# 2020 in Masonry, One Review



## Forthright (Dec 31, 2020)

I attempted to summarize everything I saw in 2020 within Freemasonry.  Just one Mason's perspective.

Link to the Post

Personally, I think that in times of societal crisis, big dislocations (like COVID-19) rarely _fundamentally change the course of society_. What they tend more to do is _accelerate existing trends_. For example, digital work from home was already popular pre-pandemic, but it got a massive shot in the arm in 2020. Social division pre-existed the pandemic, but the virus made it drastically worse. In the Masonic world, we have downward demographic trends which are also being accelerated by the pandemic. The virus makes it harder to bring in new members, and disproportionately kills the elderly, at a time when our membership skews older.

*This changes nothing fundamentally, but simply ups the stakes* on a discussion throughout the Craft of what we want our future to be. Being decentralized, there's no one place to go to have this discussion. Each lodge will do as they wish; each Grand Lodge the same. But via electronic travel, education, and relationship building over time, and the fundamental goods of what the institution offers, we have a lot to use to our advantage.


----------



## Glen Cook (Dec 31, 2020)

As a note, not all lodges begin the masonic year in December.


----------



## Forthright (Dec 31, 2020)

Many don't!   But that's not the point.  It's just one perspective of the calendar year, no specific Masonic year.  One of the themes of the entire thing is that there's almost nothing you can say (outside the landmarks of Freemasonry) which apply to most/all lodges.


----------



## Glen Cook (Dec 31, 2020)

Forthright said:


> Many don't!   But that's not the point.  It's just one perspective of the calendar year, no specific Masonic year.  One of the themes of the entire thing is that there's almost nothing you can say (outside the landmarks of Freemasonry) which apply to most/all lodges.


Ahh. We want to talk about landmarks do we?


----------



## Forthright (Jan 4, 2021)

Glen Cook said:


> Ahh. We want to talk about landmarks do we?



I mean, no, not particularly.  I chose that as an example of "if there's anything that's constant across all the practices of freemasonry, it'd be that" but I also know there are exceptions and caveats to that, multiple obediences, etc.  There is a mind-boggling amount of diversity out there all under the label of Freemasonry. One can point out that this or that is subjective or different here or there.  Taken to the extreme, if there's absolutely no observation about masonry that's universal, and it's all so specific & hyperlocal that no generalization can ever hold, well then in a very real way, "masonry doesn't exist" and it's just this lodge vs. that lodge.


----------



## Glen Cook (Jan 4, 2021)

Forthright said:


> I mean, no, not particularly.  I chose that as an example of "if there's anything that's constant across all the practices of freemasonry, it'd be that" but I also know there are exceptions and caveats to that, multiple obediences, etc.  There is a mind-boggling amount of diversity out there all under the label of Freemasonry. One can point out that this or that is subjective or different here or there.  Taken to the extreme, if there's absolutely no observation about masonry that's universal, and it's all so specific & hyperlocal that no generalization can ever hold, well then in a very real way, "masonry doesn't exist" and it's just this lodge vs. that lodge.


The Landmarks aren’t constant across Freemasonry. My mother GL doesn’t even have a list.


----------



## Forthright (Jan 5, 2021)

Glen Cook said:


> The Landmarks aren’t constant across Freemasonry. My mother GL doesn’t even have a list.



I'm aware, and that's a little mind-blowing...and mine doesn't either.  This is mind-blowing because lacking any firm list of things that unambiguously makes a GL masonic, it makes the entire idea of freemasonry look more and more fuzzy the more you look at it.  I.e., play the game: "Make one statement that is universally true of all regular masonic jurisdictions, that you can confidently say, and that you can get people to agree with, without 10 footnotes and caveats".  Are there any such statements?  There may not be (particularly those statements that don't need caveats & footnotes)


----------



## Winter (Jan 5, 2021)

Forthright said:


