Georgia. Alabama. Arkansas. Arizona. Connecticut. England. The Philippines.There's another crack in the cement of brotherly love. This time it's in West Virginia.
Bro. Chris Hodapp, on his Freemasons for Dummies blog, gives us a glimpse into emails to and from a group of Masons, comprised of at least 100, and the Grand Master of Masons in West Virginia, M.W. Bro. Charles F. "Chuck" Coleman, II.
Apparently, the group is unhappy that measures they voted on, and passed, at the most recent Grand Lodge communication have been overturned unilaterally by the Grand Master.
A West Virginia Mason using the name I.M. Hiram sent out an email to a large group of supporters, and the email found its way to the Grand Master.
The Grand Master, it seems, immediately threatened expulsion of those who were a part of this email chain.
The motto displayed on the website of the Grand Lodge of West Virginia is "Building Bridges amongst Men through Brotherhood."
I recall that West Virginia's most famous bridge was the Silver Bridge, which collapsed into the Ohio River in 1967, killing 46 people, after area citizens had been repeatedly warned for over a year about the upcoming disaster by the appearance of the Mothman, a winged man-size creature with glowing red eyes.
Read the emails and Bro. Hodapp's commentary on his blog.
Image: Statue of the Mothman in Point Pleasant, West Virginia
Additional resource: More about Mothman
Masons | Masonic Disagreements | Mothman | Freemasonry | Grand Lodge of West Virginia | Burning Taper | BurningTaper.com
Thats funny, an email of mine also found its way into my Grand Masters hands as well!
ReplyDeleteFunny how our leaders get into possesion of things that were not addressed to them or for them, but yet it always works it way back to the Top Dog...
Gentleman, you might not be able to trust your brothers anymore. Some have been seduced by the power of masonic Bling Bling, and will apparently turn in a brother...so there are no secrets left in this fraternity as long as Narcs run around in it, stepping on the backs of fallen brothers to receive appointments up the chain....
great job brothers!
Funny how our leaders get into possesion of things that were not addressed to them or for them, but yet it always works it way back to the Top Dog...
ReplyDeleteMaybe it's because some brothers don't want to see every small disagreement turned into a circus. Some brothers grab hold of one little piece of an issue, and turn it into a grass-roots movement, all the while ignoring the larger issues - or parallel issues - of jurisprudence.
Bro. Hodapp seems to have a little more information on the disagreement in WV, and from where I'm sitting, it certainly doesn't seem like a case of a GM simply taking over and nullifying a previous GL vote.
I'm not saying that what happened is correct or ethical. The point is that I simply don't know all of the facts or reasonings behind the decision, and neither do most of us. It's simply way too easy to look at one action and then get worked up over it. This is one of the reasons why we are taught early in our Masonic careers the importance of learning to subdue our passions.
Beautifully put Tom!
ReplyDeleteBr. Arthur Peterson
"I'm not saying that what happened is correct or ethical. The point is that I simply don't know all of the facts or reasonings behind the decision, and neither do most of us." - Tom
ReplyDeleteNor will you ever know them because they will be covered up and brushed under the rug. Masonry is dying one incident at a time while the Masons walk around in denial.
Nor will you ever know them because they will be covered up and brushed under the rug.
ReplyDeleteYou know something? I'm beginning to see that there's not much difference between some Masons and the konspiracy-obsessed anti-Masons.
Tom, you dualist daoist you.
ReplyDeleteYou too have noticed that people become that which they fear.
Or as the Stones put it, "...every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints."
— St. W.S. the Sinner
Numerous lawsuits are now pending where people have suffered adverse consequences from the forwarding of their private interpersonal communications (i.e., "email"). This is an instance where it's taking the legal system a while to catch up with technology, but it's illegal to "forward" or otherwise distribute potentially damaging confidential communication, and when people suffer tangible losses as a result of that, those who violated their expectation of privacy can be held financially liable.
ReplyDeleteAs for the replies posted above by Tom Accousti and Arthur Peterson, those are sadly typical of the attitudes prevalent in American Masonry today. Despite any hint of evidence in support of the Grand Master in question, they just "assume" he's right, and anyone who questions him is a trouble maker.
Unfortunately, that attitude is NOT supported by facts. I'm not aware of a single instance (ever) where a Grand Master has been accused of wrongdoing, yet was ultimately able to justify his actions.
As specific cases in point:
Several months ago, a Grand Master in Arizona caused considerable unrest in his jurisdiction when he ordered the disbandment of a Shrine club.
