The Brother Before the Institution: A Candidate-Centered Approach to
Strengthening Freemasonry
by A Dear & Respected Brother
(who chooses to remain, for now)
Freemasonry
today faces many challenges. Membership has declined, lodge attendance is
inconsistent, buildings have become expensive to maintain, ritual proficiency
varies, Masonic education is sometimes neglected, leadership can become more concerned with administration
than inspiration, and internal politics can undermine harmony. Faced with these
problems, it is natural for Masons to search for institutional solutions. We
create membership committees, investigate new programs, adjust dues, improve
advertising, organize public events, develop leadership seminars, and debate
how Freemasonry should adapt to a changing world.
There is value in many of these efforts.
Yet they can also distract
us from a much simpler principle.
What if the best way to strengthen Freemasonry is to concentrate our attention on the
individual man standing before us?
Instead of asking first how we can save the lodge, increase membership,
improve attendance, preserve the building, or secure the future of the
fraternity, perhaps we should ask: What
does this candidate need from us? What kind of Mason are we helping this Brother
become?
Freemasonry was
never intended merely to perpetuate an organization. Its purpose is to work upon
men. If we devote ourselves seriously to that purpose—one candidate and one Brother
at a time—many of the institutional problems troubling the Craft begin
to resolve themselves.
The Individual Is the Work
One of the most
familiar images in Freemasonry is that of the rough ashlar being prepared for a
more perfect state. The significance of that symbol should not be overlooked
when considering the health
of the fraternity. The object
being worked upon is not the lodge building,
the membership roster, the treasury, or the institution itself. It is the
individual Mason.
This suggests an important distinction between the purpose
of Freemasonry and the
structures that
support that purpose.
Lodges, Grand Lodges, temples,
committees, officer lines,
charities, dues, regulations, and programs are necessary structures. But they are means rather
than ends. Their ultimate justification is that they provide
an environment in which the work of Freemasonry can take
place.
And that work takes place within men.
When
institutional preservation becomes our primary concern, our priorities can
become reversed. We begin asking how many candidates we need to keep the lodge financially viable, how many petitions we can obtain, or how quickly
candidates can be moved through the degrees. The candidate can subtly become a
resource needed by the institution rather than a man entrusted to the
institution.
A candidate-centered philosophy reverses that relationship. To paraphrase John F.
Kennedy…
The question
is no longer, What can this candidate do for our lodge?
The question becomes, What can this lodge do for this candidate?
That small change in
perspective has enormous consequences.
Membership Decline
Becomes a Question
of Membership Value
Declining membership is probably
the most frequently discussed challenge facing Freemasonry.
The instinctive response is recruitment. If fewer men are joining, we assume we
must find more men.
But recruitment
addresses only one side of the problem.
Suppose a lodge successfully initiates ten men this year. If eight become inactive
within several years, the
lodge does not fundamentally have a recruitment problem. It has a problem
creating an experience that men believe is worthy of their continued time and
devotion.
A candidate-centered lodge therefore worries
less about how many petitions
it receives and more about what happens after each
petition is accepted.
Was the candidate properly
prepared for what he was undertaking?
Did Brothers take an interest in him before his initiation?
Were his degrees
performed with care?
Did someone
help him understand what he experienced? Did he develop genuine
friendships within the lodge?
Did he receive meaningful Masonic education?
Was he given opportunities to participate without
immediately being pressured into an officer's chair?
Most importantly, did he come to believe
that being a Mason was making a meaningful
difference in his life?
If the answer
to those questions is yes, retention
becomes much less mysterious.
Men tend to remain involved in organizations in which they are known, valued, challenged, and needed.
The strongest membership program Freemasonry could develop may therefore be a Brother who goes home after lodge and
thinks, I am glad I became a Mason.
Better Candidates Produce Better Lodges
A focus on the individual candidate also changes how lodges think
about initiation.
