Post by Trinityman on Nov 18, 2004 20:35:45 GMT
<climbs onto soapbox>
One of the aspects of freemasonry which I am very keen (sic) on is the concept of the private lodge as the keystone upon which masonry is built. Lodges were around well before Grand Lodges ever came into being, have many powers to govern themselves, and is the environment where almost all of our formal masonic development happens. It's the place we call Home.
I'm not sure if lodges actually realise the extent to which they can be autonomous. There are principles which must be upheld, and constitutions have their own rules, but beyond that lodges can pretty much govern their own affairs.
I'm prompted to make this posting because of a story I heard at the last Trinity meeting. Trinity, as some of you may be aware, is a very old and quirky lodge with a stubborn, independent streak. One of our traditions is that the Master of Trinity is the only person allowed to open the lodge. Apparently some time ago (about 100 years I think) the PGM decided to test his authority in Trinity and demanded admission. He got admitted alright but he wasn't allowed to open the lodge . Not impressed, he left in a huff and for at least a generation Trinity received no provincial honours.
I'm pleased to say that the rift was eventually healed and now the Master of Trinity condescends to allow certain people to open the lodge on his behalf . I don't think we'd ever try this one on again but it makes for an interesting story nevertheless.
So if GL, or more probably PGL tries to tell you what to do and you don't think it's right don't just take it lying down. The big fights are unwinnable, but some of the petty restrictions and rules which some PGMs seem to 'invent' I believe can and should be challenged. What's he going to do - pull the Charter? Only the GM can do that.
Private lodges can and should govern their own affairs. Because of this variety is spread right across freemasonry the world over, and there is a lodge somewhere for anyone.
This is very much my personal opinion, and I certainly don't advocate cecession from GL or anything like that. Sensible regulations that guide our conduct are what makes freemasonry what it is. Silly, pointless rules should be exposed for what they are.
<climbs off soapbox, gets coat from peg and exeunt stage left>
One of the aspects of freemasonry which I am very keen (sic) on is the concept of the private lodge as the keystone upon which masonry is built. Lodges were around well before Grand Lodges ever came into being, have many powers to govern themselves, and is the environment where almost all of our formal masonic development happens. It's the place we call Home.
I'm not sure if lodges actually realise the extent to which they can be autonomous. There are principles which must be upheld, and constitutions have their own rules, but beyond that lodges can pretty much govern their own affairs.
I'm prompted to make this posting because of a story I heard at the last Trinity meeting. Trinity, as some of you may be aware, is a very old and quirky lodge with a stubborn, independent streak. One of our traditions is that the Master of Trinity is the only person allowed to open the lodge. Apparently some time ago (about 100 years I think) the PGM decided to test his authority in Trinity and demanded admission. He got admitted alright but he wasn't allowed to open the lodge . Not impressed, he left in a huff and for at least a generation Trinity received no provincial honours.
I'm pleased to say that the rift was eventually healed and now the Master of Trinity condescends to allow certain people to open the lodge on his behalf . I don't think we'd ever try this one on again but it makes for an interesting story nevertheless.
So if GL, or more probably PGL tries to tell you what to do and you don't think it's right don't just take it lying down. The big fights are unwinnable, but some of the petty restrictions and rules which some PGMs seem to 'invent' I believe can and should be challenged. What's he going to do - pull the Charter? Only the GM can do that.
Private lodges can and should govern their own affairs. Because of this variety is spread right across freemasonry the world over, and there is a lodge somewhere for anyone.
This is very much my personal opinion, and I certainly don't advocate cecession from GL or anything like that. Sensible regulations that guide our conduct are what makes freemasonry what it is. Silly, pointless rules should be exposed for what they are.
<climbs off soapbox, gets coat from peg and exeunt stage left>