Discussion about this post

User's avatar
John Gebhart's avatar

MW, I recognize that many lodges are groping with questions like the one you posed, and I don't take lightly that preserving a long standing lodge building fosters pride among the Brothers. However, I believe that by the time the question of "should we keep it" is on the table that the lodge is already suffering from EDIFICE COMPLEX (see what I did there?)

Brother Nelson highlights the significant problem with aging buildings: " too much time, money, and effort go into maintaining our beautiful sacred space and that it takes away from our primary mission of pursuing masonic knowledge."

Masonry isn't a building, and if you're doing it right it's not even a place.

Bruce L. Nelson's avatar

We, too, struggle with this conundrum. Our beloved lodge, built as a Second Degree Lodge, still has an active stereopticon whereby we project our lectures upon a screen that lowers in the East. The 100-year-old building just received a new boiler and underwent tuckpointing at a cost of 450K. Property taxes are our highest expense, followed by utility costs.

I believe that too much time, money, and effort go into maintaining our beautiful sacred space and that it takes away from our primary mission of pursuing masonic knowledge. We have dabbled with selling the building and downsizing our lodge, but I fear nostalgia and complacency will win the day.

What I do know is that our current model of maintaining the building with membership dues and rentals is unsustainable. If our lodge chooses to ignore this economic reality and make difficult decisions now, time will do it for us.

12 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?