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.
 |
