LinkedIn v Freemasons: It's not either-or.

 

LinkedIn v Freemasons

Joining the club

Networking websites are booming, but they have not supplanted more traditional business networks

 

Eyevine

FRANÇOIS PÉROL, the adviser whom Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s president, controversially appointed in February to head two merging mutual banks, is not known as a champion of transparency. But Mr Pérol has let it be known that he intends to reduce the influence of freemasons at Caisse d’Epargne and Banque Populaire. He has refused an invitation to a tenue blanche ouverte, a masonic meeting that non-freemasons may attend. And he does not want senior posts shared among the banks’ various rival lodges.

French business may be particularly full of networks, but every country has its cliques, whether based on education, social background or spiritual beliefs. In Spain, Italy and Latin America as well as France, businesspeople speak of the influence of Opus Dei, a conservative Catholic lay order which supports a number of business schools. America has its Ivy League alumni groups and Rotary clubs. Chinese businesspeople often rely on guanxi, or personal connections.

At the same time online professional networks such as LinkedIn, headquartered in California, Viadeo, a French-owned website, and Xing, a site with a strong presence in German-speaking countries (formerly called OPEN Business Club), are surging in popularity, thanks in part to fear of lay-offs amid the recession. A year ago it took LinkedIn over a month to win 1m new members; it now takes about 15 days and the site has 42m members around the world. Online networks, in contrast to the old kind, are open to all and easy to join.

Old-style networks, however, are usually stronger than online ones, and the trust between their members facilitates transactions of all sorts. They can be particularly helpful for young companies in emerging markets. A study of entrepreneurship in China by Yusheng Peng of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, for instance, showed how kinship networks helped firms protect their property, obtain reliable information and identify opportunities. Social networks can also be speedier than formal systems: in July 2002, for example, when Vivendi, a French conglomerate, was weighed down with debt and needed to raise €3 billion (then $3 billion) in three days, its chief executive at the time, Jean-René Fourtou, turned to a group of bosses who were fellow rugby fans, including Claude Bébéar, then the chairman of the AXA Group, an insurance firm, and the money was secured.

Some old-style networks aim to bring an ethical dimension to business. Not all students at IESE, a leading business school with campuses in Barcelona and Madrid, are aware that it is “an initiative” of Opus Dei. But many of them, particularly those of Spanish origin, are invited to join the order, says one graduate who was approached during his time there. IESE has a network of 15 business schools in developing countries, some of which explicitly state a goal of bringing a Christian perspective to business. Combining family with work, for instance, is the special subject of Nuria Chinchilla, a professor at IESE.

But networks can also have baleful effects. They sometimes abet crimes. At French firms there is often pressure to hire or promote people based on their connections, businesspeople say. A study by Francis Kramarz and David Thesmar published in 2006 by the Institute for the Study of Labour in Bonn looked at three French business networks: former civil servants who graduated from the École Nationale d’Administration, former civil servants who graduated from the École Polytechnique and École Polytechnique graduates who went straight into business. These two elite schools, which produce 500 or so French graduates a year, dominate the boards of France’s biggest companies. The study showed that firms run by former civil servants who maintained their links to government markedly underperformed those run by executives with purely private-sector backgrounds.

Competition suffers, too. Nicolas Véron of Bruegel, a think-tank, says networks make it hard for new firms to emerge in France, since established ones are conservative about whom they do business with. As a result, he says, “you often see that successful young firms are business-to-consumer rather than business-to-business.”

On the face of it, networks are less important in more meritocratic America. Only 11% of bosses at big American firms received their undergraduate degrees from an Ivy League college, according to a survey last year by Spencer Stuart, an executive search firm. That suggests that performance matters more than the old school tie. But a 2007 study of mutual funds by Lauren Cohen and Christopher Malloy of Harvard University and Andrea Frazzini of the University of Chicago found that American fund managers invested more money in firms run by people who attended the same university as them. Moreover, membership of Rotary “service” clubs, which started in Chicago in 1905 and have since spread across the world, is by invitation only, and women were not admitted until the late 1980s. The Lions Club International, also based near Chicago, may be the most global offline business network, with 1.3m members in more than 200 countries. A third business network is the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, members of which must be Christians.

