicing Freemasonry in 14 languages. This year's Bill P. Horn Masonic Memorial Medal recipient, RW Andrew Hammer, founded one Lodge that practices old Emulation and another that practices an Antient Scottish ritual in DC. Still doing my homework. I will ask Daylight No. 232 to introduce unless the Grand Master wants to make it his recommendation.
2. I believe we should give Lodges latitude in the standards for electing affiliated members who are MMs in good standing in this jurisdiction. There are cases where the well-being and progress of a Lodge are being blocked by one or a select few brothers exercising their right unmasonically. Lodges should be allowed to change their bylaws to require more black cubes to reject a petition for affiliation or set a simple majority or 2/3 approval standard. Olympia No. 1, St. John's No. 9, and Skykomish No. 259 all come to mind as worthy sponsors.
3. If a petitioner for the degrees is rejected by ballot, they should wait a year to petition the Lodge that rejected them, but be allowed to petition another Lodge after six months, keeping the remaining requirements of inquiry for previously rejected petitioners. One brother should not decide for the jurisdiction. St. John's No. 9 should get first right of refusal to introduce.
4. American Freemasons revere our nation's founding fathers, most especially our first President, who we sometimes refer to as our Most Worshipful Brother George Washington. In commemoration of the 250th Anniversary of The Declaration of Independence, I propose a Brother be considered clothed if wearing an apron of the type and form worn by MWB Washington. Spoiler alert, you'll likely enjoy how I'm thinking about framing the "Whereas" honoring a certain PGM in the name of his extinct Mother Lodge and his long service to the George Washington Masonic Memorial. Sponsored by Centralia No. 63? ;-)
5. Permit and encourage nontiled business meetings. Your idea, you pick the sponsor, I'll work up a draft for you, MW!
In my legislation efforts, I try to follow a couple of principles: more carrot, less stick; more prerogatives for Craft Lodges, less prescription. My only exception to this philosophy is Masonic real estate. Especially in our population centers, we need more cooperation and coordination between Lodges, which likely requires ceding some local control to Grand Lodge or a jurisdiction-wide entity. For example, we don't need five aging buildings in the Seattle city limits. We need one or two modern ones with sustainable economics. Lodges aren't buildings and buildings have become a burden to many Lodges.
Whad ya think?
In my view, Number 1 is truly superb.
I'll just use my little City as an example. We have an extremely significant Spanish speaking population. Significant enough that they sort of have their own little 'district' within our little historic downtown.
And we know that a good number of the men who live and work here share our Masonic values. Family, faith, fraternity, service. And we know, from our own Grand Lodge travels to Mexico that Lodges thrive there.
It makes no sense at all to me that we would effectively prevent these men from being able to form Lodges in Washington because we only work in a language that is difficult for them to understand.
Honestly, just imagine how hard it would be to understand the meaning of our ritual if English was one's second language.
I also really like number 4.
It is more than a little nuts that we insist that it is somehow not proper for a Washington Mason to want to wear an apron in the design worn by George Washington himself!
Number 3 and 5 make great sense to me.
I'm not certain I agree with number 2 however. But that could be because we have seen some of what I think of as abuses of plural memberships.
The three Lodges I listed as potential sponsors have all rejected brothers who would have, in my opinion, helped their respective Lodges progress forward. That said, I'd love to hear and understand the counterargument. Maybe my idea can be improved, or maybe it's fatally flawed, MW. ;-)
I don't think it is fatally flawed, and I don't know that I have any ideas for improvement.
And I do understand that sometimes plural membership petitions are rejected for absurd reasons by some Lodges.
But, on the other hand, I also think that other Lodges don't reject plural membership petitions that they absolutely should reject. Making it easier would not help that situation.
And I think that both situations can be equally damaging to the impacted Lodges.
This is certainly worth consideration! During my year in the East, we had a fairly consistent agenda. Open, Master's Message, Education 1, Business, Education 2, Good of the Order, Close.
