The Grand Lodge of Tennessee, the other major player in the situation currently unfolding in US Freemasonry, issued their response to the suspension of fraternal relations by the Grand Lodges of California, and of Washington DC.
It might be cynical thinking on my part that instead of posting these as they come, I should have a page that has the list and we could keep adding to it.
This evening, the news began to spread around the Masonic internet haunts about the message from M. David Perry, Grand Master of Masons in California. I received several from brothers who were proud, excited, and who wanted to make sure the message went out.
From the GM of CA today
You might have read about recent events in some US states including Georgia and Tennessee where Masonic grand lodges have adopted new rules or have enforced existing rules that discipline Masons because of their sexual orientation. Such rules and actions do not coincide with the principles of Freemasonry as practiced by the Grand Lodge of California and do not support what we understand as the great aim of our fraternity.
Freemasonry is a universal system which uses the tools and techniques of the old stonemasons’ guilds to illustrate simple moral and ethical principles. To this it adds a philosophical and spiritual framework for personal improvement. Freemasonry encourages its members to be better by improving their relationships with others, by practicing a life of tolerance, compassion, honesty, and the pursuit of justice. Freemasonry instructs its members to uphold and respect the laws of their government and not to undermine those laws. It attempts to make the world a better place by making its members better citizens of the communities in which they live.
Freemasonry may be found worldwide, in the Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Freemasonry works through local lodges. In California and elsewhere, some lodges are comprised of men only, some of women only and some of both men and women. Each lodge typically operates under a grand lodge, and there are a number of these grand lodges operating in California. Each grand lodge is independent and operates under its own set of rules as its members may decide.
With more than 50,000 members statewide, those lodges under the Grand Lodge of California are open to men of good character and faith, regardless of their race, color, religious beliefs, political views, economic station, sexual orientation, physical ability, citizenship or national origin. Our lodges currently work in English, Spanish, French, and Armenian.
Through this universal brotherhood, California Masons learn to be better husbands, better fathers, better friends, and better citizens. By appreciating our differences, we learn to focus on what unites us. Thus, the discussion of religion, politics, and business is not permitted in our lodges. In this way we live up to the centuries-old aim of our fraternity – to unite men of every country, sect, and opinion and cause true friendship among those who otherwise would have remained at a distance.
It has been a week now since the news of the Grand Lodge of Tennessee and their expulsion of two seemingly well liked and active brothers who were accepted by the members of their lodge, but who were not accepted by other members of the fraternity in the state.
The discussions have continued on Facebook groups and other Web forums since then, with the overwhelming majority of Freemasons sympathetic toward Brothers Clark and Henderson; and ranging from irate to incredulous at the Grand Lodge of Tennessee.
Unfortunately, the opinions of the several thousands of Freemasons will probably have little impact, since most of the support for the brothers has been from members who aren’t from Tennessee. This may have something to do with the recent directive in Tennessee that forbids members from discussing the matter in public; indeed, rumors have circulated that the GL officers have noted some of the brothers who have spoken out on social media. So far, reports that those members have been disciplined have gone unsubstantiated.
Fortunately, however, it seems that the conversations have not gone unnoticed elsewhere. California is the first to release a public statement to the effect that the Grand Lodge does not condone or support the discriminatory actions of several other states. Hopefully others will follow shortly, before the Grand Lodge of Tennessee convenes at the end of March.
= = = = =
Edit: Chris Hodapp has posted the text from the Grand Lodge of Utah, and the Grand Lodge of DC, both of which came out several days ago.
Several contentious years of Grand Lodge politics have culminated in an unprecedented (in Connecticut, anyway) upheaval in which the progressive Grand Line officers were voted out and replaced by a new line of elected officers. The hotly contested elections (reportedly needing four votings to arrive at a majority) ended with the election of two Past Grand Masters and the re-instatement of a former Grand Line officer.
The future of the Grand Line officers appointed during the past year is uncertain, as is the standings of the dozen or so Grand Lodge committees.
Edit: At the time of publication, several of the appointed GL officers appear to have resigned, as have several District officers.
In the time-honored tradition of keeping Masonic news as dry as possible, that would almost seem to be the entire story. Indeed, the only thing that would appear to be missing at this point would be a picture of MW Simon LaPlace presenting a gavel to our new Grand Master MW Tom Maxwell as both of them grin into the camera. Unfortunately, that is not the situation.
