Those of you who missed the last few months at lodge have missed quite a bit of excitement. I perpetrated that greatest of Masonic evils; recommending change. It triggered a pandemonium that would have required an entire grove of olive trees to turn it into a calm debate :-).

Lots of people crave stability. It’s a basic human need. Back when it was proposed to move the tyling time back by 30 minutes, there was general grumbling but it was eventually adopted on a ‘try it for a year’ basis. A year later it was obvious that it was detrimental to the majority of the brethren and so I moved that it be returned to its 7:30 PM time. This lead to a very tense meeting. Luckily, the change was relatable and desirable by the majority of the members and so the motion passed by a majority of however many to one. But it was a hell of a lot of fuss – over a 30 minute change.

These last two changes that I have suggested, however, have been far more extreme and of no personal benefit to the older lodge members themselves. Ergo, they resist. I would like to explain, to the younger members especially, why this is the case, lest they be too judgemental.

The older members were freemasons during the golden age of Freemasonry. Lodges grew so large that they needed to bifurcate. Advancement was a privilege that had to be earned and there was very little competition for one’s time. Masons occupied an esteemed place in society. It was a very good time to be a Mason.

Eventually, outside forces resulted in membership declining, but it was a gradual thing. Like the frog in the pot of water, masons got used to it. After a while, the three lodges that made up GB Lodge had to combine but the numbers kept declining. When I took the chair, I estimated the life of the lodge to be 5 years. During that time some of the older members would have received the final summons and the younger members would have found the effort to reward ratio incompatible with a modern lifestyle. The lodge would be forced to amalgamate in order to stagger along for another decade or so.

So you see, a lodge collapsing and having to amalgamate isn’t a disaster to the older members. It is simply business as usual. Freemasonry is, for them, a time when they can get together with their old friends, have an extremely familiar ceremony and then get together for dinner afterwards. What the name of the lodge is, is virtually immaterial. Some lodges don’t even amalgamate. The members still get together for dinner, just not as Freemasons.

For the younger members of course, it’s like the frog being put into boiling water. The situation calls for massive change immediately. Losing our lodge is not normal, it’s like losing our home. They haven’t been members long enough to have old friendships, it’s where they come to make new ones. Change, for the young man today, is not a thing to be avoided but rather a normal part of everyday life. Check out the average age of the people at the climate change rallies.

So, in my rather pessimistic opinion. The younger members ought to make sure that they have enough new members to replace all of the Officers positions as well as enough passionate ones to spend their time learning the long charges (until they get changed as well). Because when the shit hits the fan, we might find ourselves short of a great many very experienced people. Just pass me that parachute will you please?