Introduction

Suspicion of others is a pervasive part of the human psyche. Wherever people gather together in groups, eventually some sort of “resistance” to such groups will form because of the innate human need to belong (Baumeister & Leary 1995). When someone is not a member of “the group,” they will create their own group in order to feel as though they belong.

Anti-Masonry, it is proposed, is one such group. A major need in Masonic scholarship is taking the time to not only historically analyze Anti-Masonry, but develop a framework for understanding why Anti-Masons engage in their pursuits. It is acknowledged that such a framework is difficult to construct, because we must draw from a truly interdisciplinary selection of the literature: from sociology, psychology, history, and even religion. I offer this as a first attempt to do so.

If any serious attempt is to be made at analyzing Anti-Masonry from an institutional perspective, this is only a first cursory overview of a proposed framework for analysis. Quantitative and qualitative research is needed beyond an analysis and discussion of the relevant literature as presented here.

Discussion

Understanding the driving forces behind Anti-Masonry requires first and foremost an analysis of what Anti-Masonry is and the themes which define those who are members of Anti-Masonic thought movements.

It is offered that the genesis of modern Anti-Masonic thought has its foundations in the historical U.S. Anti-Mason parties, which by all accounts were an important part of the political landscape in the early to middle 1800s. Formisano and Kutolowski (1977) offer a critical analysis of the formation and reasons behind the birth of the movement. In terms of the cause and birth of the Anti-Masonry movement, there are both immediate explanatory (short-term) and structural (long-term) reasons for the movement. This overview will focus on the structural reasons for the movement.

Formisano and Kutolowski posit that the traditional reasons for Anti-Mason movements, like the now infamous William Morgan story, are in actuality surrogate theories used against Masonry as a fraternity as it emerged in popular culture. Instead of being actual reasons for opposition, the Morgan theory and those like it became a symbolic rallying point for Anti-masons that coalesced against the changing tides of popular culture in favor of Masonry.

Some scholars have suggested that the emergence of Anti-Mason thought is merely a coincidence – a sort of “perfect storm” of political, social, and economic factors that emerged in a thought movement (McCarthy 1902). Historians vary in their analysis of why Anti-masonry exists. The explanations are sundry and varied, from radical left-wing appeals (Hofstadter 1965) to populism to radical right-wing appeals to religion and tradition (Davis 1960). The author posits that the truth, as it often is, is probably a mixture of both.

Scholars have generally agreed that Anti-Mason thought promoters historically serve the role as aggressors, with institutional masons serving as a scapegoat (Meyers 1943). This is not to say that Masonry is without blame, indeed, most scholars have pointed out the silence of the institution toward Anti-Mason charges, while they may be factually wrong, still provokes Anti-Masonic thought movements Lipset & Raab 1970). Given all the literature, it seems the best definition of Anti-Masons are those who have lines of thought that are successors to original Anti-Masonic sentiments, born from fraternity’s role as a counterculture and place of dissent against societal norms, a system of dissent which was heavily against political and religious thought in early America (Lipson 1974).

There are two main components of this definition upon which we can build a structural framework: Anti-Masonic opposition in terms of politics, and in terms of religion.

From the political perspective, the Anti-Masons cursory glance at the fraternity brings feelings of unfairness. Masonry, for them, essentially breaks, “the rules of the game” (Formisano & Kutolowski 1977). This is because any institution with entrance barriers immediately gains the perception of exclusivity to those not in the institution. Regardless of this reality, such perceptions give rise to populist sentiments and urges to create false dichotomies.

The allure of populism is that all people feel as though they are unfairly treated. It is a natural human proclivity, because no one individual is ever truly satisfied with his or her life. We seek to explain our disparate satisfaction, and in doing so many observe the differences between us and those who we perceive as having more or being happier than we are (Kazin 1998). We presume that this disparity of perceived wants is due in part to their characteristics. It is unsurprising then that Anti-Masonry, as a prelude to American populism, found its target in the institutions of Masons and the membership, many of whom were wealthy and had “more” than the leaders of the Anti-Mason movement. The Anti-Mason made a causational link between disparities of wealth between the fact that some people were wealthy and masons, and a movement was born in the name of political ideology.

Beyond political ideology, scholars have analyzed Freemasonry and found it to be in conjunction with civil religion (Jolicoeur & Knowles 1978; Wilson 1980). Civil religion, a term that is misleading, simply means that institution plays a important part in offering a set of norms or standards for members of a society. This is different from religion as we use the term, since religion retains its rights to lay out a moral code by virtue of Deity, while “civil religions” offer moral codes based on the appeal to greater virtue and principle without appeals to any particular aspect of the Divine. Many institutions have civil religion – for example, the prayer to a non-specific God during government ceremonies is a form of civil religion.