About a year ago, a Grand Master in Florida caused considerable unrest in his jurisdiction when he ordered a Master Mason there to stop writing and publishing Masonic news and commentaries.
A couple of years ago, a Grand Master in Georgia caused considerable unrest in his jurisdiction when he "erased" from the rolls a multitude of Master Masons, without trial, or even charges of impropriety.
About three years ago, a Grand Master in Arkansas caused considerable unrest in his jurisdiction when he nullified a Grand Lodge vote overwhelmingly against a doubling of per capita dues.
Those instances and countless others, indicate widespread corruption and/or disregard of Masonic law by Grand Masters throughout the United States, yet the vast majority of Masons, like brothers Tom and Arthur above, continue ignoring the truth and hoping the problem will eventually go away.
Indeed, that may happen, as Masons and prospective Masons continue "voting" with their feet. Rather than taking an active roll to improve the fraternity, most who become enlightened about the widespread corruption, simply choose the path of least resistance by allowing their memberships to lapse. Very few have the courage to say: "This is wrong, and if Masonry really means anything, we need to stand up for what we believe is right."
Despite any hint of evidence in support of the Grand Master in question, they just "assume" he's right, and anyone who questions him is a trouble maker.
ReplyDeleteAnd it seems that you readily accept the version of the events presented by the disgruntled brothers without trying to understand the background or the other issues. IOW, you "assume" that the GM or GL is is wrong, and that anyone who questions the decision is a martyr.
In Arizona, it's true that the GM disbanded a Shrine unit. But what were the events leading up to it?
I know about the situation in Florida. I don't understand it, and it doesn't seem fair to me. However, the GM acted because the GMs from other jurisdictions contacted the GL of FL with some concerns.
I don't even pretend to understand the issues with GA. All y'all do some strange things down there, if y'all ask me.
It's not - or to be fair, it's rarely a case of a GM simply doing something that's ethically wrong. The issues usually arise because some point of Masonic law or regulation is open to interpretation. In most US states, when the GL is not in session, then the GM has the power to make decisions and act on its behalf. When you come up with a better system, then let us know.
I can't imagine that GMs or GLs want to crush the spirit of brotherhood in their jurisdictions. I can believe, however, that some of them don't grasp all of the implications. Likewise, I believe that most brothers of the craft arent' troublemakers, but rather may become irrationally exuberant and act without thinking about how it fits in with existing GL rules and by-laws.
To the Anonymous poster...
ReplyDeleteI have not given any opinion on this blog post.
The only opinion that I gave was that Br. Tom wrote a beautiful post.
So, since it has been brought up, I will gladly give my opinion.
My opinion is I DON'T CARE.
Simple really...
This situation and all the others happened in Grand Lodge jurisdictions that I have no business sticking my Masonic nose in.
If something like this happens in North Carolina, I will do my best to get ALL the details and follow my conscience.
What I have noticed is that Freemasonry in all the states concerned still flourishes. There was no great exodus of members from the craft.
There were a few who were expelled, or left of their own accord.
If the Majority of Masons in those states do not see a need to fix the supposed problems, who the hell am I to tell them they are wrong?
Br. Arthur Peterson
Bro. Arthur:
ReplyDeleteWith all due repect, NOT CARING is the problem.
You're not a New Yorker, or a Pennsylvanian, or a resident of D.C., yet I'm sure you cared about what happened in those places on this date in 2001. Why? Because you're an American, and you're a member of the human race.
Did you not care that a New York brother was shot in a lodge several years ago? Do you not care that Arkansas Masons were given 50-year suspensions by a vindictive Grand Master a few years ago?
These things and many more ARE your business. Everything that happens in Freemasonry affects YOU, or the opinion of someone ABOUT you, if they know you are a Mason.
We're all in this together. Our interactions online prove that much. We communicate with each other, without grand lodge approval (their approval is actually required for interstate interaction, at least by some jurisdictions), because we accept and respect each other as Masons.
What happens to Bro. Tom in Connecticut, or to Sis. Kelly in California, affects you as a Mason and as a human.
Just because something happens in a jurisdiction other than your own doesn't mean you shouldn't care, or that, if necessary, you shouldn't take action. Only one of your obligations was to your state's grand lodge; the bulk of them were obligations you took regarding all Masons.