> I'm aware, and that's a little mind-blowing...and mine doesn't either.  This is mind-blowing because lacking any firm list of things that unambiguously makes a GL masonic, it makes the entire idea of freemasonry look more and more fuzzy the more you look at it.  I.e., play the game: "Make one statement that is universally true of all regular masonic jurisdictions, that you can confidently say, and that you can get people to agree with, without 10 footnotes and caveats".  Are there any such statements?  There may not be (particularly those statements that don't need caveats & footnotes)


You want black and white, clearly defined and universal definitions in an organization that was spreading via autonomous branches for who knows how long before even the first GL was formed. Good luck with that!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Forthright (Jan 5, 2021)

Winter said:


> You want black and white, clearly defined and universal definitions in an organization that was spreading via autonomous branches for who knows how long before even the first GL was formed. Good luck with that!
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



Fair enough.  How then, in such an environment, do so many brothers develop such firm, fixed, and confident views about who is regular and who isn't, what is "real masonry" and what isn't?


----------



## Winter (Jan 5, 2021)

Forthright said:


> Fair enough.  How then, in such an environment, do so many brothers develop such firm, fixed, and confident views about who is regular and who isn't, what is "real masonry" and what isn't?


Freemasons suffer from the same prejudices all humans do. We're raised (literally) in a specific group where our thought patterns are cemented as to what is right or wrong. By the time we are exposed to other streams of thought we are already taught to look at it through the lens of "my way is correct". Freemasons are the epitome of a tribal mindset. Even among Regular mainstream Masons from different jurisdictions. 

This is only my opinion mind you, but I think that even with a lack of consensus on the Landmarks, most Freemasons (Regular) are concerned with a handful of requirements.

- Is the legend of the Third Degree more or less he same
- Do they initiate women
- Is there a requirement to believe in Diety (however defined)

Those seem, to me, to be the major sticking points all our arguments revolve around. All of the other minutiae can be tolerated. 

I would add in the recognition of PHA, but I think that may be just a US thing. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Glen Cook (Jan 5, 2021)

Forthright said:


> I'm aware, and that's a little mind-blowing...and mine doesn't either.  This is mind-blowing because lacking any firm list of things that unambiguously makes a GL masonic, it makes the entire idea of freemasonry look more and more fuzzy the more you look at it.  I.e., play the game: "Make one statement that is universally true of all regular masonic jurisdictions, that you can confidently say, and that you can get people to agree with, without 10 footnotes and caveats".  Are there any such statements?  There may not be (particularly those statements that don't need caveats & footnotes)


http://tsmr.org/1929-ugle-basic-principles.html


http://www.recognitioncommission.org/publish/2004/06/10/the-standards-of-recognition/index.html


----------



## Glen Cook (Jan 5, 2021)

Winter said:


> Freemasons suffer from the same prejudices all humans do. We're raised (literally) in a specific group where our thought patterns are cemented as to what is right or wrong. By the time we are exposed to other streams of thought we are already taught to look at it through the lens of "my way is correct". Freemasons are the epitome of a tribal mindset. Even among Regular mainstream Masons from different jurisdictions.
> 
> This is only my opinion mind you, but I think that even with a lack of consensus on the Landmarks, most Freemasons (Regular) are concerned with a handful of requirements.
> 
> ...


UGLE is not in amity with all PHA GLs.


----------



## Winter (Jan 5, 2021)

Glen Cook said:


> UGLE is not in amity with all PHA GLs.


Are you referring to the State PHA or the numerous ones that are questionable. The various PHA groups is a very confusing situation and one I am definitely qualified to speak on.  

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Glen Cook (Jan 5, 2021)

Those with the “A”, for Affiliated, are legitimate. Other PH, (without the A) such as PHO (Origin), are not legitimate.


----------



## Winter (Jan 5, 2021)

To clarify, I am NOT qualified to speak on the matter of PHA! Typing on my phone and accidentally made it look like i have an expertise that I absolutely do not.  

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------