It is reasonable to believe that Anti-Masons build their framework in part from this opposition to Masonry’s particular expression of its views that are religious in nature and lacking in specifics. The Anti-Mason must be opposed to such conceptions because while notions of civil religion are widely accepted, they are not as socially accepted when institutions practicing such concepts have exclusive membership. Due to the Anti-Masons need to see divisions between themselves and other people in order to explain perceived differences in wealth and other wants, religion therefore often becomes the second method of attack used by Anti-Masons to promote the needed dichotomy that political populism requires.

Conclusions

This cursory view of interdisciplinary research on Anti-Masonry offers that the foundational framework that is used by Anti-Masons is two-fold: involving political notions of populism, and the need to create a religious dichotomy that springs forth from such notions. While more research is needed, at this preliminary stage it suggests that dialogue engaged in by Masons should stress the point that there is no need to create false dichotomies when such tactics are used by Anti-Masons.

While the framework for Anti-Masonry suggests its roots are in political populism and religious division, this is not the only framework that Anti-Masons use. Future research should focus not only on these foundational items but other aspects of Anti-Masonry: such as the need to be “against” the “establishment,” which probably has its roots as a psychological response against early moral stages that adults encounter in their ethical development (Fowler 1995).

Bibliography

Baumeister, R.F. & M.R. Leary. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Pscyhology Bulletain, 117(3): 497-529.

Davis, D.B. (1960). Some themes of counter-subversion: An analysis of Anti-Masonic, Anti-Catholic, and Anti-Mormon Literature. Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 47(September 1960): 205-24.

Formisano, R.P. & K.S. Kutolowski. (1977). Antimasonry and masonry: the genesis of protest, 1826-1827. American Quarterly, 29(2): 139-165.

Fowler, J.W. (1995). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the quest for meaning. New York: Harper Collins.

Jolicoeur, P.M. & L.L. Knowles. Fraternal associations and civil religion: Scottish Rite Freemasonry. Review of Religious Research, 20(1): 3-22.

Hofstadter, R. (1965). The Paranoid Style in American Politics. New York: Knopf.

Kazin, M. (1998). The Populist Persuasion: An American History. New York: Cornell University Press.

Lipson, D.A. (1974). Freemasonry in Connecticut: 1789-1835. University of Connecticut Dissertation.

Lipset, S.M. & E. Raab. The politics of unreason: right-wing extremism in America, 1790-1970. New York: Harper.

Meyers, G. (1943). History of Bigotry in the United States. New York: Random House.

McCarthy, C. (1902). The Anti-Masonic party. Annual Report of the American Historical Association. Washington: Government Printing Office.

Wilson, J. (1980). Voluntary associations and civil religion: The case of Freemasonry. Review of Religious Research, 22(2): 125-136.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by LightinDarkness]

I became anti Mason by reading the writings of Masons:

Manly P. Hall
J.D. Buck
C.W. "Lend a hand" Leadbeater
Foster Bailey
Albert Pike

Spare me the stupid remarks about reading the stuff on Freemasonry watch. I have the collected works of all of the above writers.

The point is that the Anti-Masonry view is a tradition that has foundations in political populism and religious division, because such division is necessary in order to justify your needs.

Reading authors who are not speaking for all of Masonry and then concluding they speak for all of masonry confirms this hypothesis, because you are looking for a way to cause division in order to explain your anti-mason worldview.

Very interesting reading. I agree with you wholeheartedly, LightinDarkness, it is a serious and important issue for our time, where conspiracy theories run rampant. That's what amazes me most with all the researchers (this is not directed at you, Researcher), everybody is saying "if you dont know this and this, you havent done your research." Well my own research has brought me to the conclusion that most of these people havent done theirs either! Only looking at one side of the coin cannot bring by an objective opinion, especially if the matter is being looked at through a religious (mostly Christian) prism.

While I havent gotten the chance to look into Anti-Masonry specifically, i would like to mention a book which i feel could contribute much in understanding Anti-Masonry (specifically in Europe) and the historical, social, political and psychological background behind Conspiracies or theories thereof; Johannes Rogalla von Bieberstein, Die These von der Verschwörung 1776 - 1945 (The Thesis of the Conspiracy 1776 - 1945), 1991 Flensburger Hefte Verlag.
The book is very well researched and while i havent finished reading it yet, i am quite confident in recommending it. The negative side is that it seems the book is not available in English.

