|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 11:43:22 GMT
Bill, I love it when you get passionate about freemasonry, but this is just plain ridiculous. If you just go back on this thread alone, you will see that the Co Masonic lobby want things their way. They want all of us to listen to their opinion, but any UGLE opinion is brushed aside as outdated, anti female. There *is* no lobby. I don't know how many times we need to say this, but we neither seek nor need UGLE recognition. We are happy where we are. I have yet to encounter a co-mason who wants what Tamrin wants. I don't think UGLE are anti-female, and to the best of my knowledge I have neither said nor implied so as long as I have been a mason. I respect and staunchly support anyone's right to practice their craft in their preferred environment, and again, I have yet to encounter a co-mason who thinks otherwise. Just snap out of the old "us vs them" routine and put on another record. It's getting b ... zzzzzz *snore*
|
|
|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 11:49:07 GMT
Oh Architekt?
Considering you appear to have left the party on the other thread, and I remain ever so curious about your masonic antecedents, would you care to elaborate at all ...?
12 Oct, 2008, 23:14, architekt wrote:
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 14, 2008 13:35:54 GMT
Bro. Cora, I am now convinced you know that I am going to do this when you issue the challenge.
you said : There *is* no lobby.
They have already been questioned and answered so no need to explore any further. I have no complaint about the comments just that they show a willingness to blame UGLE, when there is a complete lack of UGLE posters wanting to blame anyone else, or at least that is the way it seems to me.
Here are clips from this thread.
--------------------------- (little wince)
It's not for lack of caring. There's just some very, very, veeeeeeeeery ugly history that, really and truly, needs to be lived down. That history, along with a certain inattention to accepted Masonic protocol, keeps quite a few folks quiet and not a little skeptical. You've, unfortunately, stumbled into the middle of that, though it's much quieter here than elsewhere.
----------------------------- Bro. Bill, geographical sovereignty never actually exist and the idea was totally blown when US MS lodges, and UGLE, started recognizing some PH Obediences.
It's a proven red herring. -----------------------------
You could certainly have fooled me Bro Bill, but thanks, I needed a laugh this morning as it's not going to be a good day today.
------------------------------ I am sure that you, Bro Bill, believe in these three principles but the only one I could honestly attribute to UGLE in 18 years of membership thereof was Fraternité the other two were singularly absent in my experience. ----------------------------- about UGLE I have met this calm before, in an old folks home where the inmates are drugged up with Seranace or Haloperidol and sit placidly in their chairs or lie in bed smiling inanely and waiting to die. I personally want no part of such "calm". ----------------------------- Bro Bill, surely you remember Bro Mark Perrot who was very robust indeed in his condemnation of Co-Masons when he used to post on another Forum? I have also met UGLE masons who mock Women Only Masonry, LDH and also GOdF, and who state, "If it's not UGLE approved it's not Freemasonry". I'm afraid not all of your Brethren are as tolerant as yourself Bro Bill. ----------------------------- This latest position taken by UGLE would seem to go not even as far as current community norms, towards redressing its previous stance. ---------------------------- I always thought that statement by UGLE to be a bit pious and twee. Women's Freemasonry being "Regular" except that it admits WOMEN! --------------------------
Not quite so ridiculous I would say ? I wont do the rest of the forum. we don't have enough room.
This thread is about GOUSA and GOdF.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Oct 14, 2008 14:27:19 GMT
Personally I have never heard of any Co-Freemasons who’ve said say they want to change Mainstream or Malecraft Masonry but I get the impression some within the Malecraft community are concerned this might become a possibility. In time it may happen as a matter of natural progress but for now it's carry on as normal
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 14, 2008 15:00:37 GMT
Leo I did not say the Co Masons want to change mainstream, believe it or not I am trying to help as are I believe the other mainstream Masons on this and other forum are trying to help.
It is the constant niggling comment, as demonstrated above. I am sure we all do it.
But even when mild mannered Cora says "but this is just plain ridiculous." I then have to prove the point. because I have another view does not make what I say ridiculous.
Jeff Peace was the same he spent more time complaining than creating his Masonic Utopia. When he stopped complaining and concentrated on his dream we ended up with GOUSA. I said the same to him, so maybe GOUSA is all my fault.
Jeff is one of the nicest people I know, but on these Forum he is a pain in the aspidistra. You may have noted he is strangely quiet. Maybe because he is banned from some but he could find a way in if he wanted to.
We all have far more in common that we have that keeps us apart, if we are to look for more contact and less disharmony someone has to create the atmosphere by which this can happen. you do not create such an atmosphere by making the other party responsible for everything.
Lets make Co Masonry more energetic, more enjoyable, stronger, lets attract more people to Co Masonry, I will help its a good idea. Many times I have seen mainstream posters tell a new poster to try Co Masonry it might suite them better, you have seen that happen as well Leo I am sure.
So whatever problems we have lets have them together, let us solve them together, we do this for the good of Freemasonry whatever obedience would suite that person lets do this.
My passion is for Freemasonry Cora, I just happen to be a UGLE Mason.
If it be GOdF or GOUSA then so be it, let the newbies join there.