Will technology and globalisation undermine old networks?  Swiss banks’ hierarchies, for instance, used to bear a resemblance to those of the country’s army, with strong connections between the two. But the network has largely disappeared, thanks to globalisation and a decline in the army’s role in society, says a Swiss banker. Guanxi are different from Western networks: they are much more personal, informal and subtle.

“An active, open online network is far more competitive in today’s globalised business environment than local, closed networks such as alumni groups or freemasonry,” argues Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn. Online networks’ most compelling advantage, in addition to openness and efficiency, is the chance they offer to connect across borders and among different sorts of people. Traditional networks, by contrast, tend to be strongest in domestic industries, such as construction. About two-fifths of LinkedIn’s members are female, whereas offline networks are usually dominated by men. And online networks include more entrepreneurs than traditional groups: they make up 30% of Viadeo’s subscribers, according to Dan Serfaty, the website’s co-founder.

Nevertheless, the old structures will not fall away soon. Indeed, Mr Serfaty argues that online networks can reinforce offline ones. A graduate of HEC (École des Hautes Études Commerciales de Paris) might use the school’s own website to look for any alumni working at, say, Google, he says. But using Viadeo’s tools, he can also do a broader search for anyone who attended HEC and knows someone working at Google, so the network becomes more powerful. Online networks make it easier to gather information on firms and their employees, argues Jean-Michel Caye, a specialist in human resources for the Boston Consulting Group in Paris. But if you want to influence a big decision or secure a job, he says, “it’s still the old networks that really count.”

Taking Liberty: Restoring Freemasonry by Returning to it a Virtue it Once Gave Us

In the Masonic Dictionary article 'Kakistocracy' Brother Dale Sabin presented a summary of the problems that beset Freemasonry, with the withering but undeniably true verdict that Freemasonry has become a kakistocracy.  We propose that it become, or rather return to what it once was, an organization that gave us the template for Liberty, reinvigorating the Craft by doing so.

Kakistocracy definition: government by the least qualified, from the Greek kakistos; worst, superlative of kakos; bad. (American Heritage Dictionary, 4th edition.)

As it is, Freemasonry is turned upside down.

Post- WW II Freemasonry has seen a de-evolution of the Fraternity from a grand Philosophical Order, to a pseudo- mystical public charity, under the management of men who not only misunderstand the philosophical and esoteric aspects of the Craft, but attempt to correct their irrelevance by increasing membership of like- minded individuals, and boosting public support by concentrating their efforts into charitable fundraising, which it does poorly.

To the young Candidate, we promise Philosophy; what we actually deliver is politics, bad food, incredibly boring business meetings, and badly done Ritual. The new Mason, disappointed by this subterfuge, either fades into the background, quietly and individually studying and practicing Masonry as it was meant to be, or simply becomes inactive, if he doesn't actually demit. The latter will never be seen again, the former makes himself a Master through his individual effort and study, but will never ask, or be asked, to serve in a managerial capacity.

Why? Like calls to like; incompetence breeds incompetence. In business we refer to this, usually with a chuckle, as "The Peter Principle:" an individual rises to his own level of incompetence. In Masonry, we refer to this, in all seriousness, as "advancement." The only Mason who will be tapped to serve in a Grand Lodge capacity, or would even desire to do so, under these circumstances, is the Mason who probably shouldn't have passed through our West Gate in the first place.

Of this type of Mason, Manly P. Hall says: "They can never do any harm to Freemasonry by joining, because they cannot get in ... Watch fobs, lapel badges, and other insignia do not make Masons; neither does the ritual ordain them. Masons are evolved through the self- conscious effort to live up to the highest ideals within themselves ..."

Brother Hall, usually a fairly accurate and insightful commentator on Masonry, is dead wrong in this, at least as it applies to the physical body of Freemasonry in the last half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st. They have done nothing but harm.

There is yet a second problem contributing to our current poor leadership: lack of education. This can take a potentially good Mason, and make him worse, through no fault of his own. A Brother once said "today's inept DDGM is tomorrows incompetent Grand Master."

I would add: today's uneducated Master Mason is tomorrows inept DDGM.

Fortunately, the cure for this incompetence at the top is largely the same cure as for the rest of the problems in our Fraternity.

§

We resurrect liberty or we shall have death.