Researcher: I too have followed the advice of many researchers and actually went to the sources like Hall's or Pike's writing, as well as some freemasonic websites, to learn about freemasonry. I havent really found much objectionable information that would support my then belief of a Freemasonic conspiracy or their "devilish philosophy." I found the opposite, most of the time quotes were taken out of context, as old as this "excuse" might get, and the information was presented strictly through a religious prism.
And dont get me even started on the Bavarian Illuminati....

Originally posted by LightinDarkness
The point is that the Anti-Masonry view is a tradition that has foundations in political populism and religious division, because such division is necessary in order to justify your needs.

Reading authors who are not speaking for all of Masonry and then concluding they speak for all of masonry confirms this hypothesis, because you are looking for a way to cause division in order to explain your anti-mason worldview.

While there may be anti-Masons who have what they believe is a legitimate beef with Masonry, it seems that the majority of antis have no idea at all about Masonry. They don't join. They don't investigate. They don't KNOW anything other than misquotes from old books that may or may not be written by Masons, guesses based on erroneous or imaginary information from questionable anti-Masonry sites, and simply a deep seated jealousy.

And jealousy isn't pretty.

From everything I've read, anti-Masonry is mindless, vitriolic nonsense. That someone who has never been in a Lodge (first time I visited was during a Constitutional Observance, and since then I've been to a Scottish Rite Temple (that's pretty damned beautiful), an Installation, and seen the Masons at different public events), can know anything - much less anything more - than an ACTUAL Freemason is just plain silly.

What other anti-Masons seem to believe is that name dropping or reading old, outdated texts means something. For example, Morals and Dogma. I know, I know; Scottish Rite, Albert Pike, blah, blah, blah. Scottish Rite Masons may take offense at that, however even I know that Bridge to Light is a text that's not only easier reading but is also based on the current Southern Jurisdiction Scottish Rite stuff. Why every anti-Mason seems to want to quote a book that - while it was a HUGE undertaking and very well done for it's time (and kudos to Albert Pike for all the work he did) - is now somewhat antiquated (not to mention long, sleep inducing and intricate beyond what's necessary), instead of quoting a modern book that reflects the updates to the Rite shows the shallowness of the 'research' that these antis are doing.

For the uninitiated (or even the raised), there are PLENTY of sources of good, solid, reliable information that clearly explains Masonry, it's history, it's theory and even it's practice (usually short of the 'modes of recognition'). That someone would not take advantage of those sources to properly research the fraternity seems, again, silly.

Another thing that I find interesting is the (oft repeated) "rank and file Masons don't know what the 'higher degrees' are really doing" nonsense. ANY Mason worth his salt knows exactly what the Fraternity is all about; they've been to the anti-Mason sites. They've heard and investigated the claims. Masons all know what Masonry is about. IF they disagreed with it's goals and purpose, they are always free to leave of their own free will and under their own power.

Even I know that. And I'm just a food group.

Your pal,
Meat.

Originally posted by Researcher
I became anti Mason by reading the writings of Masons:

Manly P. Hall
J.D. Buck
C.W. "Lend a hand" Leadbeater
Foster Bailey
Albert Pike

I find this interesting, and would like to hear why. Pike, for example, rambles on and on for hundreds of pages about the necessity of leading a moral life, doing good deeds, focusing on God, etc. Why would Pike's books make you an anti-Mason? Do you disagree with him?

Hall, on the other hand, also tends to ramble on, but makes a good point now and then. Yet most of his books were written long before he himself even became a Mason. Therefore, why would his books make you an anti-Mason?

Foster Bailey: a pretty wacky guy, with some pretty weird ideas. But it certainly isn't a crime to be weird, and Bailey was a nice enough guy. Why would he make you an anti-Mason?

Dr. J.D. Buck is actually one of my favorite Masonic authors. I read his "Mystic Masonry" before I became a Mason, and that book helped me want to become a Mason. I'm curious if this is the book you're referring to, because it apparently had opposite effects on us?

C.W. Leadbetter was never a regular Mason, so I will withhold my opinions of him, as he is not relevant to Freemasonry.



[edit on 1-2-2008 by Masonic Light]

Take a look around gentleman. The only posters left in this forum are the masons.

This is the ATS conspiracy theory website. This forum exists so that conspiracy theorists may discuss secret societies or any organizations historically or currently connected to our government etc.

I do believe, that the Masons doth protest, far too much.

This is a forum for open discussion of Masonry, I've said this countless times in light of your endless stone-walling and self-victimization.

