to this page
to this page
Can it be that in some respects we are stuck in the past, and not responsive to the challenges of a new era? Certainly, for better or worse, many articles and commentaries in fraternal journals suggest this. One example is quite evident from our own jurisdiction, as well as others. Recently, several Grand Masters have tried to get their constituent Lodges to settle on one standardized period for their Installations, pointing to the inconvenience of two kinds of Masonic years, especially in the computer age. Some Lodges use June, and some use December. All are jealously guarded privileges based on historic usage. Most remain unchanged after strong efforts.
Some Masonic writers point out that these dates simply reflect the traditional Patron Saints of the Order when it was largely Christian in character, before we somehow made the hugely beneficial and progressive change to universal values. June 24th is, of course, the day of St. John the Baptist, and December 21st the day of St. John the Evangelist. Indeed, are not the two conjoined, for reasons so beautifully set out in the ceremony of dedicating a Lodge, as "the Holy Saints John of Jerusalem". Other sociological commentators have noted that these meeting times, as well as the tradition of meeting in the evening, are really a reflection of how the craft adjusted from the daylight and extempore meetings of the medieval age to the needs and demands of the agricultural age. A few Daylight Lodges reflect a modest adjustment to the needs of the industrial age, for night-workers and the retired. Little else has changed.
The question arises, therefore, as to how the Craft can adjust to the Information Age and the Knowledge Society, and will it even be relevant? Can we respond to the challenges of this new and puzzling era? The question of Freemasonry's place in the Knowledge Society is surely one of profound significance for the future of mankind. But first, we need to understand the kind of society we are entering, and the sorts of problems which arise, now and in the future.
Many of the challenges which arise are already beginning to be evident, and have been frequently noted in scholarly publications, and in fraternal publications such as The Philalethes magazine. they are also symptomatically evident in almost every Lodge notice and Grand Lodge report. We are all familiar with them. For example, there is the self-evident problem of the demographics of the Order: the prevalence of older men and, in most Masonic bodies, a very high average age. There is also the masking of true membership numbers by multiple Lodge affiliations. this is partly a reflection of an aging society, but it is worse. As one Masonic authority put it: it represents a truly remarkable potential for Masonic funerals! It also reflects in symptoms such as the difference between Lodge membership and Lodge attendance; in the very survival of many allied Masonic bodies as the demographic wave works its way from the foundation up through the superstructure. It is there in the difficulty of manning the various offices, and even in some cases, the dire challenge of keeping the various branches of Freemasonry alive. There are serious financial and charitable implications. There is the general social marginalization of the Craft as measured against other fraternal organizations; and the general decline of all such organizations in competition with the other attractions and diversions available.
But, in addition to these well-known problems, which have been increasingly evident for some decades, there have also been some highly significant changes in our wider society which have not yet been fully played out. They will certainly add further impact which could be a serious challenge to the Craft.
One is the gradual decline in the general standard of living, and the deterioration of social norms. An example is what happens to the family when both spouses work, and there are no relatives or elder generations to look after children.
There is also the increasing uncertainty regarding work itself. Jeremy Rifkin in his book The End of Work argues that increasing automation will remove the very idea or concept of "a job". He argues that we will be pushed into a post-market era, substituting software for routine employees, as the global economy fundamentally changes the nature of work itself. For many people this is a drastic re-definition of the meaning of life itself, because they have grown up in a kind of dependency on large institutions, based on the concept of "a job".
In addition, the Census shows us the breakdown of traditional communities, as people move every few years. Young people have great difficulty in finding time to attend functions on a regular basis because of the uncertainty of their working conditions, the demands of suburban life, and the shortage of disposable time. All these trends have been well explored by the Canadian economist Nuala Beck, in her books Shifting Gears: Thriving in the New Economy and Excelerate: Growing in the New Economy. Alvin Toffler, the futurist, has argued that as we move into cyberspace, we are entering the new "super-symbolic" economy. According to the theories of the economist Kondratieff, the old industrial economy peaked in 1981-82, and we have been working our way through a hidden depression. Some time early in the next century, argues Harry S. Dent, Jr., there is a boom ahead, a new cycle of growth in a new economy. The information age society will then develop quickly. It has been called by futurists, such as Alvin Toffler, the "super-symbolic society" because most of the elements of information will simply be electronic symbols existing in cyberspace. They will control the real assets.
Surely, Freemasons should be at home in a super-symbolic society? Symbolism and allegory are at the root of the Craft. Perhaps in discussing the nature of the super-symbolic society we may find some signals for the future of the Craft. We have a good beginning: in a global society, Freemasonry has universalist values applicable to all good men. In an increasingly tribal society we appeal to brotherhood. In a society where bureaucracy is in trouble, we have the structure of self-governing Lodges under stable and constitutional government. In a world of warring factions we speak for harmony. In a world where there is increasing lying and corruption, we speak for truth. In a world of massive social problems we have a commitment to relief of suffering. If we can understand the nature of the new society, we have the fundamental and enduring principles on which to build.