Without outlining them, the solutions that were presented in Brother's Sabin's article* are of limited use to reduce the problems in the Craft.  They have worth for individual lodges.  Indeed any of the familiar prescriptions as a remedy for all lodges, to be instituted by mighty Grand lodge authorities are bound to produce failure.

I suggest something else, a thoroughly Masonic (and American) idea: Liberty.

We should free the Craft from onerous and suffocating top-down authority.  Let Freemasonry return to what it was, i.e. individual lodges, sovereign, with connections to communities and built by a groups of men who are true fellows.   Give them freedom to look within the rich traditions of Freemasonry to build lodges with characteristics that suit them. 

Let the moribund lodges that have failed pass and new lodges rise or take up retired charters.  Supporting decay and failure only helps rot the Craft and place undue burden.

Encourage Freemasonry to reach out to the professionals, universities and men from groups who are given to share fellowship.  Right now lodges and grand lodges collude to keep these men from the doors of Freemasonry.  Step aside and let these men in.  This again is a question of removing the shackles from Freemasonry.

Facilitate membership or let the folks start a new lodge.  Facilitate those new lodges, find a Past Master to help get them started.

Let lodges acquire a character that they choose.  In these days we are apt to speak about diversity, though not achieve it, at least in Masonry.  There are so many ways to be diverse that all lodges will not be able to accomplish it but one place to start is a diversity of lodges!

Let the lodges develop activities of their own devising that responds to the interest of their membership.  Rather than trying to determine ways to restrict Masons or to dictate a calendar beside their essential meetings for rituals, why not leave the Masons to see how often they need to meet and what else they want to put on the calendar. 

Lodges could consider becoming centers of activity in the community again- coming out dances, baby showers, talks, memorial services, etc.   Lodges should not be forbidding and distant from the community.  That was not the character of Freemasonry during its zenith. 

Let charity return to being the work of the lodge, and let charity exist within the lodge and in endeavors of its choice.

Let Masonic education become something Masons in the lodge take upon themselves.  If you want people who will pursue Masonic education, urge lodges to select educated men!

Masonry is a system of allegory expressed in ritual and symbols, not a system for employing the underemployed or jobless at the grand lodge to act as incompetent teachers usurping one the most crucial Masonic process, i.e. the individual's processing and interpretation of the ritual and symbols!  The Mason is given resources, he is guided to where he might FREELY make his own pursuit or inquiries, he is not "taught"!   

If you want to get rid of politics don't force divided lodges to turn on themselves.  Let them part amicably and multiply!  If one group's ideas were better for lodge growth and quality we are sure to find out this way.

Grand lodges, make yourself useful!  Serve Freemasons and lodges, don't try to make Freemasons and lodges serve you.  Put materials online so Masons can read them, learn about the Craft, history, constitutions and the business conducted in their name.  To share the wonderful experiments of lodge types such as European Concept, Traditional Observance, various historic rituals, etc. make information available. To see exemplary ritual work, put it on!

Let us recall that Freemasonry is thus named because it was made of FREE men, Masters, in a time when much of society was bound in servitude.  It is therefore important for the Grand lodge and Freemasonry in general to refrain from claims of ownership and control of men.

What Thomas Jefferson said about government applies to Masonic governance as well, the government that is best governs least; Grand lodges should be afraid of failing its constituents and the constituents should never be afraid of governance.  Don't forget that it was the failure of the British colonial authorities to heed these words that caused the people to wage a revolution and start anew.  

---
*For the full article cited please see the Masonic Dictionary article.

Something for the Ages and the Connaught

Those active with the Level Club are aware that the Club, while in  reduced strength, focused on drawing a base of younger men to ensure its future as an initial measure in a larger design.

What is a young Mason? In the U.S. the average age of an active Mason is over 60. So is "young" in this context less 60 years of age?

What is a young for a person who is interested in Freemasonry but has yet to become a Mason? The average man today tends to be much older than in the past when contemplating and eventually approaching a lodge for membership. Should young relative to Masonic interest be seen as anyone below 50?

There is an important consideration regarding this youth movement.  Fraternalism benefits from having those with different and complementing experiences, concerns and energies come together and share of themselves.  With continuity such an environment happens.  In recent decades fraternalism, and Freemasonry in particular has not had this continuity of either participation or frankly speaking, of quality of participants.  The youth movement itself is excellent in terms of addressing issues of revitalization and reorientation toward healthy brotherhood and away from some of the damning problems that typified the nadir of the past several decades. One would hope that though that a wider range of recruitment and continuity would lead to the beneficial state described.  

