Yesterday a conversation erupted on an online Masonic space because one of the national leaders of an Appendant Masonic body wrote an article for his group’s magazine that was disparaging of an entire generation of men.
Clearly, Masons were not pleased reading his words.
But what truly caught my eye in this extremely long discussion thread was the fact that some guys hopped on over to Social Media and checked his public posts there. I didn’t do it myself, but consensus was that his Social Media profiles were filled with inappropriate things, if I’m to believe the guys who did take the time to look, extremely inappropriate things.
Unfortunately, I think we must all know at least one Mason who posts hateful, wrong, or otherwise damaging things on Social Media. That’s why so many Grand Lodges have worked to create Social Media policies.
This whole thing brings some questions to mind though:
When we receive a petition from a man seeking the Degrees, should we take a look at his Social Media profiles as another way of ensuring that he is a man we want in our Lodge?
When we vote for Lodge Officers (or appoint them) should we check out those men’s Facebook, Twitter, and all the rest to ensure that they aren’t posting things that will make Freemasonry look bad?
When we vote for Grand Lodge Officers (in those Jurisdictions that have competitive elections) should we look at what the Brother posts on Social Media platforms before giving him our vote?
All of us in the United States have a right, granted by the Grand Architect, to say, write, and post whatever on earth we desire to communicate. I am not, and would never, advocate for censorship. But we, as well, have rights of free association granted by the Grand Architect. If a guy wants to act like an idiot online, he has an absolute right to do so. But we in turn have an absolute right to withhold the privileges of Masonry, or Masonic office, from him.
When I first started reading this, I figured it was some young guy disparaging the boomer generation for creating apathy among masons to where the bulk of lodges has criminally low standards and dues and just complain at business meetings about lack of funds.
In fact, I have that criticism myself.
But the latter half suggests it possibly was something much worse. Perhaps a racially incensed diatribe and social media full of such content. I'm not going to bother researching myself. I don't need to read specifics.
I do agree that social media absolutely should be examined during the investigation. But also keep in mind that dredging up something a man wrote when he was 15 isn't fair. In fact, many of my own views have changed in the last few years and I may not have the same opinions I had a decade ago in my mid 30s. I don't go back and delete my old content that I think was stupid now. Who has time for that.
So, current content should bear more weight than old content. After all, men can learn grow and improve as they mature.
I think people have a tendency to show you an unfiltered version of themselves online. That may be a way to get some insight into their character. My mother lodge in Portland does background checks on each candidate. I can’t imagine that looking at any public postings on social media is somehow more invasive than what we already ask.
I have seen a few brothers say some things on social media that have caused me to pull them aside and speak with them. Sometimes they get angry, sometimes they respond with grace. But that’s me trying to live up to my obligations.
From the perspective of someone in their early 40s who barely uses social media (I have a instagram account that I occasionally post pictures of airplanes on) this (sadly) does not surprise me. I might be one of the few people in my age cohort who has never had a Facebook account. Does it mean I have likely missed out on some good things? Possibly, even most likely. Does it mean I have had enormously less negativity in my life? Definitely.
So I missed entirely whatever drama precipitated this post, and am ok with not knowing about it, hahaha.
Having said all of that, I have seen petitions for the degrees from some other jurisdictions that specifically ask for a candidates social media accounts and make it clear that as part of the investigation process those accounts will be looked at by the investigation committee. Do we need to make it that explicit to the petitioner? Probably not, but is it a good practice to do some investigation if the candidate has an online presence, I think the answer is a clear yes.
One of the more significant causes I’ve seen of Masonic drop out is a mismatch of candidate and Lodge, and even if there is nothing objectionable in a candidates social media postings a review of them may give additional insight into his interests and help determine if the two groups are right for each other.
It is always a good idea, if possible, to check social media for clues as to a inquiry. I remember a few years ago, Our FB page was getting messages from a man wanting to join our fraternity. Simply looking at his facebook page told us everything we needed to know about his motivations. Hint, if you're wanting to try and join the freemasons, don't have a FB page filled with all of the conspiracy theories against the group. Even his profile picture was Baphomet.