There is no 'witch hunt' for Masons, only a conspiracy theory forum TRYING to get along with open discussion. If you cannot see with your own eyes that the Masons, not the 'anti-masons' are the ones controlling this forum : than I fully understand your motive behind making threads such as these. Otherwise, I suggest the Masons come down from their tree-fort and join in the discussion with the rest of us, and keep in mind, that this is the a conspiracy theory website, for conspiracy theorists, and NOT a 'no antis-allowed' clubhouse.

Keep up the good work,
Sincerely, the 'Anti-Masons'

Originally posted by mmmeat
Kinda reminds me of...
The lovely, kind, caring God Warrior chick from Trading Spouses.

Yeah that was very funny. I guess anyone who wants to discuss Masonry must be a nutjob like that lady

You know, if you look around, you wouldn't know it, but this forum was actually created for normal ATS'ers to speak about Masonry and it's involvement in clandestine government etc.

As I understand it now, all those regular ATS members are 'God Warriors' and 'anti-masons' etc.

My how the times have changed.

[edit on 1-2-2008 by NewWorldOver]

Due to the rash of recent threads that are using libel or slander to target masons, I thought this post deserved a bump. I do not do this to toot my own horn, but I invite ATS members who are REAL SEEKERS OF TRUTH to examine my OP - with actual peer reviewed academic sources - and compare that to some of the other large threads appearing that are blaming the masons for being: satanic, fronts for the gay movement, etc. Look at those, the sources they use, then this. In light of these recent posts, I think this OP that examines why people post things like have been appearing recently.

[edit on 2-5-2008 by LightinDarkness]

Wow, 2nd thread in 1 week created by Masons to characterize me and my info as "Anti-Mason." Remember, you're the ones saying I'm "Anti" anything. I think Masonry is Anti-Freedom and I'm Pro-Freedom. Got it? Mason/agents knowingly lie and spew misinfo all day every day, they are Anti-Truth and I am Pro-Truth.

You Masons must really feel threatened by the likes of me, ChadAndrewATS, and Cutsbothways. MasonicLight is getting all pumped up, breakdancing on the playground, preparding to "Serve" me a dose of Masonic sweet-talking in the debate forum. These two threads are trying to convince people that Masonry is wonderful and non-Mason researchers exposing the organization are bad. If anything you're proving how much you have to hide and how important this "ATS facade" of the benevolent Masons is to you.

As the OP said in the early 1800's there were Anti-Mason political parties trying to get them all out of office! Masons in politics have only gotten more prevalent and through government indoctrination and media manipulation the public is more ignorant to their existence. Two hundred years ago there were Anti-Mason political parties, nowadays most of the propagandized public doesn't even know what a Mason is.

In my recent "Secret Society Network" thread, one of the older Masons said, "To the older Masons here, this one (referring to me) sounds like a ghost from the past." He wasn't referring to crazy/paranoid conspiracy theorists from the past who don't know what their talking about. No no. He was referring to knowledgable, fervant Anti-Masons of the past - back before TV when people knew who their enemies were.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Take a look around gentleman. The only posters left in this forum are the masons.

This is the ATS conspiracy theory website. This forum exists so that conspiracy theorists may discuss secret societies or any organizations historically or currently connected to our government etc.

I do believe, that the Masons doth protest, far too much.

This is a forum for open discussion of Masonry, I've said this countless times in light of your endless stone-walling and self-victimization.

There is no 'witch hunt' for Masons, only a conspiracy theory forum TRYING to get along with open discussion. If you cannot see with your own eyes that the Masons, not the 'anti-masons' are the ones controlling this forum : than I fully understand your motive behind making threads such as these. Otherwise, I suggest the Masons come down from their tree-fort and join in the discussion with the rest of us, and keep in mind, that this is the a conspiracy theory website, for conspiracy theorists, and NOT a 'no antis-allowed' clubhouse.

Keep up the good work,
Sincerely, the 'Anti-Masons'

Thank you. This is exactly what has happened in the Secret Societies forum and it only proves what we're saying! If Masons had nothing to hide, there wouldn't be a team of them, (like the DiGG bury brigade) waiting to pounce upon every good post. If Masons had nothing to hide, it wouldn't be necessary for them to monitor ATS "defending their wonderful, benevolent" organization. If Masons had nothing to hide, any paranoid/crazy conspiracy theorists that started spouting non-sense would instantly be ignored.

