These are just random thoughts brought on by a posting about the Shrine I read on a Masonic forum today.
I think it would be safe to say that within 5 to 10 years the Shrine will be forced to break its Masonic ties for strictly practical reasons.
I would not want my Shriner friends and brethren to take this the wrong way; I am not offering an opinion on whether that would be bad or good for either organization -- I'm just being pragmatic and looking at the numbers and guessing at the future.
As Masonic membership declines or levels off, obviously so will Shrine membership, as long as it is tied to Masonry. This will eventually lead to the Imperial Divan needing to make a decision one way or the other in order to grow the organization and preserve the philanthropies. If the separation is done with finesse and sensitivity, no Mason will have to feel that he has to choose between the organizations, and no Grand Lodge will feel that it has to proscribe Shrine membership -- that is, it ought to be a win-win for both organizations. As one of my college professors used to say at the beginning of every semester, "if we must part, let us part friends." If we ever do part from the Shrine, I hope that is how we do it.
Again, I'm sorry if some don't agree and/or don't want to hear this kind of talk. But one thing we don't do well in Masonry is long-range planning. We have to start looking farther ahead than we do and consider all the scenarios -- best, neutral, and worst cases all included -- and losing the Shrine is just one of those scenarios that we'd better start thinking about.