I didn't see the social media shit show that you described, so I'm not privy to the ugly details, but I ask, "What if the criticism was warranted?" Sometimes the facts of the truth are ugly and they can hurt...but the truth still needs to be said.
For example, the GOP in the House of Representatives had to take a stand and address the elephant in the room. Negotiations took place, debates and discussions were had and resolution was finally realized.
My concern with "Social Media Policies" is that we are slowly being institutionalized on being afraid of offending anyone. While I stipulate that there are certain elements of decorum in given situations and we can agree that the extremes of hate (ANTIFA and Hard-Core "Alt Right") messages have no place in Masonry.
Likely, the first mistake was engaging in a "debate" on social media is foolish. Those of whom were offended, took to digging into the man's personal page, where he posted his personal thoughts and opinions....and then brought them to light in an effort to shame him. We call this "Cancel Culture" and it's f*cking stupid, childish and immature.
If we all conform to how our woke culture is becoming, then Masonry is surely doomed. I post patriotic things because I love our country; silly things to make people laugh and understand my humor and a few personal highlights of different events and activities. We have been encouraged to be upright before man and before God; if we are forced to - or voluntarily participate in - "performing speech" then we are not being our authentic selves and, by default, deceiving our fellow men and disgracing God.
Nothing in the Washington Masonic Code requires us to look into someone's social media posts. The 6 steps gives us the ability to get to know the candidate and the candidate to get to know us. We could run a background check for criminal behavior but I don't recall seeing a prohibition in the code regarding convicted felons. Who is to decide what is right or wrong? Who is the authority? Does anyone not see how we are being conditioned to trade-in our liberties? We might as well replace the stars on our flag with the hammer and sickle if we are going to go this route. Our Founding Fathers would be ashamed of us today.
I feel one of our biggest issues in Freemasonry is guarding the West gate. We care about " Social and Moral Virtues". Social media is "social" and when considering a man for membership or office we should review their social media as much as their reputation in society at large. Everyone is aware of Plato's allegory of the Cave, but a less known allegory of Plato is the story of Gyges the Lydian. The long and short of that story is that you can only know a man's moral character when he is free to do what he wants without consequence. Many people think that social media is free of consequence, as they rarely have to face the target of their vitriol. It's an excellent test of character, and we should use it. Freedom of speech is NOT freedom from consequences for what you say.
Social media. My generations life blood. Another brother said it tends to show you who someone really is. It can. People are emboldened to say things online, voice opinions or thoughts, that they would never say to someone's face. I don't think we need to advocate for a deep dive on social media accounts for potential candidates, lodge officers or Grand Lodge officers.
For a candidate, im going to look you up on FB cuz I look everyone up. If you post recent content in line with the man I believe you are, im satisfied. As Jack said, I'm not going to research your life. This isn't a top secret clearance.
For our Lodge officers, I would hope that we would know them well enough and likely already be connected on at least 1 more of social media to what type of social media presence they have. If they are otherwise a good brother, but post controversial subjects that might harm the craft or Lodge specifically, hopefully that would be addressed long before he take an office by the local brothers.
The Grand Lodge officers are Slightly different. It's high well possible that I will never meet a potential candidate for Grand Junior Warden prior to them becoming such. As such, their online persona will have to tell me about them. Is it in line with what other brothers have said about them? If not, well then there is my answer.
The short of it is, if you wouldn't say it to someone's face or wouldn't want your grandma to hear it, you probably shouldn't post it at all!
Well I never had a twitter account since it seemed like a big waste of time.
And as you know I do have a FB account but on my page I rarely post things "public" and to only "friends"........but to tell you the truth I thought this emeth was a private Masonic page but I see that it is not so it makes me not want to even say things that another person may have a problem with me saying certain things.
I am not a member of the Grand Lodge and I know we have rules and I probably don't know every rule but do know MWGM's are not all the same.
BUT I would like to see the evidence before saying if *I* think it is and "idiot online" posting "hateful, wrong, or otherwise damaging"
Since I see things daily that *I* would say fit that BUT I also know *they* think the same about my opinion on certain subjects.