But do young men need subset events or clubs within the larger organization to make Freemasonry more relevant to them by catering to say, men 35 and under exclusively?  The lodges of the UK which have been successful in revitalizing the Craft through specialized programs for young men and reemphasizing affinity lodges, including school (and university) lodges. They have  also
struck up a club for young Masons.  

This club, the Connaught serves primarily those professionals of the London area, no small number of whom were active in their university scheme.  It is worth noting that the successful Connaught Club has given rise to an associated revitalized lodge, Burgoyne 902, which is not thankfully, age exclusive. 

Unlike the Level Club, the Connaught Club is open only to those who are already Masons though we are told there are events where members are encouraged to bring guests. It also should be noted that the Connaught has occasions on their calendar that may be of interest to the traveling brother and its members' lodges encourage visiting Masons. 

From the  Connaught: 
 

ABOUT THE CONNAUGHT CLUB

The principle of the Connaught Club originated in June 2007 when the Metropolitan Grand Lodge held a reception for Freemasons under the age of 35. The evening, hosted by the Deputy Metropolitan Grand Master, was deemed a unanimous success. Owing to the reception’s enjoyment, further events were planned and the Connaught Club was born. In its first two years of activity, the Connaught Club has grown to become the focal point and central meeting place for young Freemasons living in and around London. In the last few months, the Club has seen exciting new developments as membership continues to rise and further events hosted. The Club now has its own dedicated lodge with all the principal offices being filled by brethren under the 35 year old threshold.

Connaught Club Objective

From the onset, the purpose of the Connaught Club has been to give young Freemasons in London a means to socialise with like-minded people of similar ages within Masonry; whilst bridging the large geographic area and diversity of London’s many lodges.

Aside from social functions, the Club acts as a representative body for the views of the younger generation of Freemasons. Theses views and further suggestions from brethren within the club are then referred to Metropolitan Grand Lodge through the appropriate channels.

We endeavor to encourage and support participation in our lodges and in Freemasonry. We promote openness and pride in our membership of the Craft and stress the contemporary role Freemasonry plays in modern society, with particular emphasis placed on its relation to the younger generations.

A Freemason's Christmas Wish

 

A Freemason's Christmas Wish  

-Bro. Andrew Bradley

It is the time of year when the Brethren rejoice,
and sing carols of praise in resounding voice.
Days of merriment and long nights of cheer,
as we all await the "Happy New Year!".
It is a time of family and life long friends,
a time of happiness and to make amends.
Roast turkey and baubles and the Nutcracker Suite,
we each have our own way to make Christmas complete.

As we stroll through this happy month of December
find time to pause and take time to remember
that distinguishing sign of a Freemason's heart -
those acts of Charity. How great they are.
As your family gathers 'round your Christmas tree,
and the children play with giggles of glee,
spare a thought for the poor, the man with no shoes,
whose money for food is less than your dues.

Remember also the Grand Lodge above,
and the Supreme Great Architect's act of love.
And practise those virtues we hold so true.
Have some fun! But let Temperance chasten you.
And during this season of peace and joy
look well to our future - the girl and boy.
Then wonder what lessons you may them teach,
and with your guidance what heights they may reach.

So, to all of my Brethren from far and wide,
whether your Christmas be snow, or hot and dry,
may the Architect grant his celestial boon
and keep your good health 'til we meet again soon.
Take care of yourself and those you find dear.
Keep this festive spirit throughout the next year.
Look toward your next date with our happy band.
'Til our next merry meeting. Apron, heart, and hand.

Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction by Stewart W. Miner, PGM, GLDC

A Presentation on Masonic Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) by RW Stewart W. Miner, PGM of the Grand Lodge of the District of Columbia.  Mr Miner notes that far from being rooted in the Constitutions or landmarks or even customary practices of Freemasonry from the Grand Lodge of England, that the practice is instead one based on pragmatic policies and politics in the American Masonic landscape.  Here in America the speaker notes, ETJ has never been uniformly practiced historically nor is it in modern times, and that such practices have come both with and without the approval of various grand lodges.  Mr Minor also expresses in an amusing personal anecdote that (prior to his research) he too, as Grand Secretary of the District of Columbia was upset to find that his grand lodge's "territory had been invaded". 