Anything important that needed to have discussion was sent out via email weeks ahead of time so everyone had time to review and comment. That made the actual time-on-task in lodge a lot quicker. Sometimes things pop up and can't be avoided, but the majority of things can be handled outside of lodge, with only the official vote happening in the tiled recesses of the lodge.
You nailed it here, WB Tim. That's how I ran my meetings for my 2nd and 3rd terms. Likely would have happened for my first term, but E-mail was just starting to get traction in 1999. But I did have the agenda ready to go a week ahead of time and I made phone calls instead of E-mails for that term.
Yep. It makes a huge difference!
Agreed. Email discussions in advance can make everything go much quicker and smoother. As a side benefit, they also allow everyone to feel as if their voice has been heard, which sometimes might not be the case in Lodge for various reasons.
The only hiccup I have found is that one guy (I assume that every Lodge has at least one) who consistently claims he didn't receive the email, despite the fact that he did receive the email. I've learned that such complaints are best ignored. And I say that as someone who probably 'doesn't receive' lots of emails, because I avoid checking my email like the plague. 😎
“The only hiccup I have found is that one guy (I assume that every Lodge has at least one) who consistently claims he didn't receive the email, despite the fact that he did receive the email.”
This happened during both my second and third terms in the East. And the response is similar to yours, just move forward; if those who complain they’re out of the loop are serious that they want to stay in that loop, they’ll talk with you and try to hammer out something mutually beneficial. It almost always works.
What really drives me nuts is the younger generation on this one. You’ve heard the story countless times – the older generation only answers phone calls and ignores text messages, while the younger generation does exactly the opposite; they don’t answer phone calls or have voicemail even set up, yet they’ll answer a text within seconds. Yeah, I know… we should be tailoring our communications to the future generations, but in this case, that’s crap. I get the older guys not wanting to dabble in the technology or fumbling with the text apps or social media, etc. on their phones. But the younger generations deliberately NOT using a communication technology, I don’t care how old or new it is, is not something to condone or work around. Use the options you have at your disposal!
MWB Bailey, I appreciate the concerns of ensuring the sanctity of the space. Though I wonder if business is an essential part of many Lodges survival and health in more than one way.
Masonry, in my personal opinion, is a holistic approach to personal development. Mind, body, and spirit. If we fail to develop any of these aspects, the alchemical process is altered, as is the desired result. The Lodge much like a body has parts that require care, attention, and maintenance.
I am concerned that the removal of business could result in the lack of knowledge our Brethren will one day need to sit the line. Business, much like ritual, when frequently and intentionally performed, is likely to improve, though arguably disastrous, if left unattended.
The Craft promises to make its Brothers better, wiser, and consequently happier. If we fail to impart the professional skillsets needed to operate a Lodge, when will that Lodge cease to operate as such? How will that Brother gain skillsets he might otherwise never encounter? Will that Brother find their way to higher education, employment, or office?
I wholeheartedly agree that time must be made for Masonic education and the sanctity of the experience. I fear that meetings established for the sole purpose of performing and teaching the business of a Lodge, are likely to be as well attended as many of the education nights I have been to, or hosted…
Perhaps we can find ways to improve our ritual and summarize our business topics, enabling us to maintain a comprehensive approach. Or perhaps it is merely a matter of perspective? That that these votes, while appearing mundane, indelibly tie each Brother to the success and continuity of their Lodge.
I don't fundamentally disagree that business can be taken care of in an Open Lodge, and maybe you are right that it is valuable to do so. Certainly that's the way it has been done for as long as I've been a Mason.
But, I do think that it absolutely can't be the focus of an Open Lodge. The fundamental focus of an Open Lodge needs to be Freemasonry, not business. And I guess to my mind, if a man goes home feeling as if he had just attended a business meeting, that is a very bad thing.
If however he feels like he was educated, or experienced great Brotherhood, or experienced great ritual, or had a wonderful philosophical discussion, then I think that is a very good thing.
Perhaps business can be done and still avoid the first result, perhaps not, and it should be separated out.
Wholly agreed on all points Brother.