|
Today more than ever, Freemasonry needs to be understood in its real social dimension and historical importance, as well as in its thought and its values, in order to be placed as an active subject within a post modern society as ours, with all the weight of its secular tradition.
So, the plan that Freemasonry should pursue is, first of all, to promote an organic and united vision of itself, through the study of its history and of its thought, avoiding misunderstandings on its origins and, even worse, on its purposes.
Only in this way Freemasonry will regain possession of its real identity and aspire to profitably place itself within society. A Freemason is therefore strongly called to study, to thinking, to comprehension efforts, to knowledge, along a difficult way, from which he cannot evade and from which the Institution cannot prescind, if it does not want to be swept away by the strong wing of modernity, which simplifies and debases everything. Freemasonry cannot think to meet the masses making it "easily" comprehensible, therefore adopting their same simplistic language. Thinking of making Freemasonry modern and present, for example wearing blue jeans and putting away the "gloomy" dark suit, as someone has proposed in Italy, it is counter-productive, besides form being demeaning; and it also is counter-productive and demeaning thinking to render it knowable to the vast public, "succinctly" explaining, in a few seconds or lines, what Freemasonry is or what being a Freemason means.
If we, with obvious contradiction, also add that to this day a Freemason who is looking for a standard identity can proclaim himself "mazzinian", and embrace socio-political theses almost 200 years old, the requirement of a much deeper and articulate effort of analysis, study and comprehension, compared to the one made until now, manifests itself imperatively.
I have in consequence convinced myself that the first study phase, within a project for a "modern" Freemasonry -and this does not mean anti traditional- has necessarily to be "sociological" in order to evaluate how Freemasonry can enter the fabric of society and position itself in it without being rejected by it, as often happened.
My idea is to initially represent Freemasonry as one the many "associative" phenomena that it is possible to discover in our society. Freemasonry is, in fact, to all intents and purposes an association, with all its "initiatory and esoteric" peculiarities, but nevertheless an association.
In my opinion, this first step could allow us to come out from the ghetto in which we were confined for centuries, the ghetto of the "Seven", often because of misinformation and crass ignorance of the subject by journalists and self-styled scholars. All this has been accepted for years by the Masons themselves with compliancy and acquiescence, Masons who were guiltily mute before a public opinion that had arrived to consider us a sort of "bucket" in which everything can be thrown.
Even in its evident simplicity, the result of this approach went beyond my brightest expectations. In fact, not only Freemasonry has been inserted in the important "2004 Italian Report", of the Eurispes Research Institute, that draws a picture of the socio-economic condition of the Nation, but the section in which Freemasonry has been inserted, the one on "Representation" has a definitely respectable title: "The discreet fascination of Freemasonry.
But what interests us most of all is the content of the Eurispes research. The two Masonic realities that are represented are only the Regular Grand Lodge of Italy and the Grand Orient of Italy, and this is already a great help in order to be oriented in this world that unfortunately enumerates almost an hundred of self-declared Grand Lodges and in consequence of self-declared Grand Masters on the Italian territory.
The Regular Grand Lodge of Italy, as it is well known, is the only Italian Masonic Body recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England, while the Grand Orient of Italy, whose recognition of 1972 has afterwards been withdrawn in 1993, represents the most numerous one. The Eurispes research content is interesting even because it confirms the differences between the two Grand Lodges: Regular Grand Lodge of Italy and Grand Orient of Italy. At the end of the section dedicated to the GOI it is indeed quoted word for word: "…Dunque si può affermare che il GOI - nella misura in cui si esprime apertis verbis su aspetti della vita pubblica e sociale del paese, fa politica e tende a caratterizzarsi come un partito di opinione". (It can be affirmed that the GOI - inasmuch as talks apertis verbis about aspects of the public and social life of the country, it is politically involved and so it strives for being characterized as an opinion party). On the contrary, the section dedicated to the Regular Grand Lodge of Italy opens with the title: "La GLRI, la massoneria politicamente corretta". (GLRI, the politically correct Freemasonry). From all this we can clearly deduce that GLRI is considered, and in fact is, the only Masonic Body on the territory that follows the Anglo-Saxon traditions and rules, and that therefore is REGULAR.
It is known indeed that condicio sine qua non in order to be included among the "regular" Free masonries is not to be in politics and in religion, and moreover not to be in conflict with the religious realities on the territory, elements that the careful and competent researchers of Eurispes have accurately noted.
After this first phase of "Sociological" approach, the second study phase concerns the "Philosophical" context of Freemasonry also relating to the contexts in which the single Masonic realities operate. My personal vision has already been officially presented in public at the Cornerstone Society, one of the most important historical-philosophical associations close to the United Grand Lodge of England, which has permitted me to present my theory to a qualified and interested audience in two consecutive conferences, the first in Sheffield last year and the second in London at the Freemason's Hall, a few weeks ago.
From this study one can infer that the Florentine Neo-Platonism and its Anglo-Saxon continuation, constituted by the Cambridge Neo-Platonists, represent a philosophical doctrine in which the Freemason's thought finds important correspondences and that most of all does not contrast with the various religious expressions, particularly with the Christian one, allowing to overcome and settle the centuries-old arguments between Catholic Church and Masonry. Exactly on this level, what we must avoid is to simplistically unite thinkers as Pico della Mirandola or Marsilio Ficino to others, as Giordano Bruno. One can verify the antithesis especially with regard to the doctrine of the Eros, nucleus of Neo-Platonic thought. The platonic theory of love, that the Florence Academy tried to merge with Christianity, is in fact to be twisted by Giordano Bruno, who sees in Eros the proof of the titanic force of the man. It is Eros that equips the man with that "heroic fury" which enables him to have a vision of the infinite Universe and to break the snares that tie him to religion. So, if Pico della Mirandola and Marsilio Ficino never look for the conflict with the Christian theology, trying to have the platonic concepts coexist with Christian theology, in Bruno, on the contrary, the platonic doctrine of Eros will become a real weapon against the Christian doctrine. The Italian Neo-Platonists, as opposed to Bruno, set themselves as the guardians of a tradition that they absolutely do not want to demolish, but to save.
This does not at all mean that a thinker as Giordano Bruno has to be rejected or abandoned, but only that also his theories have to be reconsidered in the light of a critical spirit that every Freemason must always have. Let's avoid throwing the child together with hot water. Giordano Bruno himself, who fought all sorts of dogmatisms, would not be pleased to know that his doctrines are leniently followed, often as if they were the "Word" and his figure idolized by Masons, sometimes even in a grotesque and embarrassing way (a fake pyre in Piazza Campo dei Fiori on the 400th anniversary of his death).
So we arrive at the third and last phase, maybe the most delicate, that concerns the esoteric aspects of our way as Freemasons. It is obvious that going near the esoteric part implies that the Freemason has completed a whole series of preparatory studies on the subject, which can lead to an adequate comprehension of it. We sometimes speak about mysticism, ermeticism and esotericism, with very little knowledge of the facts, and this inevitably causes confusion and misunderstandings.
Running after the "Holy Grail" as an anachronistic templarism and looking for improbable Masonic traces in the "Rolls of the Dead Sea" does not really help in recognizing to Freemasonry the credibility and dignity that the body itself is entitled to have for history and tradition.
My auspice is therefore that in the future the study of Freemasonry as an important socio-cultural phenomenon will be informed with scientific criterion and therefore with historical, philosophical and exegetical rigor.
The Grand Master
The Most Worshipful Bro. Fabio Venzi
|
