The long-simmering feud between the older and more established Journal of Masonic Research, and the newer Masonic Research Journal began several years ago when the Masonic Journal of Research began soliciting articles by authors in the Traditional Observance and Masonic Restoration movements. The Journal of Masonic Research contends that the Masonic Journal of Research articles tended to take vaguely derogatory swipes at the more traditional practices of American and even English Freemasonry. The Masonic Journal of Research, on the other hand, has contended that traditional practices have been the cause of the slow decline in the quality of Freemasonry in the US and UK.
The article, written by the publishers for the April issue, takes aim at what they term "the speculative opinion pieces" by such authors as Bob Listener and Clayton Mallet for having no actual research behind them, and are simply "advancing a cult of personality for the purpose of more book sales."
Many Freemasons have taken to online forums to express surprise that the Journal of Masonic Research would "air their dirty laundry in public" by allowing their differences to surface in print.
"Sure, there have always been differences and disagreements in how we think Freemasonry should be approached," reads one anonymous comment. "But when they start taking shots at each other in public, then they are acting like cheap AMORC students."
No word if the Masonic Journal of Research will respond in kind.
-- Conte Calvino Gliostro