Huge megapolitical changes are happening. Basically, in the coming age, everyone will be obliged, like it or not, to look after themselves, because the age of dependency on big government or big business or big unions or big institutions is over. There will be long-term persistent uncertainty about our careers in business or the professions. In effect, everyone will need to manage their own lives just as does an entrepreneur when he manages a business. That involves being nimble, shifting to new opportunities as old ones dry up. This is a fundamental shift for most people, and many will need help to achieve it: but is not that what Freemasonry has been about? We have tried to build the sovereign individual and to combat everything that stultifies human development: ignorance, prejudice, poverty, disease, and society.
All the statistics show that the largest generation of baby bookers, average age about 50 now, are seriously under-invested and over-committed with respect to resources, assets, and time, so there will be a crying need for the kind of help we can give. The acid test which will apply to almost every activity will be: does it add real value, and does it strengthen the sovereign individual? Are we building the Temple?
The context will be disturbing to all Freemasons: a kind of social Darwinism. As writers such as Hirschleifer have suggested, most people will only play by the rules when it suits them. there will be serious problems of elementary morality, decency, civility, and ethics. Hirschleifer, who specializes in the study of conflict, argues that :"...the persistence of crime, war and politics teaches us that actual human affairs still remain largely subject to the underlying pressures of natural economy." What he means is that most actual outcomes will unfortunately be shaped by conflict, including open violence. People will be sorely tempted to follow the rule of law and economic self-interest when it is easy, but will increasingly be diverted from lawful production and exchange on the one hand, to fraud, theft and extortion on the other, when it looks easy. Added to this, we will likely have the cartelization of the state, as an interim stage to privatization: not unlike modern Russia where the Mafia has taken over government and the police.
In a valuable new book on politics, violence and crime, Garfinkel and Skaperdas state: "Individuals and groups can either produce and thus create wealth, or seize the wealth created by others."
This is also allied to trends where technology now favours the defence, so that there is a serious decline in the decisiveness of police power and military power, as well as diminishing returns to violence. Governments cannot police cyberspace. Increasingly individuals will be well able to form international business corporations offshore and thus taxation will be difficult. this means that large groupings such as the nation-state or most large governments and corporations will be hard put to it to justify their huge overhead costs.
Very small groups and even solitary individuals (such as gangs, tribes, gangsters, Mafia, militias and terrorists) will have real power. While aggression by governments will be less likely, domestic peace will be difficult to maintain within societies. In addition, there will be information wars: battles between propaganda, disinformation, outright lying and truth.
I simply note that historically, Freemasonry has had the moral values to reinforce good men, as well as the courage and the integrity and the structure to survive tyrannical situations. I think of the survival and re-emergence of Masonry in the formerly fascist and communist countries. We are historically good at surviving such tests.
The good side of this is that basically the knowledge society and the information age are really, as Davidson and Rees Mogg have said, using technology's advances to convert citizens (now regarded as assets by the nation states) into customers of private commercially operated agencies of protection. We can see the gradual privatization of all state functions: and people will choose what they want and pay for it accordingly. This means also that the optional size and scale of almost every human activity is falling rapidly. Again, we are used to small self-governing Lodges: they have survived for centuries under adverse conditions. They should prosper in the new age.
We will gradually see small networks of virtual corporations providing almost every service that can be imagined. This is the reverse of the industrial age. For most of the industrial age, great wealth was created by bringing processes and procedures under central control, on the principle that bigger was better. One of my mentors in Britain in the National Coal Board in the 1950's was the economist E. F. Schumacher who argued that "small is beautiful". That seems to be the way of the future. Excessive scale will be uneconomic, and dangerous.
What does all this mean? Adam Smith said: "Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest state of barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice."
The key ingredient in the new age will be acceptance of human diversity; and honest government. Without it, barbarism is guaranteed. Fortunately, Freemasons have always been patriots in the true sense: in favour of constitutionality, the protection of the individual under the rule of law, and honest government based on ethical principles and spiritual truths. Obviously these are all major challenges. What are the further implications for the Craft?
Canada has very strong cultural traditions of decency, tolerance, honest government and respect for persons and the rules of law, and Freemasonry has been a strong factor in our peaceful evolution. In making good men better, the new technology should enable Freemasons to build strong linkages both locally and globally. that will evolve naturally as we get used to cyberspace, and it is not likely to be difficult.
The moral ambiguities and ruthlessness of the Social Darwinism of the new age should in itself be fertile ground for Freemasonry. In such ages, whatever the difficulty, we have achieved greatness and been of great help to mankind. Our ancient landmarks and fundamental principles will be a great rock and solid foundation for those who share our values. There are, however, some other challenging implications which point to the need for significant adaptation, even transformation. Obviously, no organization can survive unchanged through traumatic times, and Freemasonry is no exception.
