There is no doubt that a new influx of members meant that esotericism at least briefly declined in importance when considering the outcome and consequences of the membership booms after both World Wars, it is important to ascertain the ideas of Freemasons and their thoughts about the new influx of members into the fraternity. In doing so, a chronological approach of looking at the Grand Lodge of California’s Annual Proceedings minutes through the various years during and after the membership booms of World War I and World War II will give insight into the ideas, thoughts, and motivations about membership numbers.
One thing to note is that the membership boom of World War One is that the increase in new members started to occur not after the war but during it. The Grand Master of California in 1918 stated that there were a lot of degrees of initiation occurring in California but that the lodges were lacking in the instruction of the more philosophical and spiritual demands of the members.
The conception that the prosperity and greatness of a Lodge is measured by its large membership and its wealth is erroneous. That Lodge is prosperous and great which commands the affections of its members and displays spiritual rather than material wealth. The conferring of degrees is essential and desirable, but a Lodge abrogates some of its responsibilities and neglects its fairest opportunities when it devotes its entire time to the conferring of degrees and fails to unite its membership into an homogeneous spiritual and working whole. This homogeneity can be accomplished only by as assiduous attention to the needs and desires of those who are already Masons as it does to the prayers of those seeking to become Masons. By failing to respond to the intellectual and spiritual demands of their members some of our Lodges are losing the interest and active support of many of the best Masons of California, and are in danger of becoming the patrons of the mediocre.[1]
Even at the onset of this membership boom, the leadership of the Grand Lodge was noticing that an increase in membership without instruction in the meaning and philosophical underpinnings of Freemasonry would become “mediocre”. The increase in degrees were playing a double-edged sword within the fraternity by both providing more members but at the same time not having enough time or reason to provide meaningful Masonic education. The move from a lodge of religious and spiritual characteristics gave way to the promotion of Freemasonry as a civic institution that promoted Americanism at the onset of World War I.[2]
This idea of a lack of substance in favor of a growing membership would continue in 1919 in which the Grand Master of California would warn again that the quality of Masonic membership will succumb to the quantitative aspect. The Grand Lodge also stated that the new Freemasons that were entering the lodge desired more social events, lesser degrees, shorter rituals, and emphasizing the social aspect of Masonic membership. The Grand Master at this time stated that he had seen the dissatisfaction with the emphasis of meetings placed on ritualistic activities and that “the remedy, if such there be for these conditions, seems clearly indicated to confer fewer degrees…and emphasize the social features.”[4] We can see here that the institution was starting to transform into a different form of Masonic experience which elevated the social events over the educational. The annual proceedings will illustrate this change. For in the Grand Master’s closing remarks, he says “In conclusion, then, it seems that so far as we can make a general recommendation, it should be along the line of emphasizing the social and fraternal features of our order.”[5]
This change from a philosophical and educational aspect to a social club would become even more strengthened in 1920 when the Grand Master of California stated that the ritual needed to be reduced and that more extra-curricular events centered around socializing and dinners needed to be added to lodges to attract more members.[6] The ritual committee of the Grand Lodge would promote this by looking into reducing the lectures of the degrees so that the rituals of initiation are shorter in time.[7] Even so, the Grand Master still professed the “ill-fate of lodges if not given importance to ritual and philosophy.”[8] Again, the Grand Lodge addresses the quantity over quality issue and said that there were “too many members and not enough masons.”[9] Still, the Grandmaster felt the lure of new members as would then state that there needed to be changes to those rituals to make it quicker.[10] It is apparent that in 1920 we can see the rise of social Freemasonry and the decline of educational Freemasonry although some still emphasized the importance of the latter. It appears that the membership of the Grand Lodge recognized the importance of Masonic education but at the same time understood the growing demand for a more social organization. This ultimately would put the Grand Lodge in a precarious situation of being caught in the middle of trying to accommodate both those new members that want to have an experience reflective of those that exist in other fraternal organizations at the time and those who sought to keep the lodge spiritual.
The solidification of social Freemasonry occurred even more in 1922 when members of the Grand Lodge started shifting the lens of the lodges towards more labor and social issues that existed at the time. For instance, during the Grand Orator’s speech, he informed the brethren in attendance that the Grand Lodge wanted to take on roles relating to educational support, political, and social endeavors as well He saw Masonry as a way to help and resolve the labor dispute in America if members were both employee and employer.[11] Turning the gaze towards issues in America and ways that Masonic lodges can fix or alleviate some of them, the Grand Orator also told the typical Freemason to “rededicate himself” to Americanism.[12] This is a change from nineteenth-century Freemasonry where universality was preached. This universality was characteristic of associating men without regard to their class or nationality.[13] In contrast to the inclusion of Americanism into twentieth-century Freemasonry, the Freemasons of the nineteenth were receptive to immigrants. California had three lodges that were distinctly ethnic lodges, Italiana Speranza, Parfaite Union, and Hermann.[14]
This injection of Americanism into lodges was appealing to members who were looking for outlets of patriotism when Catholics, immigrants, and radicals were of concern to the American public during the 1920s.[15] There is good information about the cross-membership of Freemasons and those within the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s. The Grand Lodge of California forbade dual-membership with the Klan as it aimed to reconcile the need for both organizations to exist and complement one another.[16] This Americanism even created appendant bodies to Freemasonry like those of the National Sojourners. The National Sojourners started clubs in 1900 in the Philippines during the Spanish American War and officially became an organization in Chicago in 1917 by former and current military members. The meaning of these clubs was to unite Freemasons who were displaced around the world into traveling lodges on bases to both meet and even create lodges in foreign nations. The efforts of the National Sojourners have been from then until now the promotion of Americanism and Masonic activities. They provided patriotic services centered around speeches, presentations, and ceremonies that were intent on showing love of their country and the promotion of national security.[17] This fundamental change to the lodges defined the fraternity itself as a patriotic organization, which made it more accessible and sparked interest in the community.[18]
Even with this inclusion of Americanism into lodges, we can see the Grand Lodge members struggling with how to retain members in lodges. The Committee on Jurisprudence explains that the rapid growth of members that have entered the lodges in the past few years have not found the way “into the spirit of Masonry” and stressed further the importance of instilling in their minds the true meaning of Masonry.[19] Here we can see that importance of spiritual Freemasonry remained an issue for a number of members, particular in the leadership, but rather there had been a division of thought about whether to become either more social or spiritual.