Whether someone is a member of the Grand Orient of France, or of Le Droit Humain, or working under the Grand Lodge of West Virginia, he or she is still a Mason, and deserves your concern. Artificial lines on a map, or "recognition," shouldn't enter into it.
— W.S.
W.S.,
ReplyDeleteGrand Lodges being self governing is a part of Freemasonry I would never want to see tampered with.
Which is why I say "I don't care"
It is far too easy for the emotions to overrun a man when the drums of injustice begin to beat. It happens all too often in Cyber space.
We get fed just enough information to want to rally behind a Brother for his perceived injury. What we will never get is the whole truth.
I have yet to see a Brother on-line say "this is what I did to escalate the situation".
There is always at least two dogs in every fight.
Online all you here is that a Grand Lodge pulled a name out of a hat and declared "this is the Mason we will toy with today!"
I don't buy it.
Do I care how other jurisdictions carry on their Masonry? Absolutely!
Do I care about the few incidences that pop up online? Hell no!
Because I will never have all the facts to decide which way I should be shifting my care.
And, because despite how big it appears online, it isn't big enough to motive the majority of Masons in the particular jurisdicition to action.
Freemasonry on the internet is but a tiny slice of what is really going on. In the real world Masons meet on the level and part on square every single day.
So Mote it be!
Br. Arthur Peterson
Bro. Arthur wrote:
ReplyDelete"And, because despite how big it appears online, it isn't big enough to motive the majority of Masons in the particular jurisdicition to action."
The majority of Masons in any particular jurisdiction don't know what is going on in their own jurisdiction, much less other jurisdictions, nor do they care. They don't even go to their own lodge meetings.
Online Masonic interactions, therefore, take on an even greater role, and represent a higher percentage of ACTIVE Masons than you might think. While we may not have ALL the information in any particular case we discuss, we know far more than the average Joe Mason, who doesn't attend meetings or even read his state's Masonic magazine.
— W.S.
W.S.
ReplyDeleteI put this on a forum we both contribute to and found it fitting here as well.
God grant me
The courage to change the things I can,
The strength to accept the things I can't,
And the wisdom to know the difference.
Br. Arthur Peterson
Brother Arthur:
ReplyDeleteCheck out one of my very first posts on Burning Taper, back in Sept. 2005.
It was opening prayer for this blog.
— W.S.
W.S.
ReplyDeleteI knew I had that prayer dorked up!
Yours is the correct version, but the sentiment is the same!
Br. Arthur Peterson
I didn't notice if they were different versions. I was simply pointing out the "coincidence" that nearly two years later, you'd posted the same prayer.
ReplyDeleteIt's one we should all think about more often.
— W.S.
The majority of Masons in any particular jurisdiction don't know what is going on in their own jurisdiction, much less other jurisdictions, nor do they care. They don't even go to their own lodge meetings.
ReplyDeleteI may be showing a cynical side, but IME, most of them barely know what's going on in their own district, never mind jurisdiction.
we know far more than the average Joe Mason, who doesn't attend meetings or even read his state's Masonic magazine.
Hey! I write for the state magazine! Maybe that explains why my blog only has like 23 Connecticut readers.
That said, Bro. Peterson makes a point that often goes ignored: I, as a simple brother about the lodge, have absolutely no say in what happens at the GL level of my own jurisdiction; it would be foolish of me to inject myself into the situations of a GL several states away.
Bro. Peterson,
ReplyDeleteYour post about how this is none of your business because it is happening elsewhere reminds of something said by Martin Niemoeller.
"First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -- because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out -- because I was not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out -- because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Bro. Tom,
I believe you are suffering from what psychologists call "denial".
It may be a brother or a lodge from another state that may be the only ones that respond to another states situation, due to the individual states members being afraid to act on something within their own state?
ReplyDeleteBut if GL's and GM's began to have to worry about "Brothers" outside their fiefdom's who will challenge their actions, we may be able to LEVEL things out here
and allow Pavlov's Dog to keep a Vigilant watch.
Bro Tom, I have tried to discuss certain "topics" and "incidents" with DDGM's, and their words to me were quote" We were told not to discuss that topic", so if the people in places to do something are ORDERED not to discuss something, how does the lowly blue lodge peon do anything?
I know how, but to the mason out there who feels alone and neutered do to having no one trusting to go to?
How do we break that cycle?
Bro Jethro Tull
Bros. Jeff & Jethro -
ReplyDeleteOkay, I can't speak for any other GLs, but I can tell you how it works here in Connecticut; and I can tell you with some authority because I have that purple apron.
