Some Notes on Amorphous Masonic Virtual Groups
The proliferation of so-called “We-Are-All-Masons-Regardless-of-Grand-Lodges-and-Jurisdictions” groups in Social Networking sites, poses a serious threat to regular Masonry. It misleads Masons to ambigous concepts and distorted notions of so-called ‘universal brotherhood of Masonry’. Clandestine organizations would like us to believe in this way, and if you don’t agree, you’ll earn their ire and will be branded as not being a genuine Mason. They would like us to believe that theirs is the ideal and real Masonry because they accept and treat all as Brother Masons. Then at every opportunity proselytize and brag of their correctness and makes a fool out of us and our Grand Lodge.
Sadly, many from our ranks in the GLP believes on this infantile sentimentalism and enjoys the rollercoaster ride these clandestines provide. In the meantime, while they keep us busy in our virtual amorphous gathering in these social networking sites, this clandestine group are fast encroaching on our territories building their lodges and according to reports, are receiving into their fold individuals who were rejected from our lodges. Think, it is not actually harmony that they’re after, they are actually destroying the harmony within our ranks and slowly breaking our foundations.
This alarming trend is succinctly described by Bro. Ronald J. Watkins of Wayfarers Lodge No.50, G.L. of Arizona in his article, “Freemasonry: The Digital Challenge”, to wit:
“This “new wave” has certain troubling aspects. The proponents veil their anger towards regular Masonry by claiming to be supportive of traditional Masonry, when in fact they are not. They tend to depict regular Masonic Grand Lodges as monolithic and oppressive. They view subordinate lodges as dysfunctional and archaic. They envision a future in which anyone claiming to be a Mason is accepted as such, a world in which regularity all but ceases to exist. In the name of what they term “universal brotherhood” they seek a Masonic world in which anyone wearing a compass and square is accepted as a Mason. If they have their way it will be the end of regular Masonry.”
Brethren, caution should always be our watchword in our dealing and participation in the various social networking sites passing itself as Masonic.
- Bro. Cris M. Gaerlan
Jacques DeMolay Memorial Lodge No.305
MD NCR-A, M.W. Grand Lodge of F.&A.M. of the Philippines
Well, the web isn’t going to go away, and this is ultimately an argument against Grand Lodges losing the battle over control of the message of what is Freemasonry. Unfortunately for Grand Lodges, by the time they figure out what the battle is, it is already lost. The day of the power of Grand Lodges to control the definition of who and what is a mason is over.
There is both good and bad in this, although I am certain Grand Lodges will see only bad in it. However, that doesn’t really matter. It is too late to put the cat back in the box. Freemasonry will survive. Grand Lodges did not invent Freemasonry and it was just fine before they were invented. Many might argue, and with perhaps some measure of credibility, that the future of Freemasonry will not substantially include Grand Lodges. I am neither upset about these changes, nor especially concerned. I don’t see Grand Lodges as being responsive anymore, and they are dooming themselves as a result.
If Grand Lodges wish to maintain supremacy, they’re going to have to do better than this. The old arguments about regularity and the boogey mason no longer ring true. I am not an enemy of the Grand Lodge system. There are some good reasons to maintain them. However, if they cannot recognize their weaknesses and respond to changing trends, getting back to what Masonry was really meant to be about (ie, not a giant boys club with ties to mega-charities) the future will end up being largely in the hands of what they call irregular freemasonry,
I agree Bro. Owen, but we must also recognize the fact that Grand Lodges everywhere did not underwent a uniform development. Thus, we cannot have an automatic assumption that all Grand Lodges in the world are affected by the same contemporary issues and changes, and that all will undergo a common and linear process of development. Each Grand Lodge will confront its dynamics based on its own particularity. The problems confronted by Grand Lodges in the US might not be the same problems faced by the Grand Lodge of the Philippines, India or anywhere else.
Many had experienced splits and divisions, but all still goes back to forming their own Grand Lodge systems. In my opinion regularity is still an important element of the Masonic institution as it prevents anarchy and further vulgarization of our ancient and honorable craft. In my honest opinion, reforming the Grand Lodge system is all that is needed, not its dissolution.