The membership spike in fact created a bind for the lodges. On one hand we see still see big membership numbers during 1922 but on the other hand, the Grand Master, worried about the essence of Freemasonry, stated that his motive for the year was to have more lodges with fewer members than that of less lodges with more members.[20] This bind which lodges found themselves in meant more membership dues to pay for the new real property that was owned or rented by these lodges, which will led lodges to concentrate on only initiating new members to pay on these new founded financial burdens. Whereas, if the lodges still had the preexisting lodges initiate more members, then the dues already being paid would suffice and the coffers of the lodge’s treasury would be filled for future savings or educational events.
The Grand Lodge in 1923 still advocated for spiritual and educational Freemasonry. The Grand Master pushed back on social and moral Masonry and stated that “Masonry is not a beneficiary society.”[21] Unlike the other fraternal orders that exist to promote the welfare of the community through engagement and financial support, the Grand Lodge in 1923 looked to separate itself from those other groups. Additionally, we can see that the Grand Lodge was starting to question their ethos as an organization at this point when the question about “what is Freemasonry” was asked before the Grand Lodge. In the answer to this question, we see an admission of change from the Grand Lodge while still holding on to the spiritual and esoteric underpinnings of Freemasonry.
The Grand Master stated that esotericism had always been a part of Masonry but agreed that it is now a sociable one for the mutual aid and comfort of others.[22] Masonry had always appealed to search for Truth, but that was apparently quickly fading though as the Grand Secretary stated that the members were anxious about too many members joining too fast and not assimilating into the lodge and understanding what Freemasonry is.[23] This idea of not assimilating and understanding what Freemasonry is, was elaborated on by the Grand Lecturer when he said that the Masters and members of the lodge, when performing the ritual, are doing so without explaining or they themselves not understanding the content or meaning of that which they are reciting.
As Lynn Dumenil has argued, anxieties concerning the threats facing American society at the time de-emphasized the religious and ritualistic qualities of the lodge.[24] Going back to the earlier fears of the Grand Lodge saying that lodges have become degree mills, we can see here fears that lodges have now just become just that, a mill that has now lost the reasoning for why they are even doing the rite or ritual.[25] What was discussed in lodges changed from that of topics on Masonry to increasingly more non-Masonic topics on Americanism, Bolshevism, crime, law, and public education.[26]
Other freemasons were writing and publishing books at this time stressing the importance of Masonic education and the division of thought that was occurring within lodges. One famous Freemason at the time, W.L. Wilmshurst argued in his book The Masonic Initiation that some members wish to not be educated at all and that they wish to be known as Mason in name only. Additionally, he said that there existed brothers within the lodge that are seeking “Wisdom and Light” but lose interest when they see what the lodge has to offer.[27] The desire for Freemasons to learn and take part in the more esoteric perspective of Freemasonry remained but was being diminished by the joiners who fill the lodges in the 1920s.
This further adds to the case that the esoteric or more spiritual aspect of Freemasonry existed, as a concern among some members albeit being more of a shadow in the background, but the importance of social Freemasonry was elevated. These issues do not cease to exist as the twentieth century continued and the same issues would present themselves into the mid-late twentieth century.
[1] Grand Lodge of California, Journal of Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the State of California (San Francisco, CA,1918) 13.
[2] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 1880-1930, 116-117.
[3] California Freemasonry, 1850-2000, 250.
[4] Grand Lodge of California, Journal of Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the State of California (San Francisco, CA,1919) 359.
[5] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1919, 359.
[6] Grand Lodge of California, Journal of Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the State of California (San Francisco, CA,1920) 78.
[7] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1920, 310.
[8] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1920, 79.
[9] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1920, 86.
[10] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1920, 108.
[11] Grand Lodge of California, Journal of Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the State of California (San Francisco, CA,1922) 82.
[12] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1922, 84.
[13] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 9.
[14] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 10.
[15] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 153.
[16] Adam G. Kendall, “Freemasonry and the Second Ku Klux Klan in California, 1921-1925,” Journal for Research into Freemasonry and Fraternalism 2, no. 1 (2011): pp. 123-143, https://doi.org/10.1558/jrff.v2i1.123.
[17] “History,” National Sojourners, accessed January 26, 2021, https://nationalsojourners.org/history.
[18] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 154.
[19] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1922, 355.
[20] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1922, 17.
[21] Grand Lodge of California, Journal of Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of the State of California (San Francisco, CA,1923) 475.
[22] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1923, 467-477.
[23] Grand Lodge of California, Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1923, 488.
[24] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 1880-1930, 148.
[25]Marco G Thorne and Levi Stowell, “Bound for the Land of Canaan, Ho!: The Diary of Levi Stowell,” California Historical Society Quarterly 27, no. 1 (March 1948): pp. 33-50.
[26] Dumenil, Freemasonry and American Culture, 1880-1930, 133.
[27] W. L. Wilmshurst, The Masonic Initiation, Revised Edition (Martinez: Plumbstone, 2007), 15.