ALSO as far as the GL checking what ALL the Masons in our State to see what they are saying or other members reporting to the GL things said that they don't agree with is what is called a "double standard" and a BIG mistake as far as RIGHTS we have and THAT is of course also a Masonic rule.
Like I said *I* would have to see the evidence before even having an opinion.
Of course if a Brother goes onto a public Masonic website and says bad things about Masonry.........well as the WM last night I got to read off the names of several who were removed from Masonry and even though I didn't see the evidence I accept the ruling of the GL.
There are other things I read last night that made me think about when it happens to me and how long would that "moment of silence" be.
As a Freemason on all three Degrees of the Ancient Craft we have all taken our Obligations West of the altar as all Speculative Freemasons have done since time immemorial. We have received a Charge from the Conferring Worshipful Master on the first degree and Instructions after being Raised. As Officers we take an Oath to perform the Duties of the position that no one forced them to take. On all three Degrees we are "told" never to wrong a B or a L. Period.
The question asked by Emeth is should we? Should we look at every avenue and source before the petition is read and voted on? Absolutely! Should we guard the West gate prior to petition and after all three degrees? Absolutely!!
In the Ancient Craft there is no grey areas.
If a man wrongs himself or others prior to a vote on his petition. We as upright men and Masons must vote for what is best for the Craft.
If a Freemason wrongs himself, a Brother and his lodge. We as Freemasons must continue to guard the West gate and do what is hard to do.
Follow your oaths and obligations. Re read your oaths and obligations.
If any Brother in my jurisdiction would wrong a Brother or my lodge I would have no problem with making a decision for the protection of our honorable Ancient Craft.
I have no idea what thus Brother in question wrote, nor do I care to read it. If that Brother has a lodge then that lodge 'must' make the hard decision and continue to guard 'Our West Gate'.
I’m curious to see what the article was that started the drama. I will add, no one will ever know a person’s true character by reading their social media posts. Furthermore, we will never know a person’s true character even if we have known them our entire life. Like it is said, "who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them?"
When deciding on whether or not to admit a candidate, it’s a two way street. The lodge should be clear on what their objective is first. Is it charitable, family driven, social, esoteric- how would they fit in, or would they? If it’s a lodge that is primarily a social club, then social media posts would be necessary to read out loud in lodge, before the vote. Which of course would boil down to everyone personal bias.
I believe that if we just go back to the traditional method of being signed for by men they truly know not just met. These men would be already on their social media accounts knowing what they are saying.
There are a few lodges in Oregon Jurisdiction that require a time frame of some sort before they would accept a petition. My lodge is not one of them. We have the information provided by our Grand Lodge showing the steps for back ground checks. Some lodges use this also. My lodge does not. All good comments. Jje
When I first started reading this, I figured it was some young guy disparaging the boomer generation for creating apathy among masons to where the bulk of lodges has criminally low standards and dues and just complain at business meetings about lack of funds.
In fact, I have that criticism myself.
But the latter half suggests it possibly was something much worse. Perhaps a racially incensed diatribe and social media full of such content. I'm not going to bother researching myself. I don't need to read specifics.
I do agree that social media absolutely should be examined during the investigation. But also keep in mind that dredging up something a man wrote when he was 15 isn't fair. In fact, many of my own views have changed in the last few years and I may not have the same opinions I had a decade ago in my mid 30s. I don't go back and delete my old content that I think was stupid now. Who has time for that.
So, current content should bear more weight than old content. After all, men can learn grow and improve as they mature.
I think people have a tendency to show you an unfiltered version of themselves online. That may be a way to get some insight into their character. My mother lodge in Portland does background checks on each candidate. I can’t imagine that looking at any public postings on social media is somehow more invasive than what we already ask.
I have seen a few brothers say some things on social media that have caused me to pull them aside and speak with them. Sometimes they get angry, sometimes they respond with grace. But that’s me trying to live up to my obligations.
Greetings, where can I read that? Thx.
