Are lodges in Washington permitted to open on the First Degree? That would be the optimal time and space to handle the necessary business of the lodge, as the EA Lodge is best suited for that mundane stuff, leaving the work of self-improvement protected upstairs in the higher degrees.
See “The Ceremony of Passing” by W.L. Wilmshurst, 1933.
Brother Magpie, In the most friendly manner I must say that I cannot more strenuously disagree with the notion of leaving the mundane stuff for EAs. We only get one chance to make a first impression and the mundane stuff is the worst possible impression we could make on new Masons. We can open on the first degree in Washington and we have a significant problem of initiating new Masons and then having them disappear after a few meetings. I believe that much of this problem can be attributed to spending too much meeting time on the mundane stuff. It's a problem for all Masons but I guess we more experienced Brothers have built up a tolerance.
Well, the business doesn’t have to be the only activity. There should be “age appropriate” education and more.
There also is the European method, which is to have a committee address the business before lodge opens. If the lodge’s annual budget already covers whatever is being spent that night, there’s no need to talk about the bills at all. They were voted on when the budget was adopted.
>>>we have a significant problem of initiating new Masons and then having them disappear >>>after a few meetings. I believe that much of this problem can be attributed to spending >>>too much meeting time on the mundane stuff
I think this is exactly right. We tell our newest Brothers that they are going to get to learn and do wonderful things as Masons, and then we sit them in a room to let them listen to us argue over secular things that have nothing whatsoever to do with Freemasonry.
Then we wonder why they don't return.
>>>I guess we more experienced Brothers have built up a tolerance.
I think this is correct too. Like the proverbial lobster, we don't notice it anymore.
One issue I think we face is that often the First Degree is the only Degree many Lodges are ever able to Open on. The two Lodges I'm most active with for example have only opened on the First Degree, I think for at least a couple of years now, unless we are performing a Degree or something Degree related such as a Proficiency return.
This is because both these Lodges are growing, and have continually been graced with active EA's. A good thing!
So I don't think in most cases we could leave the work of self improvement to those meetings Opened on a higher Degree.
Creating a lodge as a sacred space, and "Speculative Masons build sacred spaces in the spiritual world" is foundational. It's deeply encoded in the ritual, and quite explicitly.
Doing business and paying the light bill on a monthly basis inside the Sanctum Sanctorum is an incidental practice. We need to pay the light bill, but it's not why we exist, just what we have to do to keep existing.
All we need to do is double down on the foundational practices and be willing to change any incidental practice. Or, as Gustav Mahler put it, "Tradition is not the worship of the ashes, but the preservation of the flame"
Following up on this, broadly I despair that anybody's ever going to get convinced. Existing lodge cultures can also be profoundly resistant to change. While I do think brothers should have a go at changing their local lodge culture, there are also procedures for making new lodges that are extremely underutilized.
What could possibly be wrong with a group of like-minded brothers coming together to charter a new lodge, with a solid purpose & vision? I know some people might be upset; that's not the question, the question is what's *wrong* with it. I can't see much.
There is precedent for this in multiple jurisdictions; it's already happened.
I too have thought that the formation of new Lodges would offer a good solution for those desiring change. I don't know why, but the idea hasn't gained any traction here, I've specifically encouraged it in some areas, but have never been able to gather enough interest. I think that Brothers might believe it harder to pull off than it actually is.
A couple of thoughts I have on this are; How many Brothers take the time to prepare their own hearts and minds before the lodge is transformed into a sacred space? Are their thoughts still of profane things, of their own worldly problems. Are their hearts cleansed, free from discord, especially with another Brother? I believe that when we fail to prepare our own, internal sacred space, we cannot properly receive any form of sacred teaching. We are more comfortable speaking and dwelling in the business portion of a stated meetings than we are looking inward at ourselves. We are more comfortable verbally jabbing at a Brother in the dining room rather than defending his character. It’s no wonder the mundane, business portions of our meetings drag on. That those Brothers who haven’t prepared their personal sacred space drag those Brothers who have, back into the profane world. It’s no wonder we run out of time for educational conversations. It’s no wonder Brothers stop participating, stop showing up, stop speaking of Masonry to their friends and finally just stop being Masons.