Leaving aside the rumors of collusion and conspiracy (on all sides) that have strained the patience of Connecticut Masons for the last couple of years, the situation at hand seems to be that a number of members, unsatisfied with the changes (both made and proposed) in Connecticut Masonry, managed to convince enough of their brothers that the changes were damaging to our organization, and that the only remedy would be to remove the current elected officers and to replace them with those who had a different vision.
This, of course, is the purpose of a democratic system, and it’s good to see that Freemasons remembered how it works. Sometimes the good intentions behind having a “progressive line” in most US states leads to stale, if not undesirable Grand Lodge policies. At a time in which our membership is continuing to decrease and our societal culture moves away from joining groups, the remaining members have often been slow to react or have been unwilling to make changes that would attract or retain new members. In the US, this has led to Grand Masters with little or no vision, or Grand Lodge policies or programs that have little relevance to the needs or desires of the younger members that are joining the ranks. The events last week in Connecticut will hopefully serve as an example to Grand Lodges elsewhere around the US that members of the Craft can – and will – take the necessary steps to get the kind of leadership that they want.
That said, there is something symbolical about the recent overturning of the Grand Line that has many Connecticut Freemasons concerned: Does the election of older Past Grand Masters, who served respectively 18 and 25 years ago, mean that we could not find anyone younger, or more attuned to the needs of the latest generation of Masons? Or does it mean that our vision of Masonry for the state looks more like the 1970s instead of the 2020s, and that our desire for the coming years is actually just a reboot of something from the past?
Personally speaking, I share these concerns. I became a Mason in 2001, just before the DaVinci Code and Nick Cage movies were reigniting an interest in Freemasonry. Back then, many Grand Lodges still did not even have a website, let alone electronic contact information, PDF Trestleboards, or online committee meetings. Connecticut Masons have been fortunate that Grand Lodge officers from the previous several years have been forward-thinking, and willing to adopt new methods. More importantly, some of them have been willing to take on the difficult task of changing the culture of our organization. For example, we have nine Masonic districts in Connecticut, ostensibly to correspond with the train system that was extant in the early 1900s. With nine Grand Lodge officers, we have had a century of a progressive line, one officer from each district, with a new one appointed every nine years from the outgoing Grand Master’s district. The last two years saw a change in the district structure, and with it, a different way of choosing new officers. Changes like this are huge in Masonic terms, and it would be easy to believe that the voting reflects a reactionary attitude from members who object to these and other kinds of alterations (or “innovations,” if you will) in the organization.
A reactionary mindset among the members raises other concerns for the future of our fraternity, mainly that younger or more progressive minded members will no longer desire to work toward improvements, or even to aspire to a Grand Lodge or District position if it means constantly butting heads with the old guard. Ours is a volunteer organization, and most of our members are paid only in the satisfaction of a job well done; feedback in the form of being voted out of office with little or no prior warning would seem to be a disincentive for many of those who would be qualified for those positions.
Again, democracy obviously works — the recent voting was proof of that. But we should also remember the words of Comte Joseph de Maistre: “Every democracy gets the government that they deserve.” For the sake of Freemasonry in Connecticut, let’s hope that we all have not taken a big step backwards.
WALLINGFORD — One of the items that is being overlooked in the agenda for the upcoming Grand Lodge of Connecticut Annual Communication is a bold initiative to help finance the rejuvenation of the state’s older lodge buildings, a plan that may be the first of its kind in the North America, and which may be the key toward not only rejuvenating the buildings, but revitalizing the lodges, themselves.
Like most of the areas of the northeastern US, Connecticut has a number of older lodge buildings, many of them built in the early 1900s or even before. While many of these buildings are located in the center of their respective towns, these historic buildings were often poorly maintained, and the funds for much needed capital improvements were often neglected by the members from the 1960s until today. Indeed, it’s not unusual for lodges to lack air conditioning or updated heating systems, proper kitchen and dining areas, or in some cases, even modern bathroom facilities.
“While some members of the fraternity might see their facilities as ‘quaint,’ the sad fact is that many members of the public, including potential members, see them as ‘antiquated,’ ‘dated,’ or just plain ‘old,’ and it becomes a real turn-off,” said Grand Master Simon LaPlace. “Unfortunately, many of the lodges were short-sighted and skimped on saving money for improvements, and with the lack of new members, they simply can’t afford to put the necessary thousands of dollars into building improvements, and many of them are just barely able to keep up with the basic maintenance. This is why we are introducing this plan, which should help them to raise the money to bring the facilities up to date.”