Under pressure
to increase membership, a lodge may begin measuring
success by the number
of men it brings through the degrees. But Freemasonry has never claimed merely
to confer three ceremonies upon a man. The degrees are supposed to begin a
process of moral and intellectual development.
That process
requires time and attention. Imagine the difference between two candidates.
The first receives
his Entered Apprentice Degree and is immediately given the material necessary to advance. His principal objective
becomes demonstrating proficiency so that he can
receive the next degree.
Once he becomes a Master Mason, everyone congratulates
him, and the lodge begins concentrating on the next candidate.
The second
candidate receives his Entered Apprentice Degree and afterward sits with
several Brothers who ask what he thought about the experience. They discuss the
symbolism he encountered. A mentor
checks on him between meetings. He is invited
to dinner even when no degree is scheduled. Older Brothers
learn about his family, profession, interests, and reasons for becoming a
Mason. His proficiency is treated not merely as a requirement but as an
opportunity for instruction.
Both men may eventually become
Master Masons.
Only one has necessarily been taught what it means to belong to a fraternity.
If we consistently provide
the second experience, we will eventually produce a different
kind of lodge.
Masonic Education
Becomes Personal
The weakness
of Masonic education
is another problem
that becomes easier to address
when attention shifts toward the individual Brother.
A lodge may attempt to solve an educational deficiency by establishing a formal education program. That can be valuable.
But education does not always require lengthy lectures or elaborate
presentations.
Sometimes education begins with a Brother asking
another Brother a question.
What did you notice
in that degree?
Why do you think that symbol was used?
What does that obligation require
of us outside the lodge? How might this teaching apply to
your own life?
Questions like these
transform ritual from something witnessed into something contemplated.
They also acknowledge something
important: Masonic education
is not merely the accumulation of historical facts. Knowing
when a Grand Lodge was established or understanding the development of a
particular ritual is worthwhile, but Masonic education should ultimately help a
Brother interpret and apply the principles he has been taught.
If we concentrate on the individual, education
becomes less about filling thirty minutes on a
lodge agenda and more about cultivating a lifelong habit of reflection.
Ritual Improves
When the Candidate
Matters
The
same principle applies to ritual. Why should ritual
be performed well?
It is tempting to answer that question by appealing to tradition, pride,
or ritual standards. But there is an even more compelling answer:
Because someone is experiencing it for the first time.
A Brother
who has witnessed the Master Mason
Degree fifty times
may easily forget
what it is like to experience it once.
The candidate does not know which Brother
learned his part yesterday, which
officer is filling
in, or how difficult it was to assemble the degree team.
He simply knows
what is happening before him.
If we genuinely
believe that this experience may remain with him for the rest of his life,
preparation ceases to be merely
about ritual proficiency. It becomes an act of service to the
candidate.
This perspective can improve ritual
without turning ritual
into a competition. The objective is not perfection for the sake of
pride.
The objective is to give one man the most meaningful experience we are capable
of giving him. When every officer thinks that way,
ritual improves naturally.
Mentorship Becomes
Brotherhood
Freemasonry frequently speaks of mentorship, but mentorship can become another
program that exists more clearly on paper than in practice.
A candidate-centered approach
makes mentorship much simpler.
A
mentor is a Brother who cares whether
another Brother succeeds.
He calls
him. He sits beside him. He introduces him to people.
He answers questions without making him feel foolish for asking them. He explains
customs that everyone
else assumes he already understands. He notices when
the new Brother has missed several meetings. He encourages him without
pressuring him.
Most importantly, the relationship does not end when the candidate becomes
a Master Mason. In fact, that may be when
mentorship matters most.
During the degrees, the candidate has a clearly
defined path. After being raised,
that path suddenly disappears.
He may reasonably ask, What am I supposed
to do now?
If nobody answers that question, inactivity should not surprise
us.
But imagine if
every newly raised Brother had another Mason who spent the following year
helping him discover his place within the Craft. One man might become
fascinated with ritual. Another might become
interested in Masonic
history. Another might enjoy charity
work. Another might simply
value fellowship. Another might eventually demonstrate leadership potential.
