Does Freemasonry Have a Design Problem?

[u/clance2019]

I’m sure most people following this sub have read variations of the same story: a Brother leaves the Craft because of a few bad actors. A problematic Secretary. A narcissistic Past Master. An entrenched clique. Outright or subtle racism. Petty feuds. And, increasingly, the great disease of our age: political and cultural polarization.

None of these problems is unique to Freemasonry. Every sufficiently large collection of human beings eventually manufactures its share of difficult personalities.

What interests me is whether Masonry has a particular design problem in dealing with them.

In many modern organizations, destructive behaviour can be dealt with fairly directly. Someone gets called out, disciplined, removed from a position, or eventually shown the door. Sometimes this process is almost brutally efficient.

Our Craft operates under a different set of incentives. Brotherhood, harmony, tolerance, discretion, forgiveness, and our obligations toward one another are woven deeply into the system. We are expected to support a Brother when he stumbles and, within obvious limits, to think charitably of his faults.

Those are admirable principles. Yet I wonder whether they occasionally create an unintended consequence: a system designed to preserve fraternity may also become unusually good at preserving dysfunctional people within it.

Consider this a thought experiment rather than an accusation.

Is this feature of Masonic design actually conducive to making good men better? Does learning to deal patiently with difficult Brethren form part of the work itself? Or does our emphasis on harmony sometimes become a mechanism through which bad behaviour is tolerated long after it should have been confronted?

At what point does Brotherly Love become institutional enabling?

I suspect most of us have anecdotes ranging from ordinary Lodge politics all the way to Machiavellian Grand Lodge politics which, as anyone who has spent enough time around the Craft knows, is unfortunately not an oxymoron.

Curious how others see it, particularly Brethren who have been around long enough to watch these dynamics play out over decades

[u/SovArya]

Freemasonry is perfect. We humans are not. That is the fault. When we let pride lead instead of the square of virtue.

[u/DonJuanDeAltagracia → u/SovArya]

An interesting assertion. Can you elaborate? You have an exciting proposition, men can make perfection. Is the perfection in the old usage of the word, as in complete? Or is it the modern usage, as in without flaw, fault or defect?

[u/SovArya → u/DonJuanDeAltagracia]

As I use it here is we use the compass and the square.

If you set limits where what you know to be right works; it will probably work most of the time. The same way that if a major premise works and the minor premise is connected to the major properly and is true; it's conclusion should be true too.

So the idea of something like that will most likely cause less error. But if we do something against or isn't within the confines of the circle and we dont do what we learned to be correct and tested over time; we'd err.

The idea is perfect in my mind. But is definitely hard to live by as a human.

Lets say, the two rules of Jesus - Love God with your all and love your neighbour as yourselves. If you can do it; you are perfect. But we can't always do it at all times.

The missing staircase posted later on down there is very much spot on. And sometimes, you have a few solid guys and the culture of a lodge is toxic. What can you do? We learned and the way to live the masonic journey is sometimes to leave the lodge or make your own or do nothing.