The new program, called the Building & Organization Allied Sponsorship, or BOAS, allows lodges to partner with local or even national businesses and organizations in order to have a committed source of revenue that would be put toward building and grounds improvements, and updating the facilities inside the buildings. Lodges could look forward to new or updated lighting, handicap access, internet and wifi service, and cable tv, as well as kitchen and dining equipment, general upkeep, and yes, even more modern bathroom facilities.
When questioned about the criticisms that BOAS would lead to Freemasonry as being seen as “too public,” the Grand Master dismissed the concerns. “Corporate sponsored venues have been around for years,” he said. “A few large corporations put their names on ball fields, and nobody bats an eye. But a business puts a name on a small, little lodge, and everyone loses their minds.” Indeed, a quick survey showed that most people could not remember the previous names of the Xfinity Theater or the Comcast Theaters, although most people also did not remember that Toyota now sponsors the Oakdale Theater in Wallingford — ironically, the town in which the Grand Lodge of Connecticut is located.
A large concern for some is that the Connecticut Grand Lodge gets a percentage of the BOAS funds, and will start pressuring all of the state lodges or buildings to find businesses to partner with, or worse, may penalize some of the lodges for not doing so. “Grand Lodge needs to make money, too,” responded Grand Master Simon LaPlace. “None of those guys complaining think twice about spending money on a mocha latte several times a week; but if Grand Lodge asks for a five or ten dollar per member increase, suddenly we’re the evil empire. Sure, times are tough, but we’re talking about giving up the equivalent of a couple of coffees and donuts in a year.” He looked around and added “And believe me, many of our brothers could certainly afford to go without a donut once in a while.”
Not surprisingly, not all of the Masons are happy about this program. “It’s nothing more than plain, old Grand Lodge greed. They don’t actually care about the lodges, they just care about getting their cut of the action.” said one Past Master who refused to be named. “That’s not what we used to do back in the old days,” said another, “Back in 1968, when I was Master of the lodge, when we needed money, the wives around the lodge would help hold a bake sale, and we hit everyone with a ten dollar special assessment. Why, we once raised over a thousand dollars, which was enough to put on whole a new roof!”
That’s not the attitude voiced by everyone, however. Many more members, and not necessarily the younger ones, seem to approve of BOAS. Several lodges around the state have already been testing the idea, and indeed, at least one partnership is in the final stages. “We have been fortunate to partner with a large, nationally recognized corporation that is known for its aggressive community outreach,” said a District Deputy from the 4th District. “We are just finalizing some details, like the new sign placement and promotional spots, and within a few weeks everybody should be seeing some big changes at the new McDonald’s Masonic Center of New Haven.”
While the larger buildings in the cities that host several lodges will probably benefit the most, smaller lodges in the towns will also be encouraged to seek out sponsorships, and the Grand Lodge will have suggestions for those who are interested. “Try to focus on the businesses that are important to your area,” suggested a Grand Lodge officer who would only identify himself as ‘Mike.’ “For example, Southington is known for its fruit orchards and large number of chain restaurants along the main street. I’d suggest that they approach Applebee’s. Newington has those shopping centers and the Berlin Turnpike running through it; I would tell those guys to look at Dick’s,” he said. “Or maybe they’d rather look at Hooters, instead. Unfortunately, towns like Putnam or Lakeville aren’t known for anything except being out of the way. We haven’t come up with any good ideas for them as yet.”
Indeed, this highlights one of the biggest issues with BOAS: Lodges in the cities and along the “Gold Coast” I-95 corridor will probably have no shortage of possible sponsors, while those in the northwest (and northeast) corners of the state are in economically depressed areas, with few business or organizations that would have the financial backing to pay for advertising and promotion, let alone sponsor building improvements. Ironically, BOAS could well accomplish the very opposite of what the Grand Lodge hopes to achieve; as the urban and suburban lodges draw sponsorships and become more modernized (thereby attracting more members), the older, rural lodges will look even worse by comparison, and not only fail to attract new members, but perhaps even lose some to the modernized lodges.
“The big companies aren’t going to partner up with a lodge out of the goodness of their hearts,” explained ‘Gary,’ a former Grand Lodge officer. “Lodge buildings in the city offer some good exposure, plus the opportunity to use the auditorium facilities for meetings or presentations. Even the smaller lodges in the suburbs are usually located in areas in which the buildings are highly visible, which is at least good for advertising and promotion. The lodges out in the boondocks, though, will have a more difficult time attracting a sponsor because there’s no visibility. I don’t know what the solution is. Maybe they’ll have to get several smaller, local sponsors.”