For those interested in further information we recommend this piece by noted Masonic scholar Paul Bessel. You will also find the text to Mr Miner's speech above here.

Simplicity of Being a Mason Among Masons

“What’s that you are reading?  So I see you are studying to be a Mason. What is that all about?”

"Give me a break; I'm just trying to figure out if this thing is for me at all."


As time passed and as I had more experience living as a Brother, it seemed as if just being a Mason was truly putting to ease this restless heart of mine. I was fortunate to have an  experience of a well formed lodge that had maintained tradition and emphasized quality of membership but could Freemasonry be that simple?  In a word, yes.


It was not so much about the study, rewarding though that was. The Brotherhood of Freemasonry done well was rather simple. I became less worried about the arcane and more focused on simply being… being a Brother. In fact the words "simplicity" and "availability" in our Lodge credo struck me very deeply. That is what resonated in my heart! That is what I love about this Masonic life at its best!


Simplicity:
Simply love Masonic principles written in the rituals, exemplified in the work, lived in our daily lives.
Simply love being among good men believing in Brotherhood of Man, Fatherhood of God, basic yet inspiring.
Simply love fraternity, the sentiment of good will with those in my Lodge.

Simply love the joy of hearing the fellows call me "Brother" and the joy of calling them "Brother".
Simplicity; God's gift to me-simply to be a brother.


Availability:

In an age where people find it hard to sit still and stay put, I desire to be available. To commit to being a Mason means keeping in touch in various ways with a set of men through my movement and travels.  Even on the seldom occasions I cannot make it to an Lodge meeting or event they are a touchstone, a reason for communication. I also find that when attending Lodge even if one doesn't say much, the presence says much more. Whatever Brothers do: whether it is efforts of friendship- finding out about our brothers and what is going on in their lives, sincerely wishing them well, lending a hand when possible, and giving the best of ourselves; or the work of the Lodge- setting up and taking down the lodge room, the chores of office, sending communications and publishing newsletters and updates, giving phone calls and emails, tiling the door, opening the meeting, etc.; there is also the work for the Lodge outside the Lodge itself- setting up for a group events, finding a caterer, making reservations, coordinating supportive and charitable efforts, offering advice and a listening ear, having fun while attending an event, etc.  - it is all really relevant. A Brother's main job is to be a Brother, to be available.

Shriners Declared "Clandestine" by the Grand Lodge of Michigan

This from what I have always found to be the atrociously titled though well intentioned "Freemasonry for Dummies" blog and a comment (written in purple, followed by our commentary in black):

The Grand Master of Michigan, MW Frederick E. Kaiser, Jr., has withdrawn official recognition of the Shrine there, and it has been declared clandestine and illegal. Michigan Masons may not attend tyled Shrine meetings in that state.


The problem stems from a Mason who was expelled by the Grand Master in July allegedly for pleading guilty to a crime punishable by incarceration of one or more years, and per Michigan's Masonic rules. Unfortunately, the Elf Khurafeh Shrine and the Imperial Shrine (Shriners International) in Tampa didn't agree and kept the suspended Mason as a full member of the Shrine. A slight complication: he's the current Potentate. He had pled guilty to possessing and operating gambling devices, and probably won't be sentenced until February. However, since he did plead guilty, the GM expelled him. The Shrine did not...


From the GM's letter of November 23rd:

The expelled Mason, by action of Elf Khurafeh Shrine, headquartered in Saginaw, Michigan continues to be a member and Potentate of that Shrine. Elf Khurafeh’s action to retain him was subsequently upheld by the Imperial Potentate. This situation exists despite the reputed requirement that a member of the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of
the Mystic Shrine (Shriner’s International) must also be a Mason in good standing.

Discussion was initiated with the Imperial Potentate, and counsel for the Imperial Shrine. The Grand Lodge of Michigan explained its position, and requested that the Imperial Potentate reconsider his decision, given information previously unavailable to him. Unfortunately for all concerned and with heavy heart, I must state that no modification of
his position, nor of Elf Khurafeh Shrine’s, has occurred.