Instead of forcing every Mason through
the same institutional pipeline, we would help each Brother discover where his talents
and interests could best serve the Craft.
That is mentorship, but it is also simply brotherhood.
Leadership Changes
When the Brother
Comes First
Many leadership problems in Freemasonry can also be understood through
this principle. A lodge exists for its members, not its officers.
The Worshipful Master therefore
should not primarily
ask, What do I want to accomplish during my year? He should ask, What do the Brothers of this lodge need from
me during my year?
That does not eliminate vision
or leadership. It clarifies them.
A Master who concentrates on individual Brothers
begins noticing things that statistics cannot reveal.
He notices the elderly Brother
who no longer drives at night.
He notices the Entered
Apprentice standing alone before lodge.
He notices
the Past Master who has become cynical
but still has knowledge worth sharing.
He notices the young Mason eager to participate but uncertain where he belongs.
He notices
the Brother who has attended
faithfully for years
without ever being
asked for his opinion.
He notices when disagreement is becoming personal.
Leadership then becomes less about occupying
the East and more about creating conditions in which Brothers can flourish.
Such leadership also develops successors naturally. Instead of filling chairs because someone is "next in line," the lodge identifies men of character and gradually gives
them opportunities to develop judgment, confidence, and
responsibility.
Internal Politics
Lose Their Importance
Perhaps nothing
is more contrary to the stated principles of Freemasonry than allowing ego and
politics to damage relationships between Brothers.
Yet it happens
because Masons remain human beings.
Titles can become important. Recognition can become important. Decisions
about appointments, committees, ritual, money, and jurisdiction can
become personal.
A focus on the individual Brother provides a powerful corrective.
Before entering an argument, we might ask:
Is winning
this disagreement more important than preserving my relationship with this Brother?
That does not mean disagreements should be avoided.
Principles matter, rules matter, finances matter, and poor decisions
sometimes need to be challenged.
But Masonry teaches
us that disagreement does not require
contempt.
When we consciously remember
that the person
across the room is our Brother, institutional politics become less
capable of dividing us.
The irony is that the harmony
of the lodge is not ultimately produced
by regulations concerning harmony. It is produced by
individual Masons choosing to practice brotherhood.
The Building
Returns to Its Proper Place
Even financial and building
problems look different
through this lens.
Many lodges possess buildings
constructed when membership was several times larger than it
is today. Maintaining those buildings can consume enormous amounts of money and
energy.
Sentiment understandably becomes involved. Generations of Masons may have met in the same building.
But a candidate-centered lodge asks a difficult question:
Does this building serve
the Brothers, or are the Brothers now serving the building?
A temple
can contribute tremendously to the Masonic
experience. It can create dignity,
preserve history, provide fellowship, and establish a physical home for
the lodge.
But the building is not the lodge.
The lodge is the Brothers.
If maintaining a building requires
continually increasing dues,
constant fundraising, exhausted volunteers, and meetings
dominated by maintenance problems, preserving the structure may eventually
undermine the fraternity it was constructed to serve.
Keeping the individual Mason
at the center helps put property, finances, and administration back into their proper roles: supporting
the work rather than becoming the work.
Charity Becomes Personal Again
The same can be said about charity.
Freemasonry has accomplished extraordinary charitable work, and organized philanthropy should remain a source of
pride. But there is a danger in allowing institutional charity to substitute
for personal charity.
Writing a check is easier
than noticing that a Brother
is struggling.
A candidate-centered and Brother-centered lodge
remembers that charity
begins with attention. Who has been absent?
Whose wife is ill? Who
lost his job?
Which widow has not heard from the lodge recently?
Which older Brother needs transportation?
Which younger Brother
is quietly struggling?
A lodge
that raises thousands of dollars for charity while
failing to notice
the suffering of a
Brother sitting in its own room has misunderstood something fundamental.
Attention is itself a form of charity.
We
cannot help people whom we do not notice.