Some of the members of the fraternity are ambivalent about the partnership idea, however. “Grand Lodge is always pushing some program, and every year it’s something different,” complained one member from a lodge that will be getting a facelift from its new sponsor. “It wouldn’t surprise me if in two or three years, whatever Grand Master happens to be in charge will scrap the whole thing, anyway. Wouldn’t be the first time.”
The following article by RW Carl Ek is reprinted from the July/August 2009 issue of The Connecticut Freemasons publication, which is running a series of articles celebrating the 20th anniversary of our mutual recognition. Read other articles in this series: 20 Years.
Reflections on Recognition, 20 Years Later
The Votes are Tallied
by Carl G. Ek
(Editor’s note: in the span of several months in mid-1989, the Grand Lodge, A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut and the Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., Prince Hall Affiliates, of Connecticut, Inc. crafted an agreement that changed how Masonry operated, not just in Connecticut, but worldwide. In our first six installments, MWPGM Gail Linnell Smith presented the resolution proposing mutual recognition and Connecticut Masons and Prince Hall Grand Lodge leaders enthusiastically supported this proposal. How would the craft vote? A series of stories will appear in Connecticut Freemasons this year to celebrate the 20th anniversary of mutual recognition.)
Dateline: Cromwell, Connecticut, October 14, 1989. The Prince Hall Grand Lodge met in annual communication, and voted on the recognition resolution first. In the parlance of sports, the vote was a slamdunk, with only one member voting in the negative.
That brother later approached then Prince Hall Grand Master Lewis Myrick, Sr., asking to change his vote. “Hell no!” replied the Grand Master. “That’s how you voted, and that’s how it stays.”
With the requirement of ‘all or nothing,’ it was Prince Hall’s turn to wait to see if the A.F. & A.M. Grand Lodge would likewise approve mutual recognition at their special communication, being held at Sheehan High School in Wallingford.
As it became clear that the special Prince Hall Recognition Committee chaired by Grand Senior Deacon Kenneth B. Hawkins, Sr., would report favorably on the plan, brothers who may not have been in favor carefully attempted to have influence on the decision.
A Past Grand Master approached MW Gail N. Smith to suggest that given the magnitude of the proposed change, some brothers might desire a written, private ballot to express their feelings. Bro. Smith agreed that he was correct – thinking that some would use ‘privacy’ as an excuse to retain the status quo while not appearing to be racially motivated. Still, Grand Master Smith directed Grand Secretary and MWPGM R. Stanley Harrison to prepare paper ballots for the recognition vote – knowing that they would never be used.
As some in Prince Hall Masonry feared being overwhelmed by the much larger A.F. & A.M. Grand Lodge, so some A.F. & A.M. Masons expressed a concern that their meetings might be visited by large groups of Prince Hall Masons. Why, others asked, would that be a problem? Lodges that ‘blitz’ might arrive unannounced at a visited lodge with 10, 20, even 30 members (and, politely, with a large quantity of refreshments). Why would a visit from a Prince Hall delegation make any difference to the visited lodge? Unless, of course, there were other, unspoken, considerations….
Then Senior Grand Warden of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge Michael Bivans focused on some of those concerns while speaking to Compass Lodge No. 9, Wallingford in the weeks leading up to the votes. RW Mike had been invited by Compass WM Charles Rogers to speak to his lodge to give a history of Prince Hall Masonry. After his formal presentation, Mike responded to a question about visitation between jurisdictions.
“Do all of your (A.F.& A.M.) members show up at your meetings? Of course not,” Mike answered his own question, looking at vacant seats in the nearly full lodge room. “And do all of my (P.H.A.) members show up at all of our meetings? Same thing. So what makes anybody think that when we approve mutual recognition, all of ‘your’ members are going to start going to ‘our’ meetings, and all of ‘our’ members are going to going to start to ‘your’ meetings? Won’t happen,” he concluded. History has proven him correct.
|From Prince Hall Recognition|
Image: MW Lew Myrick and RW Carl G. Ek, Worshipful Master. Unity Lodge No. 148, New Britain, at the Recognition Table Lodge. MW Myrick was protagonist for recognition twenty year ago, and RW Ek is the author of this series.
