|
Post by middlepillar on Dec 3, 2009 20:25:44 GMT
"As for male craft masonry, I just hope that when they meet a female mason or co-mason they can be a gentlemen about it."Most are polite Lynn. I have encountered fewer than 10 who have been abusive and those mostly on the Internet. You don't live in the USA. I know of a lodge of LDH in the midwest that have to change there locations everytime they meet due to physical threats. They are not open about their memberships because it is a small town and they are worried about their jobs etc. This is just one example of the "they have choices" argument being a half truth at best. If you have to go through all kinds of crap from other Masons to practice Masonry how in the world is that fair? Love and Light, Brad Let me ask you a serious question, would you consider the 'recognition' issue as you are talking about is different to the one we this side of the Atlantic are talking about? Because if it is, surely you can see this is not a masonic issue but a cultural one?
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Dec 3, 2009 20:36:46 GMT
A very few may say that Co-Masonry is not real Freemasonry but they tend to be the minority. I take it you haven't visited TSS, The Masonic Society, Freemason Pride, MySpace Cyberlodge #1, Masons of Texas, Golden State Masons or Mastermason.com recently ;D Bro.Steve, try an experiment. Join one of the above .Tell them that you are an LDH Co-Mason. I'll bet in record time you will get more that you ever expected in the way of total disrespect. Love and Light, These Masonic Forums are set up with a view to catering for the needs of what they consider 'Regular' Freemasons. They do not consider You, Steve, Cora, Imakegarb and others regular, therefore prefer to discuss Freemasonry without your (collective) presence. This is no big deal really, it is up to the owner of every Forum to decide who they let in. I enjoy both TSS and The Masonic Society Forums and they serve a need that was identifed when a lot of Freemasons expressed a desire to use a Forum pretty much like a Lodge room, ie Tyled against the profane. Now you may not like it but in thier eyes you are not regular, therefore profane, therefore not welcome. Steve has pointed out that he does the same thing, he has his own criteria for membership and anyone who does not meet it is not allowed in. You yourself are free to start your own Forum and can set your own criteria. I do not think it is discriminatory, it is all a matter of choice. It is something that anyone who is in a minority has to accept, or be driven mad with unrealistic hopes. Not all Forums are like MFoL!
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Dec 3, 2009 20:38:39 GMT
You don't live in the USA. I know of a lodge of LDH in the midwest that have to change there locations everytime they meet due to physical threats. They are not open about their memberships because it is a small town and they are worried about their jobs etc. This is just one example of the "they have choices" argument being a half truth at best. If you have to go through all kinds of crap from other Masons to practice Masonry how in the world is that fair? Love and Light, Brad Let me ask you a serious question, would you consider the 'recognition' issue as you are talking about is different to the one we this side of the Atlantic are talking about? Because if it is, surely you can see this is not a masonic issue but a cultural one? Bro.Chris, I can tell you that in my dealings, Masons from latin speaking countries have a far more "liberal" and compassionate understanding of different flavors of Masonry. Most of the time when I run into a hostile Partisan, they are either American, Canadian or from the UK. It's a little different from region to region in this country too. I mean the attitude regarding female Masons seems to very from let's say NY or CA than it does in the south. It could be largely cultural. Love and Light,
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Dec 3, 2009 20:54:09 GMT
I take it you haven't visited TSS, The Masonic Society, Freemason Pride, MySpace Cyberlodge #1, Masons of Texas, Golden State Masons or Mastermason.com recently ;D Bro.Steve, try an experiment. Join one of the above .Tell them that you are an LDH Co-Mason. I'll bet in record time you will get more that you ever expected in the way of total disrespect. Love and Light, These Masonic Forums are set up with a view to catering for the needs of what they consider 'Regular' Freemasons. They do not consider You, Steve, Cora, Imakegarb and others regular, therefore prefer to discuss Freemasonry without your (collective) presence. This is no big deal really, it is up to the owner of every Forum to decide who they let in. I enjoy both TSS and The Masonic Society Forums and they serve a need that was identifed when a lot of Freemasons expressed a desire to use a Forum pretty much like a Lodge room, ie Tyled against the profane. Now you may not like it but in thier eyes you are not regular, therefore profane, therefore not welcome. Steve has pointed out that he does the same thing, he has his own criteria for membership and anyone who does not meet it is not allowed in. You yourself are free to start your own Forum and can set your own criteria. I do not think it is discriminatory, it is all a matter of choice. It is something that anyone who is in a minority has to accept, or be driven mad with unrealistic hopes. Not all Forums are like MFoL! A total misconception of the practice of regularity should be for another thread. ;D I agree, many don't want to look beyond their own noses. It's a shame, but what can you do? Why people like this would want to join an enlightenment society is also a huge contridiction. As far as I know, Steve does not practice any discrimination based on Masonic membership. It's kind of unfair to lump him in with groups that do. IMHO of course ;D Love and Light,