My suggestion is that the need is not so much for trendy innovation, but for a return to our basic, original, standards and principles and practices, to build on those secure foundations for the future.
But Freemasonry does need a transformation to adjust to the new age. Let us refocus on the objects of the Craft: to show by example and by encouragement a standard of morality for both private and public life; to give evidence of public charity and compassion; and to support and strengthen community and society. So perhaps what is needed is really a re-focusing.
Perhaps the first matter is to refocus outward. We have, for good reasons, in recent decades focused more and more internally and privately. We must once again focus on community and society, and build bulwarks against the dark forces by precept and example to build not only our personal temple but the public one, too. We can then demand rectitude and better honest leadership in public life.
It is also evident that children and the family need support and strength. We might well focus more of our philanthropy, charity and relief on the needs of youth and young families. they are the future of the human race, and of our society and its communities.
The implication are twofold: one is that the Most Worshipful Grand Master, after appropriate research, would make public statements on key issues of significance to all Freemasons; and that individual Lodges could express their particular personalities and character as they see fit, within the general rubric, likely in a great variety of ways.
If the researchers and writers and scholars are correct about the decreasing scale of effective action, then it also suggests as a second implication that the pendulum will swing away from the long centralist trend of Grand Lodges, back to the older pattern of the "immemorial rights" of the individual Lodges. That means a real challenge at all levels, to leadership. It also suggests that one of the key roles of the Grand bodies will be to ensure the survival of the work in all its forms. This in its turn may well suggest a different organization of Grand bodies, to make it easier for concerned Freemasons with busy lives, little time, limited resources, and great concerns for the essentials of the Craft, to participate in the many branches of Freemasonry without getting over- committed to the neglect of their families and careers. In the modern world, it is likely quite unrealistic to expect members to be active in a multitude of bodies. But the teachings and survival of the degrees do matter. This will call for some ingenuity and flexibility.
It also suggests that our many various bodies should stop trying to be full-service fraternal organizations competing with non-esoteric fraternities. Research has shown that what attracts, holds and compels Freemasons is the essential core teachings of Freemasonry itself. Most Lodge agendas are, in a sense, endured rather than enjoyed. that is sad: think of what we felt at Initiation!
Similarly, we will have no shortage of charitable needs: we will likely have to further focus and refine our relief work. A particular concern is to ensure that we combat the increasing polarization of society into rich and poor, and ensure that poverty is not a barrier to entry. Another key area is to combat racism, and new forms of slavery, and to ensure that the immense cultural diversity of the emerging society is one in which true brotherhood is practiced. Similarly, we should seek to ensure that the new technology is available to the underclass so that they do not become permanently submerged.
Perhaps the Grand bodies should become a "research and intelligence" organization for the Craft: trying to define trends so that local Lodges can be alerted to emerging needs, and meet them before they become crises; and correlating research and information so that we become the great educators of the Craft to ensure its relevance and survival for suffering humanity, easing the sharp edges of what could otherwise be a cruel society, even with all its promise.
As a Masonic historian of the evolution of the Lodges and of the various branches of Freemasonry, I have been struck by the burden of the building we have erected; and by the great value, historically, of the "travelling warrants". How much time in Lodge is taken up now by increasing demands for funds to rebuild buildings? How many Lodges have sufficient revenue from buildings to do fund-raising for basic purposes other than maintenance and repair? Also, in a world where, because of the rise of evil and the moral ambiguities, Freemasons will be targeted for attacks, does it make sense to provided large and prominent building for some eventual terrorist attack?
On the one hand, it would be interesting to see a study of what would happen if the Order divested itself of all the Lodge buildings and properties and invested such funds for this complex future which awaits us. On the other hand, why not revert to the old pattern of carrying the simple trappings of the Lodge to a meeting place where, as in many old Lodges, including my Mother Lodge, the Brethren dine together in harmony first, and then go to work in a fraternal mood, removing all traces of their presence when they remove the furnishings after Lodge? Obviously, Freemasonry survived for centuries in this way, and essentially it still does in mobile military units. So it was in our early settlements.
Fixed dates and fixed places to meet fitted the mass industrial society. One of the great needs for the future will be flexibility. Daylight Lodges and Internet discussions are part of it: but perhaps what we need is a revival of "The Travelling Warrant" which was such a feature of the military lodges in early Canadian history.
Obviously, these are only a handful of possible principles for the new age, put forward simply to help create constructive discussion and hopefully in due course, positive renewal.
What is clear to me is that, at its foundation, Freemasonry is in tune with the fundamental human needs of the new age of a knowledge-information society. If we can preserve the ancient landmarks and yet adapt the Craft, we can make a significant and vitally important contribution to the evolution of humanity. that, surely, is in large part what the concept of Freemasonry aimed at doing, through the ages!
Get your own Free Homepage
Return to Home Page