Dateline: Wallingford, Connecticut, October 14, 1989. The Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. special communication being held at Sheehan High School had several items on the agenda, most of which were disposed of as preludes to what everyone understood to be the main topic of business. Brothers learned about plans for the next inspection cycle and filled out a questionnaire concerning the then-Grand Lodge quarterly publication, Connecticut Square and Compasses.
The questionnaires filled out and collected, Grand Master Gail Nelson Smith announced, “We will now take up the Prince Hall Recognition…” and stated that there could be no amendments to the resolution since it was the same resolution being acted upon – at the same time – by the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. After opening remarks, Bro. Smith asked subcommittee chairman Hawkins to read the recommendations of his group.
Issues of Masonic legitimacy of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge, the ‘sovereignty issue’ of only one Grand Lodge per jurisdiction, and the potential for other Grand Lodges to withdraw Masonic recognition from Connecticut should the vote be in the affirmative were discussed. The first two were simple to resolve; as to the last, the report stated, “… we have no control over their actions, and our vote must not be influenced by what might happen, but rather what is prudent in this Grand Jurisdiction.”
Past Grand Master Morris I. Budkofsky, chairman of the Fraternal Relations Committee, reported complete satisfaction with the legitimacy of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge and recommended that approval of “Fraternal Recognition, including rights of visitation, be granted…” The original motion was reread and opportunities for remarks allowed.
Grand Master Smith then asked those in favor of the resolution to stand, be counted, and those opposed to stand. The final tally was not recorded in the Grand Lodge Proceedings except to say that “a large majority” had approved the resolution at the historic communication of the Grand Lodge.
Bro. Smith then reported – to great applause – the Prince Hall Grand Lodge’s vote of approval and concluded the agenda of his own session. Thereafter, Bros. Smith and Hawkins made a short drive to close a centuries-old gap in Masonic brotherhood, becoming the first A.F.& A.M. Masons to be formally received into the tiled Prince Hall Grand Lodge session.
Joint news releases would spread word of the good work publicly, but the pre-Internet Masonic grapevine spread the word faster, that recognition was reality. Response would be rapid….
The following article by RW Carl Ek is reprinted from the June 2009 issue of The Connecticut Freemasons publication, which is running a series of articles celebrating the 20th anniversary of our mutual recognition. Read other articles in this series: 20 Years.
Reflections on Recognition, 20 Years Later
A Cautiously Positive Reaction
by Carl G. Ek
(Editor’s note: in the span of several months in mid-1989, the Grand Lodge, A.F. & A.M. of Connecticut and the Grand Lodge, F. & A.M., Prince Hall Affiliates, of Connecticut, Inc. crafted an agreement that changed how Masonry operated, not just in Connecticut, but worldwide. In our first five installments, MWPGM Gail Linnell Smith presented the resolution proposing mutual recognition and Connecticut Masons enthusiastically supported this proposal. But what of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge? A series of stories will appear in Connecticut Freemasons this year to celebrate the 20th anniversary of mutual recognition.)
In the closing moments of the March 29, 1989 Grand Lodge session Past Grand Master Gail Linnell Smith presented the resolution calling for the mutual recognition of Prince Hall Masonry immediately after installing his son, Gail Nelson Smith, as the new Grand Master. New Grand Master Smith appointed the subcommittee on Prince Hall recognition provided for in the motion; RW Grand Junior Warden Kenneth B. Hawkins, Sr. headed this group.
The ball, as the saying goes, was now in the court of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge.
|From Prince Hall Recognition|
Prince Hall Grand Master Lewis Myrick, Sr., favored mutual recognition and appointed MWPGM Preston L. Pope to head the Prince Hall committee that would make a recommendation on the topic. Bro. Pope had opened the topic of mutual recognition with the Grand Lodge, A.F. & A.M. a decade earlier, during his term as Grand Master; regrettably, his correspondence was never answered. Now he would have a chance to move forward the plan he had advanced a decade ago. This did not mean that Connecticut’s Prince Hall Grand Lodge did not have legitimate concerns about being the first Grand Lodge to recognize, and be recognized by, its counterpart ‘white’ Grand Lodge.
For some, undoubtedly, the term ‘recognition’ would serve only as a precursor to the eventual merger of the two Grand Lodges. The idea of merging – losing individual identities through combining or being absorbed – was understandably unacceptable to Prince Hall Masonry. The history of Brother Prince Hall and his efforts to obtain a charter for free black Masons in Boston before the independence of the United States is a source of pride among brothers of Prince Hall Affiliation.