But let us drop the blame game.
|
|
|
Post by penfold on Oct 14, 2008 15:46:27 GMT
I back Bill on this one - I have been active on masonic forums for over 6 years now, there exists currently a far better natured discussion than there used to be vis a vis co-masonry, hoever, there remains a willingness and an almost default position to criticise UGLE and it's way of doing things which hasn't gone away. It is disingenious and somewhat underhand to suggest that these criticisms and comments don't exist and its the fault of the nasty UGLE masons....again... Bill has given examples drawn from this thread of brickbats directed at the malecraft stream, not so long ago Leo asked Keith a question regarding women visiting NZ lodges who held positions of authority - well knowing the answer why the question, if not to highlight once again how bad those malecraft masons are for not letting women in....
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Oct 14, 2008 16:08:53 GMT
Lets make Co Masonry more energetic, more enjoyable, stronger, lets attract more people to Co Masonry, I will help its a good idea. Many times I have seen mainstream posters tell a new poster to try Co Masonry it might suite them better, you have seen that happen as well Leo I am sure. For me Co-Freemasonry is already all of the things you suggest, but thanks anyway. And yes, interested people have been directed towards us on this and other fora by some from Malecraft Masonry, which we appreciate. This proves what I have been saying - the Internet, visa-vie these fora, have been a wonderful tool for making more and more people aware of other branches of Freemasonry.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Oct 14, 2008 18:39:10 GMT
. . .if not to highlight once again how bad those malecraft masons are for not letting women in.... Actually, Bro. Penfold, the only folks here who ever suggest Malecraft Masons are "bad" are other Malecraft Masons. I, likewise, wonder why they keep bringing it up as I know of no Co-Masons or Femalecraft Masons who agree. Of course, I have encountered Malecraft Masons who seem to think accepting the existence of women Freemasons would require the integration of their Lodges. I have no clue why this jumps into their minds but it does. And then they get annoyed at those women Freemasons for this imaginary reason and blame them for it. But, y'know, it ain't my fault they think that falsehood and blaming me for it just ain't cool. Certainly when "Spenny" Northampton has presented an award at a meeting in England to a lady Mason who lives in the USA. Y'all call him "Spenny"? (little giggles) Oh, how very delightful!! Oh, why didn't anyone tell me that while I was there? I could have had suuuuuuuuuuch fun with that.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 19:42:09 GMT
Is what you propose allowed in Australia? Not as yet. While I feel two mutually recognised but gender exclusive branches of Freemasonry is somewhat of a neurotic compromise in this day and age, I would consider it to be fair if it involved unqualified recognition and some inter-visitation was allowed (without which "recognition" would be an empty term). Beginning, for instance in mutual representations at Grand Lodge Communications, later extending to fraternal visits at Lodge Installations and then, .... who knows? I am however of the view, while this would have been welcome and appropriate fifty or more years ago, the time is now long overdue.Apparently some clarification is necessary: 1. I am not and have never been a member of any of the Obediences colloquially known as Co-masonry. While I wish them well, there are some aspects of their work I do not personally like. Besides which, there are none of their lodges within the length of my cabletow (and no longer any women's lodges within cooee). 2. I am an unattached mason in possession of a clearance certificate from a mainstream lodge, having resigned in good standing after being officially asked to consider doing so or being quiet about women and freemasonry. I thereby represent one fate which may befall conscientious dissenters on the issue. 3. The scenario above (quoted) is not my preferred option. As I said, while I consider it to be acceptable, I also consider it to be neurotic in this day and age: Why not simply admit women as members? 4. If the reason given to the question in Point 3 is a loss of membership and if that is linked to a presumption of misogyny, then I agree we would need to tread careful; but surely an inability to keep our passions and prejudices within due bounds suggests the problem is greater than we should tolerate. 5. The presumptive freedom of lodges to exclude women is at the cost of the freedom to admit them. 6. The relevance of the international Convention, is that most of our governments have endorsed it as national policy, representing the national and international values and aspirations outside our doors. 7. My principal concern is with my former grand lodge in particular and mainstream masonry in general, not with UGLE, per se. However, given the regard with which UGLE is held and given the English foundations of this forum, I can understand why UGLE keeps being raised in threads here (indeed it seems to be raised as an example more by those who object to the focus on UGLE!?).
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 14, 2008 20:02:38 GMT
I think we have enough on him now.