I agree completely, if we were able to shovel all of the mundane business out of the stated meeting and open it up for strictly educational and philosophical discussion, it would be a huge change to bring us back to what we were.
If we're unable to change the code, then the lodge can move most of the business out themselves. The only real things that would remain within the tiled lodge meeting would be reading communications from grand lodge, balloting on membership, and voting on items that need to be addressed. Does committee reports need to be done within a tiled lodge? No. Do introductions need to be done in lodge? No. Do announcements need to be done in a tiled lodge? Of course not.
I find the same stupid behavior outside of lodge, within our monthly lodge officer association meetings. They are boring and pointless. We spend 20 minutes just introducing everyone when we all know each other. Then everyone spends another 20 minutes talking about their stated meeting and what's on the dinner menu. The only useful information given is any degrees that are coming up at each lodge. A few years ago, we would actually have some education at the LOA, inviting guest speakers for various topics. For some reason that stopped, and the meetings became just an extended version of a boring stated.
Why do we do this to ourselves? It's insane. Do people really think this is for the good of masonry?
Hello brother, first time commenter. Happy to share a thought with you.
I can completely empathize with your recognition of dissonance between these sacred ideals and the practical profane realities of operating the lodge. It is contrary to the fundamental purpose of Freemasonry today, that we are speculative in nature. Our craft being centered around constructing spiritual, metaphysical spaces. After all, a church or synagogue would not discuss the utility bill during its gatherings, why should it be any different in our temples?
This proposal to separate the sacred and profane by creating a dedicated secular space for conducting lodge business is a thought-provoking solution. Potentially allowing the lodge to retain the sanctity of its rituals and spiritual work wile still effectively addressing the necessary business elements of its operation.
In my lodge, we recognize the mundane and accept it for what it is, the necessary and practical steps to keep our sacred place and continue our craft. Over the years, we've gotten very good at streamlining the business side of things during our meetings. In my knowledge though, we have never considered separating the business of our lodge from the sacred rituals we practice, and I think it is for one important reason.
Freemasonry is not just about the spiritual journey of the individual mason, but also the communal experience of our lodge as a collective. Add to that, Freemasonry, like many other organizations, must adapt to the practicalities of modern life. You pointed out that we indeed have evolved, expanding our activities beyond the lodge walls, to include significant charitable works and property management.
I ask you and the other commenters, if this is feasible in practice to separate these two aspects of our lodge activities, what are the aftereffects? Would this separation lead to a compartmentalization that could impact the overall cohesion and unity of the lodge?
I think the most practical solution would be the formation of a committee of selected/elected lodge members to address the business side of things. It would preserve the sacred space of the lodge, promote efficiency, and allow the lodge to focus on personal development. However, the potential challenges could outweigh the benefits.
Consider the hierarchy and power dynamics in a committee, accountability of their actions, engagement of non-committee members in business decisions, and the workload of the business at hand.
To address these problems as democratically as possible, there would need to be regular and transparent communication between the committee and the lodge, the keeping of committee minutes, reporting, a rotation of roles and elections, crystal clear guidelines and responsibilities as defined by the lodge or grand lodge, training and support, and regular evaluations. As you can see, the work set forth in a proposal like this can be extensive.
With all the sincerity in the world, my brother, I encourage us to weigh how important it is to consider the practical implications of such a change and to balance the desire for maintaining sacred places for ourselves within the realities of operating a modern organization engaged in sacred charitable works in profane places.
I think the idea of not bringing the tools into the worksite is a lesson here. It's not that we shouldn't conduct "business" in Lodge, but that everything, like the Cedars of Lebanon or the stones of the Quarries, should be fully prepared before reaching the Temple mount. This means everything except the actual final discussion and vote should be done in committee, or survey, or discussion around a pool table.