From the perspective of someone in their early 40s who barely uses social media (I have a instagram account that I occasionally post pictures of airplanes on) this (sadly) does not surprise me. I might be one of the few people in my age cohort who has never had a Facebook account. Does it mean I have likely missed out on some good things? Possibly, even most likely. Does it mean I have had enormously less negativity in my life? Definitely.
So I missed entirely whatever drama precipitated this post, and am ok with not knowing about it, hahaha.
Having said all of that, I have seen petitions for the degrees from some other jurisdictions that specifically ask for a candidates social media accounts and make it clear that as part of the investigation process those accounts will be looked at by the investigation committee. Do we need to make it that explicit to the petitioner? Probably not, but is it a good practice to do some investigation if the candidate has an online presence, I think the answer is a clear yes.
One of the more significant causes I’ve seen of Masonic drop out is a mismatch of candidate and Lodge, and even if there is nothing objectionable in a candidates social media postings a review of them may give additional insight into his interests and help determine if the two groups are right for each other.
It is always a good idea, if possible, to check social media for clues as to a inquiry. I remember a few years ago, Our FB page was getting messages from a man wanting to join our fraternity. Simply looking at his facebook page told us everything we needed to know about his motivations. Hint, if you're wanting to try and join the freemasons, don't have a FB page filled with all of the conspiracy theories against the group. Even his profile picture was Baphomet.
I didn't see the social media shit show that you described, so I'm not privy to the ugly details, but I ask, "What if the criticism was warranted?" Sometimes the facts of the truth are ugly and they can hurt...but the truth still needs to be said.
For example, the GOP in the House of Representatives had to take a stand and address the elephant in the room. Negotiations took place, debates and discussions were had and resolution was finally realized.
My concern with "Social Media Policies" is that we are slowly being institutionalized on being afraid of offending anyone. While I stipulate that there are certain elements of decorum in given situations and we can agree that the extremes of hate (ANTIFA and Hard-Core "Alt Right") messages have no place in Masonry.
Likely, the first mistake was engaging in a "debate" on social media is foolish. Those of whom were offended, took to digging into the man's personal page, where he posted his personal thoughts and opinions....and then brought them to light in an effort to shame him. We call this "Cancel Culture" and it's f*cking stupid, childish and immature.
If we all conform to how our woke culture is becoming, then Masonry is surely doomed. I post patriotic things because I love our country; silly things to make people laugh and understand my humor and a few personal highlights of different events and activities. We have been encouraged to be upright before man and before God; if we are forced to - or voluntarily participate in - "performing speech" then we are not being our authentic selves and, by default, deceiving our fellow men and disgracing God.
Nothing in the Washington Masonic Code requires us to look into someone's social media posts. The 6 steps gives us the ability to get to know the candidate and the candidate to get to know us. We could run a background check for criminal behavior but I don't recall seeing a prohibition in the code regarding convicted felons. Who is to decide what is right or wrong? Who is the authority? Does anyone not see how we are being conditioned to trade-in our liberties? We might as well replace the stars on our flag with the hammer and sickle if we are going to go this route. Our Founding Fathers would be ashamed of us today.
I feel one of our biggest issues in Freemasonry is guarding the West gate. We care about " Social and Moral Virtues". Social media is "social" and when considering a man for membership or office we should review their social media as much as their reputation in society at large. Everyone is aware of Plato's allegory of the Cave, but a less known allegory of Plato is the story of Gyges the Lydian. The long and short of that story is that you can only know a man's moral character when he is free to do what he wants without consequence. Many people think that social media is free of consequence, as they rarely have to face the target of their vitriol. It's an excellent test of character, and we should use it. Freedom of speech is NOT freedom from consequences for what you say.
Social media. My generations life blood. Another brother said it tends to show you who someone really is. It can. People are emboldened to say things online, voice opinions or thoughts, that they would never say to someone's face. I don't think we need to advocate for a deep dive on social media accounts for potential candidates, lodge officers or Grand Lodge officers.
For a candidate, im going to look you up on FB cuz I look everyone up. If you post recent content in line with the man I believe you are, im satisfied. As Jack said, I'm not going to research your life. This isn't a top secret clearance.
