Alexandria, VA -- In an unprecedented breach of propriety, this month's issue of the
Journal of Masonic Research carried an article that calls out the
Masonic Research Journal for "failing to advance actual Masonic research in favor of publishing opinion pieces by the latest celebrity Freemasons."

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
0 comments:
Post a Comment