On another note, I think you're being far too generous to absolve us from our sins. At least in my jurisdiction, the Master is charged to NEVER have a Communication without a lecture or part of a lecture done by himself or another. It's spelled out -- and willfully ignored. It's not a secret or some rocket surgery. But yes, we have plenty of reasons for our failings. Yet they remain OUR failings.
In my old lodge, I proposed that our bylaws, or practices and procedures contain a simple rule - the master of the lodge will provide some sort of masonic education to the lodge at every stated meeting. It met with fierce resistance (from the usual old timers) that it was already part or the charge given to the WM at installation and we didn’t need it in the bylaws. Fair enough, but does the lodge do that now? No, it doesn’t. So why not put some teeth into it, after all there is nothing in the code to enforce it. If it’s in the bylaws at least there is something to point to.
My suggestion was shot down, obviously.
It’s been my experience that most lodges all have the same boring meetings. Not all, there are some that recognize the need for something more. But as you said, it’s our own damn fault.
I agree with everything you said, and can expand on the subject of sacred space and its effect on people. But, I think it's more important to address your proposal. I think that would work, but I personally would amend it as follows. When we conduct our business we need to do that as Masons, not just men. The spiritual, moral and ethical ideals that separate a Mason from men at large need to be applied to our secular decisions. So, having some link to our sacred space and our secular space might be useful. I would propose some method of separation, mandated by code, in our ritual. For example, we open Lodge as we always do. Then AFTER the speculative work(which should always come first), a ritual closing of the sacred space, but not a closing of Lodge so that business can be done. In other spiritual communities I have been in I have seen this work, and by doing secular work while still in the ;after glow' of the sacred space, people tend to apply the principals of the sacred space to the secular work. I think that if we separate the two aspects of our work, into separate meetings, we will essentially have two Lodges, and the tenets of Masonry might become extinct in the business meeting.
Are lodges in Washington permitted to open on the First Degree? That would be the optimal time and space to handle the necessary business of the lodge, as the EA Lodge is best suited for that mundane stuff, leaving the work of self-improvement protected upstairs in the higher degrees.
See “The Ceremony of Passing” by W.L. Wilmshurst, 1933.
Yes, lodges can open on any degree.
Brother Magpie, In the most friendly manner I must say that I cannot more strenuously disagree with the notion of leaving the mundane stuff for EAs. We only get one chance to make a first impression and the mundane stuff is the worst possible impression we could make on new Masons. We can open on the first degree in Washington and we have a significant problem of initiating new Masons and then having them disappear after a few meetings. I believe that much of this problem can be attributed to spending too much meeting time on the mundane stuff. It's a problem for all Masons but I guess we more experienced Brothers have built up a tolerance.
Well, the business doesn’t have to be the only activity. There should be “age appropriate” education and more.
There also is the European method, which is to have a committee address the business before lodge opens. If the lodge’s annual budget already covers whatever is being spent that night, there’s no need to talk about the bills at all. They were voted on when the budget was adopted.
I think that the European method you mention could work well for us.
If we could refrain from questioning everything the Committee reported! ;-)
>>>we have a significant problem of initiating new Masons and then having them disappear >>>after a few meetings. I believe that much of this problem can be attributed to spending >>>too much meeting time on the mundane stuff
I think this is exactly right. We tell our newest Brothers that they are going to get to learn and do wonderful things as Masons, and then we sit them in a room to let them listen to us argue over secular things that have nothing whatsoever to do with Freemasonry.
Then we wonder why they don't return.
>>>I guess we more experienced Brothers have built up a tolerance.
I think this is correct too. Like the proverbial lobster, we don't notice it anymore.
One issue I think we face is that often the First Degree is the only Degree many Lodges are ever able to Open on. The two Lodges I'm most active with for example have only opened on the First Degree, I think for at least a couple of years now, unless we are performing a Degree or something Degree related such as a Proficiency return.
This is because both these Lodges are growing, and have continually been graced with active EA's. A good thing!
So I don't think in most cases we could leave the work of self improvement to those meetings Opened on a higher Degree.