Elf Khurafeh Shrine and the Imperial Potentate have failed to adhere to their own Shrine law, by retaining a non-Mason in their ranks. They have also failed to honor their obligations under Michigan Masonic Law. Therefore, acting under §3.10.2.2 of Michigan Masonic Law, the Grand Lodge of Michigan hereby withdraws formal recognition of the Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine (Shriner’s International) as a Masonic organization in the State of Michigan. The relevant sections of Michigan Masonic Law are as follows:

§3.8.2: Any and all organizations, associations, or persons within the State of Michigan, professing to have
any authority, power or privileges in Ancient Craft Masonry, not fraternally recognized by this Grand Lodge, are
declared to be clandestine and illegal, and all Masonic intercourse with any of them is prohibited.

§8.1.2.9: All Master Masons under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Michigan who hold membership in
Ancient Arabic Order Nobles of the Mystic Shrine are forbidden to attend tiled Shrine meetings when there is in
attendance a suspended or expelled Mason.

It is therefore my order that no Mason who holds membership in a Michigan Lodge, or in a Lodge chartered by a recognized Grand Lodge who resides or sojourns in Michigan, may (1) attend any nonpublic function of any Shrine in Michigan or (2) have any Masonic interaction of any kind with any Shrine organization in Michigan. Furthermore, no Shrine function or activity will be afforded a special privilege not afforded any other unrelated organization that is allowed to use a building dedicated to Masonic purposes, or on the grounds of a building so dedicated.

Violation of these provisions by a Mason under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Michigan is punishable by charges of un-Masonic conduct.

 And then we have this from a commenter: "The GM had the intestinal fortitude to make an unpopular decision to assert the sovereignty of the Grand Lodge over all things Masonic. Unfortunately, some bodies forget that."

I respectfully though intensely disagree with the course of action and the commenter.  Being a Mason does not stop your freedom of association. The the A.A.O.N.M.S (known more popularly as the Shrine and its members Shriners) is not a Masonic organization in that Lodge functions occur; it is simply an association that limits itself to Masons. (At least most of the time; Shriners have regularly admit on an "honorary" basis any number of individuals who are not nor have ever been Masons.)  


These are independent Masons not conducting Masonic affairs.  When anyone starts to dictate to Masons what they can do independent of Freemasonry and outside the lodge then we run dead against the values that Freemasonry is supposed to be championing and imparting and the rights that Masons depend on the practice the Craft (see the Constitution and the notion of freedom of association and assembly).


(As a related aside, I often find it funny that an organization that promotes its history as a model of democratic principles often brings out the lurking authoritarianism in its members. Human nature...)


I entirely agree, for instance with the Grand Lodge of Kentucky's long held decision to not recognize the Shrine.  If anything I do not think that the grand lodges who govern the "blue lodges" should be in the business of conferring the favor of recognition or not to external organizations that do not deal in  blue lodges just as we expect for the most part (in this country anyway) for the York Rite, Scottish Rite, Shrine, Cedars, etc. to not get into conferring the degrees of the blue lodge. Fortunately, this tends to be the case, i.e., grand lodges do not attempt to  restrict among its members outside degrees that are separate and different from the work of the Lodge.


"Sovereignty of the Grand Lodge over all things Masonic" is a very big statement that while grandiloquent is not true, for reasons of practice and principles of Freemasonry itself); the gentleman also seem to infer "Sovereignty of all people Masonic" as well which to any Mason should be alarming on the very face of it. 


This not only takes things as far as restricting the freedoms of Masons in ways heretofore unknown and unwarranted, but also takes the additional step of determining that the grand lodge of a state has the right to dictate the terms of operation to an independent body, and one that happens not to even be headquartered in the state (not that this is the crux of he issue.)


While not a Shriner I admire their good work and I believe that since it is being done by Masons it is a credit to Freemasonry because the members are Masons.


I also believe that this may be a product of ongoing issues, one being the dispute between the idea of whether grand lodges serve Freemasonry or whether Freemasonry serves the grand lodges. With such a declining state of membership there seems to be a lot of tension and politics inside Freemasonry and between Freemasonry and organizations of Freemasons.


Brethren are examining not just the laws/ rules and practices and their basis and history. Sometimes we see where politics and practice may not be valid. Things may be rapidly becoming a case of "reform (and splinter) or die" but I think we are much better served if everyone comes to their senses and perhaps the sides step back from creating unnecessary conflict. Perhaps it is true, that "he who rules less rules best".

R.M.