There are issues that we "can't" talk about with the brethren. For example, we will not discuss a Masonic trial in your lodge with brothers of another lodge. And this makes sense, when you think about it; what happens in your lodge is your business.
That's the formal situation.
The informal situation, however, is different. We recognize that Masons do not live in vacuums. There is nothing stopping you from talking about what happening in your lodge with one of your buddies who happens to belong to a different lodge. And your buddy might say something to a third person. You can see where this is going: at some point quite a few people will have heard about something that's going on, although some of the information might get a bit garbled.
As a purple apron wearer, it's my job to visit different lodges to offer up whatever assistance I can. Sometimes that takes the form of simply listening to the brothers vent about some issue. I take that information back to the other purple apron guys in my district, and pass that along to the higher-ups, who do likewise at the GL officer's level.
Yes, it does sound like a "trickle-up" theory, doesn't it? But that's the point; if just one lodge has a concern about something, it's likely ignored, but if a dozen lodges in several districts have the same concern, the it's time for the GL officers to pay attention.
And look, I don't know what happens in other states, but I have a hard time believing that it's completely different elsewhere. Admittedly, Conn is a small state and the purples get together rather frequently, so maybe we're more poised to act on something than large states, like PA or GA.
But in fact, what happens in GA or WV or AK might as well be happening in Tibet. First, most brothers don't hear about it because what mechanism is there for that? The internet has proven to be a great medium, but it's a lot of work to separate the wheat from the chaff. Even old net hounds need to work at getting to the real background of any particular issue. GLs rarely publish white papers, and disgruntled brothers tend to publish only their side of the story. Most readers give up in frustration, and I dont' blame them.
And as to the "denial" thing? Bro. Jeff, each GL is a sovereign entity. At the various GL sessions I've met GMs and GL officers from other jurisdictions, and I can't recall any of them wearing horns or carrying a pitchfork. They all get together at least once a year, and they meet up for other conferences at other times during the year. There is a limited opportunity for, say, the GMs of CT, MA, RI, and NY to whisper good counsel to the GM of GA. There is also little motivation for the GM of GA to act on that. It seems that the best we can hope for is that the GMs of more enlightened states can continue to exert a good influence.
This was recently posted:
ReplyDelete"There are issues that we "can't" talk about with the brethren. For example, we will not discuss a Masonic trial in your lodge with brothers of another lodge. And this makes sense, when you think about it; what happens in your lodge is your business."
This is completely bogus! I've attempted to find out if proper jurisprudence was being followed or the nature of a charge against a brother. And I was stonewalled exactly for the policy described above.
This policy is abused - - sometimes with good intentions and frequently INTENTIONALLY. It's one thing to keep "dirty laundry" hidden from the profane. But to keep fellow brothers from finding out what is happening to and with other brothers (regardless of the lodge).... is just crap.
Changing this one attitude would probably have removed 90% of all the fuss about Jeff Peace and the UGL of America!
Quit screwing with all this "secrecy" stuff. That's for the secrets of the CRAFT! Not for the affairs of our brothers amongst our brothers.
To the degree that Grand Lodge officers ignore this is indicative of how extensive (or not extensive) the "dry rot" in American freemasonry there may be.
Bro.Geo
Bro. Tom,
ReplyDeleteThe whole mess in Georgia started with the RRCG. The GM, by edict, declared it "clandestine". When we inquired why, we couldn't get an answer. Is this the type of secrecy that you're talking about?
If something is "clandestine" then surely we, as Masons, have a right to know why.
If it's "clandestine" just because the GM says it's "clandestine" then that is unacceptable. As a fraternity of adults we have a right to question the GM, and should expect a reasonable response.
Why the secrecy...
ReplyDeleteThis is NOT about Jeff's case, but about the secrecy kept at the Grand Lodge level when discipline is involved in general.
We may remember a part of an obligation about not speaking evil of a Brothers good name, right?
Well the Grand Lodge is under the same obligation. If a member of the craft or members of the craft have done something unmasonic and discipline action is needed, the Grand Lodge isn't going to violate their obligation to the Brother in doing so.
That would be unmasonic. So, they quietly handle the situation according to the laws of their jurisdicition and without dragging the Brothers name through the mud.
It is very honorable if you ask me.
If you don't like it, well that is what you signed up for. There is always the option of leaving or trying to change that part of the obligation.
IMHO
Br. Arthur Peterson