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Dec 3, 2009 21:15:28 GMT
Magnus (Brad) is correct. I do not prevent anyone from posting to my Forum on the grounds of what Grand Lodge etc they belong or indeed if they are not even a Freemason. I do however block those who have caused flame wars elsewhere, or who have been insulting to other posters etc. Apart from a Moderators 'Staff Room and a Sin Bin for any thread that has to be taken down for a while there are no Tyled areas.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Dec 3, 2009 22:31:39 GMT
Mr Mason I don't mean to sound patronizing, but I think this topic is just going round in circles. Yep sure is. What is the burning need of Recognition I am a Freemason, my wife is a Freemason, Lauderdale is a Freemason, so are Leo and his wife, I assume you are a Mason - what is the big deal. We have all been initiated into the craft, each of of our Masonic credentials are valid. I am sure none of us would be so arrogant as to claim our Masonic credentials are better than another - that would be very unmasonic Hi Whistler, When you say "Yep sure is" do you mean going round in circles or patronising. If it's the latter then I apologise. My post being is that there is no big deal, which is my whole point. What I get fed up with is UK GL's and those in amity constantly being picked on by members from other obediences regarding their regulations. We (UK amity lodges), are constantly the brunt of having accusations thrown at them regarding who we allow to join our lodges, ie, women. If would be better for all round if everyone concentrated on promoting their own constitution and stopped worrying about others. Nowhere did I say that I, or my constitution, was better than anyone else. No Going around in circles , My advice for those who have a bee in their bonnet about the whole recognition thing, is for them to forget about it and put that energy into getting their own part of the ritual, required of them at their next lodge meeting - ref Nowhere did I say that I, or my constitution, was better than anyone else. You certainly didn't - your postings and Middlepillars are breaths of fresh air in this whole silly thread
|
|
|
Post by mrmason on Dec 4, 2009 7:54:39 GMT
Hi Whistler, When you say "Yep sure is" do you mean going round in circles or patronising. If it's the latter then I apologise. My post being is that there is no big deal, which is my whole point. What I get fed up with is UK GL's and those in amity constantly being picked on by members from other obediences regarding their regulations. We (UK amity lodges), are constantly the brunt of having accusations thrown at them regarding who we allow to join our lodges, ie, women. If would be better for all round if everyone concentrated on promoting their own constitution and stopped worrying about others. Nowhere did I say that I, or my constitution, was better than anyone else. No Going around in circles , My advice for those who have a bee in their bonnet about the whole recognition thing, is for them to forget about it and put that energy into getting their own part of the ritual, required of them at their next lodge meeting - ref Nowhere did I say that I, or my constitution, was better than anyone else. You certainly didn't - your postings and Middlepillars are breaths of fresh air in this whole silly thread Hi Whistler, Thanks for the clarification. your comments are appreciated
|
|
|
Post by assassin on Dec 4, 2009 15:17:01 GMT
You would think that the perfect form of masonry would just have everyone come running. Why hasn't this happened? This is not about recognition as has been made abundantly clear. There are many that could care less and there are others that wish to yell that they should be recognized by the same masonic bodies that they say are flawed.
Hassan ibn Sabbah
|
|
|
Post by letterorhalveit3 on Dec 4, 2009 16:10:39 GMT
Brad mentioned LDH members being threatened. While perhaps for slightly different reasons, this isnt particular to co-Masonry. Ive had someone drive by and scream obscenities as I stood outside my Lodge, a woman in a mom and pop grocery refuse to sell me the groceries I had selected and order me out of the store when she saw my ring and my family and I have been threatened with having our throats cut when I made a comment about a particularly ill-informed youtube Masonic "expose."
While I understand that the only way this relates to recognition is that I was exposed to this foolishness because I am a Freemason, but I think it illustrates that we are all Freemasons...male, female and co-Masonic. We take the same obligations and with some exceptions and some other variations, we work ritual based on the Hiramic legend.
I belong to a Lodge that 20 years ago had more than 5,000 Brethren and we now have less than 400. I think Freemasonry has bigger problems than nitpicking over who is a Mason and who isnt.
|
|
mgc
Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by mgc on Jan 29, 2010 3:44:28 GMT
i think the nitpicking is the problem..