In 2020 I wrote about "foundational vs. incidental practices" in lodges, and how that gets wrapped around the axle of "tradition"
https://forthright.space/2020/05/22/tradition/
Creating a lodge as a sacred space, and "Speculative Masons build sacred spaces in the spiritual world" is foundational. It's deeply encoded in the ritual, and quite explicitly.
Doing business and paying the light bill on a monthly basis inside the Sanctum Sanctorum is an incidental practice. We need to pay the light bill, but it's not why we exist, just what we have to do to keep existing.
All we need to do is double down on the foundational practices and be willing to change any incidental practice. Or, as Gustav Mahler put it, "Tradition is not the worship of the ashes, but the preservation of the flame"
Following up on this, broadly I despair that anybody's ever going to get convinced. Existing lodge cultures can also be profoundly resistant to change. While I do think brothers should have a go at changing their local lodge culture, there are also procedures for making new lodges that are extremely underutilized.
What could possibly be wrong with a group of like-minded brothers coming together to charter a new lodge, with a solid purpose & vision? I know some people might be upset; that's not the question, the question is what's *wrong* with it. I can't see much.
There is precedent for this in multiple jurisdictions; it's already happened.
I too have thought that the formation of new Lodges would offer a good solution for those desiring change. I don't know why, but the idea hasn't gained any traction here, I've specifically encouraged it in some areas, but have never been able to gather enough interest. I think that Brothers might believe it harder to pull off than it actually is.
This was a superb article! Thank you for sharing the link, it is a great perspective, and offers a good path towards fruitful conversation in a Lodge.
A couple of thoughts I have on this are; How many Brothers take the time to prepare their own hearts and minds before the lodge is transformed into a sacred space? Are their thoughts still of profane things, of their own worldly problems. Are their hearts cleansed, free from discord, especially with another Brother? I believe that when we fail to prepare our own, internal sacred space, we cannot properly receive any form of sacred teaching. We are more comfortable speaking and dwelling in the business portion of a stated meetings than we are looking inward at ourselves. We are more comfortable verbally jabbing at a Brother in the dining room rather than defending his character. It’s no wonder the mundane, business portions of our meetings drag on. That those Brothers who haven’t prepared their personal sacred space drag those Brothers who have, back into the profane world. It’s no wonder we run out of time for educational conversations. It’s no wonder Brothers stop participating, stop showing up, stop speaking of Masonry to their friends and finally just stop being Masons.
I agree completely, if we were able to shovel all of the mundane business out of the stated meeting and open it up for strictly educational and philosophical discussion, it would be a huge change to bring us back to what we were.
If we're unable to change the code, then the lodge can move most of the business out themselves. The only real things that would remain within the tiled lodge meeting would be reading communications from grand lodge, balloting on membership, and voting on items that need to be addressed. Does committee reports need to be done within a tiled lodge? No. Do introductions need to be done in lodge? No. Do announcements need to be done in a tiled lodge? Of course not.
I find the same stupid behavior outside of lodge, within our monthly lodge officer association meetings. They are boring and pointless. We spend 20 minutes just introducing everyone when we all know each other. Then everyone spends another 20 minutes talking about their stated meeting and what's on the dinner menu. The only useful information given is any degrees that are coming up at each lodge. A few years ago, we would actually have some education at the LOA, inviting guest speakers for various topics. For some reason that stopped, and the meetings became just an extended version of a boring stated.
Why do we do this to ourselves? It's insane. Do people really think this is for the good of masonry?
Hello brother, first time commenter. Happy to share a thought with you.
I can completely empathize with your recognition of dissonance between these sacred ideals and the practical profane realities of operating the lodge. It is contrary to the fundamental purpose of Freemasonry today, that we are speculative in nature. Our craft being centered around constructing spiritual, metaphysical spaces. After all, a church or synagogue would not discuss the utility bill during its gatherings, why should it be any different in our temples?
This proposal to separate the sacred and profane by creating a dedicated secular space for conducting lodge business is a thought-provoking solution. Potentially allowing the lodge to retain the sanctity of its rituals and spiritual work wile still effectively addressing the necessary business elements of its operation.