Further, innumerable Masonic authorities have examined the now unquestioned regularity of the charter of African Lodge No. 459 across the centuries. As Bro. Myrick asked, “How many ‘Regular Grand Lodges’ could withstand the scrutiny that Prince Hall has been subjected to? According to Masonic history, not very many would be considered ‘Regular’ if the same rules were applied as used against Prince Hall.”
No, ‘merger’ was neither the object, nor an acceptable outcome.
However, what about such Masonic courtesies as demitting and dual membership? The Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. (Caucasian) had, in 1989, approximately ten times the membership of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge. A scenario could be envisioned where demits by A.F. & A.M. members could dilute or change the character of Prince Hall lodges.
The question of dual membership was easily resolved: the Prince Hall Grand Lodge did not then permit dual membership, and this would not change under mutual recognition. After considerable discussion, it was agreed that initially, at least, demission between the two Grand Lodges would not be allowed. This would, after the votes were taken, lead some to say that the two Grand Lodges had only achieved ‘partial recognition,’ but all appropriately opted for caution as the Grand Lodges explored unbroken ground.
It will be recalled that the Grand Lodge of Washington in 1897 and the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts in 1947 did not feel that there would be any backlash from other Grand Lodges when they extended recognition to Prince Hall Masonry. In both cases, they severely underestimated the wrath prompted by their actions. The Prince Hall Grand Lodge was concerned about similar reactions from their sister Grand Lodges.
Not every state has a Prince Hall Grand Lodge, but across the states that do, there were strong feelings – mostly negative – about the recognition of ‘Regular Grand Lodges’ by other Prince Hall Lodges. Much discussion and soul-searching was expended on this topic. Among the questions that had to be answered by Connecticut’s Prince Hall Masons: were we willing to be outcasts? Would we be able to accept criticism for taking this step? Were we willing to accept the possibility of some Prince Hall Grand Lodges withdrawing recognition of the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Connecticut?
After debate and deliberation, Connecticut’s Prince Hall brothers moved forward with what was thought to be best for Connecticut. Under Bro. Myrick’s leadership, Connecticut Prince Hall Masonry decided that it was willing to accept criticism and the possible withdrawal of recognition from sister grand jurisdictions in order to practice the true meanings of Freemasonry.
These feelings were communicated to Bro. Pope’s committee as the basis for its discussions with the A.F. & A.M. committee chaired by Bro. Hawkins.
The summer of 1989 saw the two recognition committees meeting separately and jointly. The first joint meetings allowed brothers to get to know one another, and to begin to feel comfortable speaking frankly about things that they liked and disliked, things that were acceptable and unacceptable to their respective Grand Lodges.
It was at a late summer joint meeting in the conference room of the old Grand Lodge office in Wallingford that the final wording of resolutions to be circulated among voting members of both Grand Lodges was signed off on by the committee members and Grand Masters Smith and Myrick. On October 14, the resolution would come before the Prince Hall Grand Lodge at its annual communication in Cromwell; on the same day, the Grand Lodge, A.F. & A.M. would hold a special communication in Wallingford to take up the identical resolution.
As October 14 approached, Connecticut Freemasons and the Masonic world watched and waited.
Would both Grand Lodges approve mutual recognition? What if one voted in the negative
– would the process proceed? All sides had agreed that there would be but one chance to secure recognition – what if the vote failed?
“To be continued…”
Last week, our Zeta-Reticulan overlords protectors decided that it might actually not be a horrible thing for a few of us to put up and manage a Grand Lodge of Connecticut Facebook page.
No, the End Times aren’t here.
I wrote a few weeks ago that our Grand Lodge is rather progressive with regard to using the internet for promotion and communication; a Facebook page is something that a few of us have been discussing for a while, partly because so many of our members already have Facebook profiles and use it for a combination of family, work and social interest activities. The page is not meant to replace our own Grand Lodge website – it’s simply another way for us to reach our various members, and for them to share relevant news and information.
The page features some basic information, group discussions (not that anybody has started one yet), and is open to pretty much anyone who has an interest in Freemasonry. We just started it this week, so content is a bit sparse, and probably will be until we find our way with it. I expect that we will be posting more information about general events around the state.
If you are one of my 27 or so Connecticut readers, I urge you to sign up for Facebook and link to the new page (in Facebook parlance, one becomes a “fan” of a page), and please feel free to pass along any ideas for content or features.