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Jan 29, 2010 4:03:16 GMT
i think the nitpicking is the problem.. Oh touche ;D You need to post more that is for sure. I dig your pragmatic approach. Bravo!!
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jan 29, 2010 7:04:23 GMT
Perhaps the fact that Freemasonry for some time flung the doors open and ignored paying attention to getting quality candidates is when freemasonry (and every other fraternal or community in existence) was when the downhill trend began. Not selectively picking or 'nitpicking' the candidates to get the best rather than the biggest number was the problem. Individuals claiming to be Masons have in the past put upon and taken undue advantage of others. Their is much hardship caused by these types in and out of Freemasonry. Some would open their arms to such abusers. I would not.
Anderson certainly made no bones in his constitutions about examining those claiming to be Masons closely:
"BEHAVIOR toward a Strange BROTHER. You are cautiously to examine him, in such a Method as Prudence shall direct you, that you may not be impos’d upon by an ignorant, false Pretender, whom you are to reject with contempt and Derision, and beware of giving him any Hints of Knowledge."
Now, some will obviously disagree with Anderson.
As far as Freemasons from other observances, I treat them with respect until they treat me otherwise or seem to be disingenuous and not forthcoming in their conversation with me. Other than that, I take no issue with other observances. Why would I if I am unfamiliar with their organization? I would not 'communicate Masonically' (meaning in a tiled lodge or with information only other Freemasons should be privy to) with ANYONE who has not proven themselves to me, but of what I can speak I speak frankly and often with non-Masons about. I have met many men and women of different observances and had some very engaging and friendly conversations with them.
As for Freemasonry itself, the UGLE recognized lodges are seeing a slow but steady growth toward the positive. This seems to be the probable progression for the future.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Jan 29, 2010 11:18:56 GMT
Let us say that a person claiming to be a Freemason presents themselves at an LDH Temple and wishes to attend a Tyled Meeting. If they were not known to any of the Brethren present they would be asked to show their Masonic Passport which LDH Lodges issue to members, something like the Dues card in the USA. They would also be Proved by someone, probably a PM, able to do so, in the Degrees they claimed to have. If they were from an LDH Lodge they would be asked for the Mot Annuel which is issued from the Grand Lodge of LDH in the Zenith of Paris and changes every year. Were they from another Constitution recognised by LDH they would be asked to prove themsleves and if they had it with them to show their Grand Lodge Certificate or Diploma.
I hope this satisfies your query.
|
|
mgc
Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by mgc on Jan 29, 2010 17:14:01 GMT
there hasnt been enough nitpicking.. i understand some of the criteria have good reason, but if we could ignore the fluff and cut straight to the point, there would be a whole lot less of it.. u know what a person should be like in order to be eligible.. is that not enough?
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jan 29, 2010 18:55:53 GMT
there hasnt been enough nitpicking.. i understand some of the criteria have good reason, but if we could ignore the fluff and cut straight to the point, there would be a whole lot less of it.. u know what a person should be like in order to be eligible.. is that not enough? I think it is enough. I think any earnest, interested and eligible seeker should have their chance to apply. It should not be made easier and the investigations ought be more complete. All candidates should show willingness to do the work necessary. The more we water down Masonry the less it retains the basic tenets. It would be a good idea for the lodges to be pickier and seek out the best candidates. Unfortunately, this fell away with the shift toward making members rather than making Masons.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Jan 29, 2010 19:12:35 GMT
there hasnt been enough nitpicking.. i understand some of the criteria have good reason, but if we could ignore the fluff and cut straight to the point, there would be a whole lot less of it.. u know what a person should be like in order to be eligible.. is that not enough? I think it is enough. I think any earnest, interested and eligible seeker should have their chance to apply. It should not be made easier and the investigations ought be more complete. All candidates should show willingness to do the work necessary. The more we water down Masonry the less it retains the basic tenets. It would be a good idea for the lodges to be pickier and seek out the best candidates. Unfortunately, this fell away with the shift toward making members rather than making Masons. I agree. If the seeker isn't just as picky about the lodge that is never a good sign. Either way the vetting must been done before the seeker is admitted. Many times a lodge will admit someone then look to remove them later. That just is not fair anyway you slice it. Love and Light,
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Jan 29, 2010 19:18:54 GMT
Absolutely. It is only fair to the candidate, and I think the candidate should do his research as well. The investigation ought to be a two-way street with both the lodge and the candidate leaving informed as to what each is 'getting into'. When on an investigation committee, I try to give the candidate a reasonable amount of information while trying to discern the most I can about his character and interest level.
|
|