For our Lodge officers, I would hope that we would know them well enough and likely already be connected on at least 1 more of social media to what type of social media presence they have. If they are otherwise a good brother, but post controversial subjects that might harm the craft or Lodge specifically, hopefully that would be addressed long before he take an office by the local brothers.
The Grand Lodge officers are Slightly different. It's high well possible that I will never meet a potential candidate for Grand Junior Warden prior to them becoming such. As such, their online persona will have to tell me about them. Is it in line with what other brothers have said about them? If not, well then there is my answer.
The short of it is, if you wouldn't say it to someone's face or wouldn't want your grandma to hear it, you probably shouldn't post it at all!
Well I never had a twitter account since it seemed like a big waste of time.
And as you know I do have a FB account but on my page I rarely post things "public" and to only "friends"........but to tell you the truth I thought this emeth was a private Masonic page but I see that it is not so it makes me not want to even say things that another person may have a problem with me saying certain things.
I am not a member of the Grand Lodge and I know we have rules and I probably don't know every rule but do know MWGM's are not all the same.
BUT I would like to see the evidence before saying if *I* think it is and "idiot online" posting "hateful, wrong, or otherwise damaging"
Since I see things daily that *I* would say fit that BUT I also know *they* think the same about my opinion on certain subjects.
ALSO as far as the GL checking what ALL the Masons in our State to see what they are saying or other members reporting to the GL things said that they don't agree with is what is called a "double standard" and a BIG mistake as far as RIGHTS we have and THAT is of course also a Masonic rule.
Like I said *I* would have to see the evidence before even having an opinion.
Of course if a Brother goes onto a public Masonic website and says bad things about Masonry.........well as the WM last night I got to read off the names of several who were removed from Masonry and even though I didn't see the evidence I accept the ruling of the GL.
There are other things I read last night that made me think about when it happens to me and how long would that "moment of silence" be.
As a Freemason on all three Degrees of the Ancient Craft we have all taken our Obligations West of the altar as all Speculative Freemasons have done since time immemorial. We have received a Charge from the Conferring Worshipful Master on the first degree and Instructions after being Raised. As Officers we take an Oath to perform the Duties of the position that no one forced them to take. On all three Degrees we are "told" never to wrong a B or a L. Period.
The question asked by Emeth is should we? Should we look at every avenue and source before the petition is read and voted on? Absolutely! Should we guard the West gate prior to petition and after all three degrees? Absolutely!!
In the Ancient Craft there is no grey areas.
If a man wrongs himself or others prior to a vote on his petition. We as upright men and Masons must vote for what is best for the Craft.
If a Freemason wrongs himself, a Brother and his lodge. We as Freemasons must continue to guard the West gate and do what is hard to do.
Follow your oaths and obligations. Re read your oaths and obligations.
If any Brother in my jurisdiction would wrong a Brother or my lodge I would have no problem with making a decision for the protection of our honorable Ancient Craft.
I have no idea what thus Brother in question wrote, nor do I care to read it. If that Brother has a lodge then that lodge 'must' make the hard decision and continue to guard 'Our West Gate'.
My 2c
I’m curious to see what the article was that started the drama. I will add, no one will ever know a person’s true character by reading their social media posts. Furthermore, we will never know a person’s true character even if we have known them our entire life. Like it is said, "who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them?"
When deciding on whether or not to admit a candidate, it’s a two way street. The lodge should be clear on what their objective is first. Is it charitable, family driven, social, esoteric- how would they fit in, or would they? If it’s a lodge that is primarily a social club, then social media posts would be necessary to read out loud in lodge, before the vote. Which of course would boil down to everyone personal bias.
I believe that if we just go back to the traditional method of being signed for by men they truly know not just met. These men would be already on their social media accounts knowing what they are saying.
There are a few lodges in Oregon Jurisdiction that require a time frame of some sort before they would accept a petition. My lodge is not one of them. We have the information provided by our Grand Lodge showing the steps for back ground checks. Some lodges use this also. My lodge does not. All good comments. Jje