Book him Danno.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Oct 14, 2008 20:50:30 GMT
Not as yet. While I feel two mutually recognised but gender exclusive branches of Freemasonry is somewhat of a neurotic compromise in this day and age, I would consider it to be fair if it involved unqualified recognition and some inter-visitation was allowed (without which "recognition" would be an empty term). Beginning, for instance in mutual representations at Grand Lodge Communications, later extending to fraternal visits at Lodge Installations and then, .... who knows? I am however of the view, while this would have been welcome and appropriate fifty or more years ago, the time is now long overdue. Apparently some clarification is necessary: 1. I am not and have never been a member of any of the Obediences colloquially known as Co-masonry. While I wish them well, there are some aspects of their work I do not personally like. Besides which, there are none of their lodges within the length of my cabletow (and no longer any women's lodges within cooee). 2. I am an unattached mason in possession of a clearance certificate from a mainstream lodge, having resigned in good standing after being officially asked to consider doing so or being quiet about women and freemasonry. I thereby represent one fate which may befall conscientious dissenters on the issue. 3. The scenario above (quoted) is not my preferred option. As I said, while I consider it to be acceptable, I also consider it to be neurotic in this day and age: Why not simply admit women as members? 4. If the reason given to the question in Point 3 is a loss of membership and if that is linked to a presumption of misogyny, then I agree we would need to tread careful; but surely an inability to keep our passions and prejudices within due bounds suggests the problem is greater than we should tolerate. 5. The presumptive freedom of lodges to exclude women is at the cost of the freedom to admit them. 6. The relevance of the international Convention, is that most of our governments have endorsed it as national policy, representing the national and international values and aspirations outside our doors. 7. My principal concern is with my former grand lodge in particular and mainstream masonry in general, not with UGLE, per se. However, given the regard with which UGLE is held and given the English foundations of this forum, I can understand why UGLE keeps being raised in threads here (indeed it seems to be raised as an example more by those who object to the focus on UGLE!?). Bro Philip. Thank you for sharing some of your Masonic history with us, it's always helpful to have a clearer perspective on an individual. You have been through a lot for your beliefs and one of the many things that stand out is that you're a man of great principles.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Oct 14, 2008 22:22:54 GMT
I cannot and would not speak for anyone else but I stand by what I have said. I have replied to points made by Bro Bill where my 18 years of experience in UGLE have differed significantly from his.
|
|
|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 22:56:53 GMT
This thread is about GOUSA and GOdF. Halleluiah, he's seen the light. That is exactly why I've been questioning your bringing the old UGLE vs the rest of the world into it! Now can we stick to the subject, please?
|
|
|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 22:58:20 GMT
Oh, why didn't anyone tell me that while I was there? I could have had suuuuuuuuuuch fun with that. You didn't hear Bro:. John call him that? Guess you were too engrossed in that scroll on the wall *giggles*
|
|
|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 23:01:07 GMT
.... 2. I am an unattached mason in possession of a clearance certificate from a mainstream lodge, having resigned in good standing after being officially asked to consider doing so or being quiet about women and freemasonry. I thereby represent one fate which may befall conscientious dissenters on the issue.
If, unfortunately, your differences be of such a nature as not to be so easily adjusted, it were better one or both of you retire, than the harmony of the Lodge should be disturbed by your presence. At least Tamrin has the balls to admit where he hails from. I have yet to see you answer one simple question: what Obedience/Jurisdiction do you belong to?
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Oct 14, 2008 23:39:19 GMT
I cannot and would not speak for anyone else but I stand by what I have said. I have replied to points made by Bro Bill where my 18 years of experience in UGLE have differed significantly from his.
Perhaps the views that you were espousing about these matters were not appreciated by the members of your previous lodge/GL and that is why your experience is quite different. Perhaps they were more along the lines of Tamrin's vocal opinions on this matter. That is why it is better to join another Masonic group that practices ones preferences than attempting to change the 300 years of tradition of the society one joined. That way everyone is happy. « Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:52pm by architekt »
*****************************************************
Tamrin, aka Philip, can speak for himself and does.
For my part much as I would feel it beneficial if UGLE and Amity Brethren were able to visit LDH Lodges and vice versa, as you say it is not going to happen in my lifetime nor yours. I am more than happy with LDH and only wish I had known of it some years before.
As it stands here in the UK we have LDH for those who wish Male and Female Masonry together, Male Only Freemasonry such as UGLE, GL of Scotland, GLAE, and Female ONLY such as OWF and HFAF. Suits me, and to my mind all are Freemasons.
Oh, and I take it Architekt that you are an UGLE Mason?
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Oct 14, 2008 23:58:40 GMT
Oh, why didn't anyone tell me that while I was there? I could have had suuuuuuuuuuch fun with that. You didn't hear Bro:. John call him that? Guess you were too engrossed in that scroll on the wall *giggles* I guess it went right over my head. But, yeah, York Roll #4 was quite engrossing Actually, some of it (the key bit) was literally "engrossed." For that chapter, I got to dust off my copy of John Jackson’s “Theory and Practice of Handwriting” (1894). Always fun ;D
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Oct 15, 2008 3:03:50 GMT
Yup, I met him when I was there in March. He's a cool dude
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 15, 2008 6:46:02 GMT
This thread is about GOUSA and GOdF. Halleluiah, he's seen the light. That is exactly why I've been questioning your bringing the old UGLE vs the rest of the world into it! Now can we stick to the subject, please? I have already answered your question. Just because I do not agree with all you write does not mean I am wrong.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Oct 15, 2008 6:52:50 GMT
What would be beneficial about visiting for either? Well, here in Ireland many of my Brothers from GLoI tell me repeatedly they would love the opportunity to visit and sit with me and my wife in Lodge. Also many UGLE Brothers expressed their sadness of not being permitted to attend my Initiation. Clearly these Brethren would have appreciated if such visitations were possible between our respective Obediences.
|
|