Originally posted by freight tomsen
Wow, 2nd thread in 1 week created by Masons to characterize me and my info as "Anti-Mason." Remember, you're the ones saying I'm "Anti" anything. I think Masonry is Anti-Freedom and I'm Pro-Freedom. Got it? Mason/agents knowingly lie and spew misinfo all day every day, they are Anti-Truth and I am Pro-Truth.

Your attempts to appear victimized fail, yet again. If you look at the dates, you'll note that this OP is from SEVERAL months ago. Of course, I know as does everyone else on this board that you are the same anti-mason who was around here during that time. Thanks for providing more proof that your just using alternate screen names.

It is obvious you didn't read the post, as your paranoia about Masons has been exposed as a natural extension of populism and misunderstanding of civil religion. You are not Pro-Truth, you are Pro-Propaganda - and a disinformation agent in the conspiracy against masonry. I have no proof for that preceding statement, but hey - neither do you for anything you say. So we're even.

Originally posted by freight tomsen
These two threads are trying to convince people that Masonry is wonderful and non-Mason researchers exposing the organization are bad. If anything you're proving how much you have to hide and how important this "ATS facade" of the benevolent Masons is to you.

Actually if you would read the post it said nothing about masonry, it analyzed the thoughts of the anti-masonic moment, of which you are a member. You realize your not the first person to pull these kinds of games, right? Its quite old, and its been studied extensively.

Originally posted by freight tomsenback before TV when people knew who their enemies were.

And this, my friends, is a clear example of the anti-mason worldview. For people like this, everything is black white, good and evil. In the desperate desire to explain a complex world, anti-masons create scapegoats in the fraternity because they seek a need to explain what they see around them. This need comes from a inability to understand the complex processes that bring about what happens in our world, because its so much easier to scapegoat people instead of doing research.

Now, are you going to dispute anything I said or continue your ranting? Perhaps you'd like to quote ONE peer reviewed source for any of your claims, or argue with the tens of sources I posted? Peer review. I highly recommend it.

Originally posted by freight tomsen
Thank you. This is exactly what has happened in the Secret Societies forum and it only proves what we're saying! If Masons had nothing to hide, there wouldn't be a team of them, (like the DiGG bury brigade) waiting to pounce upon every good post.

This is called the fallacy of begging the question, and is invalid reasoning. It works something like this:
You: You know there is a evil plot with the masons because they keep responding to posts about them.
Me: How does that indicate an evil plot, instead of them responding to your libel and slander?
You: Because they keep responding, which must mean the evil plot is real.

Its circular logic, and is wrong.

Originally posted by freight tomsen
If Masons had nothing to hide, it wouldn't be necessary for them to monitor ATS "defending their wonderful, benevolent" organization. If Masons had nothing to hide, any paranoid/crazy conspiracy theorists that started spouting non-sense would instantly be ignored.

Right. Which is why every time you create another slanderous post and a mason DOESNT respond immediately, you post a follow up asking why the Masons haven't responded and this must mean they cant counter your slanderous accusations. Yet another example that your just trolling.

Did you notice you responded immediately in the thread about the conspiracy against masons? If you had nothing to hide, it wouldn't be necessary for you to monitor ATS "conspiracies against the masons" thread. If you had nothing to hide, any paranoid/crazy mason that started spouting non-sense would be instantly ignored. And yet here you are, responding to me. I wonder why?

Exposed again. The hilarity continues.

Originally posted by LightinDarkness

Right. Which is why every time you create another slanderous post and a mason DOESNT respond immediately, you post a follow up asking why the Masons haven't responded and this must mean they cant counter your slanderous accusations. Yet another example that your just trolling.

If a "Mason DOESN'T respond immediately" to my posts I have never "posted a follow up asking why the Masons haven't responded." Where are you getting this from? I don't want the Masons to respond to me. I'm not here to talk to you. I know your game, I know how you play, I'm not here to chit-chat with you.

You keep telling me I'm "Anti-Mason" which I've never considered either way until this week. You want me to go Head-to-Head with MasonicLight in the Debate forum. You keep making threads about how certain ATS members are "Anti-Mason" and there's a "Very Real Conspiracy Against Masons." This is the Hegelian Dialectical game you play. You want to polarize my wealth of conspiratorial information (royalty, bloodlines, secret societies, vatican, alternate history, religion, numerology/symbology etc.). You want to minimalize my ability to affect change here on ATS by just making me "Anti-Mason."

Anyway, it is clear that you Masons OWN the Secret Society forum on ATS and the Above Network is clearly FINE with that happening... so I think I'll leave you Masons to your lies and misinfo and I'll concentrate my posts in other forums where they will be more appreciated. Have fun.