In my lodge, we recognize the mundane and accept it for what it is, the necessary and practical steps to keep our sacred place and continue our craft. Over the years, we've gotten very good at streamlining the business side of things during our meetings. In my knowledge though, we have never considered separating the business of our lodge from the sacred rituals we practice, and I think it is for one important reason.
Freemasonry is not just about the spiritual journey of the individual mason, but also the communal experience of our lodge as a collective. Add to that, Freemasonry, like many other organizations, must adapt to the practicalities of modern life. You pointed out that we indeed have evolved, expanding our activities beyond the lodge walls, to include significant charitable works and property management.
I ask you and the other commenters, if this is feasible in practice to separate these two aspects of our lodge activities, what are the aftereffects? Would this separation lead to a compartmentalization that could impact the overall cohesion and unity of the lodge?
I think the most practical solution would be the formation of a committee of selected/elected lodge members to address the business side of things. It would preserve the sacred space of the lodge, promote efficiency, and allow the lodge to focus on personal development. However, the potential challenges could outweigh the benefits.
Consider the hierarchy and power dynamics in a committee, accountability of their actions, engagement of non-committee members in business decisions, and the workload of the business at hand.
To address these problems as democratically as possible, there would need to be regular and transparent communication between the committee and the lodge, the keeping of committee minutes, reporting, a rotation of roles and elections, crystal clear guidelines and responsibilities as defined by the lodge or grand lodge, training and support, and regular evaluations. As you can see, the work set forth in a proposal like this can be extensive.
With all the sincerity in the world, my brother, I encourage us to weigh how important it is to consider the practical implications of such a change and to balance the desire for maintaining sacred places for ourselves within the realities of operating a modern organization engaged in sacred charitable works in profane places.
Thank you for your time.
And thank you for your ideas. I appreciate them.
Great thoughtful comments, Brethren, thank you.
I think the idea of not bringing the tools into the worksite is a lesson here. It's not that we shouldn't conduct "business" in Lodge, but that everything, like the Cedars of Lebanon or the stones of the Quarries, should be fully prepared before reaching the Temple mount. This means everything except the actual final discussion and vote should be done in committee, or survey, or discussion around a pool table.
On another note, I think you're being far too generous to absolve us from our sins. At least in my jurisdiction, the Master is charged to NEVER have a Communication without a lecture or part of a lecture done by himself or another. It's spelled out -- and willfully ignored. It's not a secret or some rocket surgery. But yes, we have plenty of reasons for our failings. Yet they remain OUR failings.
In my old lodge, I proposed that our bylaws, or practices and procedures contain a simple rule - the master of the lodge will provide some sort of masonic education to the lodge at every stated meeting. It met with fierce resistance (from the usual old timers) that it was already part or the charge given to the WM at installation and we didn’t need it in the bylaws. Fair enough, but does the lodge do that now? No, it doesn’t. So why not put some teeth into it, after all there is nothing in the code to enforce it. If it’s in the bylaws at least there is something to point to.
My suggestion was shot down, obviously.
It’s been my experience that most lodges all have the same boring meetings. Not all, there are some that recognize the need for something more. But as you said, it’s our own damn fault.
I agree with everything you said, and can expand on the subject of sacred space and its effect on people. But, I think it's more important to address your proposal. I think that would work, but I personally would amend it as follows. When we conduct our business we need to do that as Masons, not just men. The spiritual, moral and ethical ideals that separate a Mason from men at large need to be applied to our secular decisions. So, having some link to our sacred space and our secular space might be useful. I would propose some method of separation, mandated by code, in our ritual. For example, we open Lodge as we always do. Then AFTER the speculative work(which should always come first), a ritual closing of the sacred space, but not a closing of Lodge so that business can be done. In other spiritual communities I have been in I have seen this work, and by doing secular work while still in the ;after glow' of the sacred space, people tend to apply the principals of the sacred space to the secular work. I think that if we separate the two aspects of our work, into separate meetings, we will essentially have two Lodges, and the tenets of Masonry might become extinct in the business meeting.
💙Interesting idea! Definitely one to think about. Thanks, VW!