The Debate Between Tradition
and Modernization Becomes Less
Important
Freemasonry frequently debates
whether it needs to modernize.
Should lodges use
social media? Should meetings be structured differently? Should communication become electronic? Should dress expectations change? Should traditional practices be preserved?
A focus on the individual helps distinguish important
traditions from incidental habits. The proper question is not simply, Is this traditional? Nor is it, Is
this modern?
The better question is, Does this help us accomplish the purpose of Freemasonry for the
Brother?
Technology that makes communication easier
may be useful.
Changing ritual merely because
contemporary people find solemnity unfamiliar may not be. Preserving a tradition that creates
meaning and continuity may be valuable.
Preserving an inefficient administrative habit merely because
"we have always done it that way" may not be.
The individual Brother becomes
the measure by which institutional practices can be evaluated.
One
Brother at a Time
None of this requires
a new Grand Lodge program. That may be its greatest
advantage.
A lodge does not need permission to care more deeply about its candidates.
A Secretary does
not need new legislation to call a Brother who has disappeared. A Past Master does not need a committee
appointment to mentor a young Mason.
A ritualist
does not need a new regulation to prepare more carefully because
tonight's candidate deserves
his best effort.
A Brother does not need a program to sit beside a visitor
who does not know anyone.
A Worshipful Master does not need a strategic plan to ask his members
what they need from
their lodge.
These actions
seem small because
they occur one person at a time. But Freemasonry itself occurs one
person at a time.
Every great lodge is ultimately composed
of individual men who decided
that their obligations mattered.
Every excellent ritual is performed by individual Brothers
who prepared.
Every harmonious
lodge consists of individual Brothers who restrained their egos. Every successful mentorship begins when one Mason takes an interest in another.
Every act of charity begins when someone notices another person's need.
Every future Worshipful Master begins as a candidate walking through the door for the first
time.
Conclusion
Freemasonry's greatest
problems may tempt us to think primarily
in institutional terms. We see declining membership and create
recruitment campaigns. We see poor attendance and create
programs. We see weak leadership and create training. We see financial difficulties and create fundraisers. We see declining
ritual proficiency and create standards.
There may be a place for all of these
things.
But perhaps
the Craft does not primarily need another program. Perhaps it needs our attention.
Our attention to the candidate preparing to receive
his first degree.
Our attention
to the Entered Apprentice trying to understand what he has experienced.
Our attention to the Fellow Craft wondering what comes next.
Our attention
to the newly raised Master Mason searching
for his place. Our attention to the Brother who has quietly stopped
attending.
Our attention to the Past Master who still has something to teach.
Our attention
to the elderly Mason whose lodge may represent one of his remaining connections to lifelong friends.
And our attention
to one another.
If we concentrate on creating better statistics, we may or may not create better Masons.
But if we concentrate on creating better Masons, better statistics may
eventually follow.
Membership improves
when men find value in belonging. Retention improves when Brothers develop
meaningful relationships. Ritual improves when the candidate's experience
matters. Education improves when we care whether a Brother understands. Leadership improves when officers view their positions as
opportunities for service. Politics diminish when relationships become more
important than recognition. Charity becomes meaningful when we notice
individual needs. Even buildings and finances assume their proper importance
when they are understood as tools for serving the fraternity rather than
purposes unto themselves.
The future
of Freemasonry, then,
may depend less upon discovering how to save Freemasonry
and more upon remembering why Freemasonry exists.
We are given rough stones
and taught to work.
The institution provides the tools. The lodge provides the place. Our Brothers provide assistance and instruction.
But the object
of the labor remains the individual
man.
If we take care of
him—if we challenge him, teach him, listen to him, hold him to meaningful
standards, give him meaningful work, celebrate his progress, correct
him when necessary, and genuinely treat him as a Brother—we will be doing more than
improving his Masonic experience.
We will be strengthening the lodge.
And if enough lodges do
that, one Brother at a time, we will strengthen Freemasonry itself.
ILLUMINATI
