bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Jun 7, 2005 22:52:37 GMT
Yeah - but I thought we were talking theoretically - following your idea through of GL's allowing individual lodges to decide who they let in, I'm aware of the current situation, and know the issues it raises, but wanted to explore the theoretical a bit more.
|
|
|
Post by Yoki on Jun 9, 2005 3:28:06 GMT
I can not but help wonder if fear plays a part in UGLE stance not to allow visitations to lodges outside their administration. In other words are they frightened of some sort of exoduses should members experience alternatives?
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Jun 9, 2005 9:12:41 GMT
Yoki Yes, I think so. The so-called Basic Principles were re-established in 1929. There was a nice speech about the reasons from a German Bro. Mike Harscheidt. In this year Labour won the first GE in Britain and made the first PM. Much more Women recieved the right of vote and being elected for this GE. The Empire Conference reduced influence of the Westminster Parliament on Dominions, the gold standard was taken down and so on.
Harscheidt wrote that the basic principles were a orthodox reaction, a backslash of the Duke of Connaught as GM to hold up the imperial glance of Britain and the Old-Boys-Network via FM, in a time, where social changes came up througout british empire, the whole world.
I found the speech quite interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Temple on Jun 12, 2005 1:19:17 GMT
I bet there's more than a few members of male only masonry who live in fear of their wives discovering that co-masonry even exists ;D
I think that us girls just have to accept that there are many reasons for the continuation of male only Masonry. Some of them may not even be related to booze-ups, fat cigars and lapdancing clubs.
Personally, I'm not fussed. I will treat any Freemason I meet with respect and as long as I'm treated with equal respect, I'm perfectly happy with how things are. I'm also quite relieved there's more than one choice. No way could I afford the UGLE lifestyle.
|
|
|
Post by sanjosekt on Jun 13, 2005 2:13:15 GMT
Here is my take on why visitation won't be allowed at least in the US. If Male only masons were to allow visitation from the male members of co masonry, we would the be open for the litigation that would follow on by women that felt they were being denied equal opportunity. And in the US courts the way the currently stand that argument would win and we would be forced to open our doors to women. So in order to avoid that from happening, we exclude both from co masonry.
I think that lots of lodges would be open to visitation, if it didn't have the long term effect of destroying our current lodges as constituted.
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Jun 13, 2005 10:24:28 GMT
I bet there's more than a few members of male only masonry who live in fear of their wives discovering that co-masonry even exists ;D Err, I think you would be very suprised at the number of male only masons who's wives are active freemasons in their own right (or should that be rite??)
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jun 15, 2005 2:45:28 GMT
Brethren
I wonder whether the real question is whether TGAOTU recognises a lodge or not. Perhaps that is the real test of regularity.
In that case there might be lodges where TGAOTU has withdrawn the warrant but the earthly GL has not.
I hear there are churches that claim to make law that binds in heaven as well as on earth. A pretty optimistic claim in my view. I would not like Masonry to take the same path.
Cheers
Russell
|
|
|
Post by kizzy on Jun 15, 2005 4:51:05 GMT
"Where were you first prepared to be made a Freemason?" The stock answer to this is "In my Heart". Therefore if a person has come to that decision then they are a Mason, (Stewart Edwards being such), although it would take Initiation into a Lodge to formalise that situation.
Russell is correct that as we meet in the Name of TGAOTU and invoke that Deity then Recognition thereby transcends that of Mankind, but of course we can never know the mind of the Almighty.
As far as I am aware NO Masonic Authority has ever presumed to make any Rule binding on Heaven as on Earth, and I for one would want no part of any man-made body, be it a Grand Lodge or Church which claimed it could do so.
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Jun 15, 2005 6:26:40 GMT
Err, I think you would be very suprised at the number of male only masons who's wives are active freemasons in their own right (or should that be rite??) Sorry to be off topic but me wife has her own rite or right and that being the type that always means i am wrong ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by waynecowley on Jun 15, 2005 8:09:15 GMT
Sorry to be off topic but me wife has her own rite or right and that being the type that always means i am wrong ;D ;D Don't I know that feeling Wayne
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Jun 15, 2005 12:51:07 GMT
"And in the US courts the way the currently stand that argument would win and we would be forced to open our doors to women." I do not understand this topic, sanjosekt. I appreciate that we can treat and meet each other as brethren in this forum. These fears might not be yours but why do these occur? If your topic would be true, why is there nobody in Co-Masonry to apply the Supreme Court for being allowed to enter male-only lodges? Because nobbody wants to. Nobody wants to enter male-only lodges and to "overthrow" men-only masonry. Our great desire is that brethren who WANT to visit OUR lodges will not persecuted or expelled from their lodges. Chain of union! Worldwide ;D
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jun 16, 2005 20:12:30 GMT
Masonic lodges are classed as private clubs, and so are their premises. No-one can limit or control membership of any clubs unless such clubs have been declared criminal organisations. So there will never be a successful action claiming sexual discrimination by a Masonic lodge, as they are not covered by the proper legislation.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Jun 17, 2005 8:06:06 GMT
I feel it would be counterproductive to force Men Only Masonic Lodges to admit women by the power of the Law of the Land, which as Ruff says would need to be changed to do so. Far better that those Lodges which wished to were permitted to admit women or at least allow Co-masons to attend, while those which didn't could maintain the current situation, such matters being left to a free vote by the Members of that Lodge.
Will this happen in my lifetime (I'm 52)? I doubt it! There is as much chance in that timescale as the RC Church recognising Anglican Holy Orders as valid and permitting inter-communion between members of both Churches.
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Jun 17, 2005 10:12:08 GMT
Steve Maybe we should wish a common enemy arise like the Nazis or the Communists or hardcore Mullahs like in Turkey maybe fremasons would stand together then.... ;D
|
|
giovanni
Member
odi profanum vulgus, et arceo
Posts: 2,627
|
Post by giovanni on Jun 17, 2005 11:18:39 GMT
Steve Maybe we should wish a common enemy arise like the Nazis or the Communists or hardcore Mullahs like in Turkey maybe fremasons would stand together then.... ;D take it easy, Ingo, they're coming....
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Jun 17, 2005 13:28:47 GMT
Don't be too eager to foretell the future, Steve: those words may return to haunt you >
|
|
|
Post by generalpike on Jun 18, 2005 12:38:45 GMT
Steve Maybe we should wish a common enemy arise like the Nazis or the Communists or hardcore Mullahs like in Turkey maybe fremasons would stand together then.... ;D Can I just point out it didn't happen the last time! GP
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Jun 21, 2005 21:02:54 GMT
General Pike Thats right. German male-only masonry tried the nationalist way, to arrange itself with the nazis.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jun 21, 2005 21:30:14 GMT
The more that I learn about this the more facinating it becomes.
As I currently understand matters, as Ingo explained, the male only frats aligned themselves with the Natzis, changes the ritual/everything to fit in, but were persecuted anyway, while the comasons fought in the resistance.
Though clearly my knowledge here may be wrong.
Also someone recently pointed out on forum somewhere that one of the French frats and the US frats came to some sort of agreement to allow visitation during the war. The needs of brotherhood and Freemasonry universal outweighed fraternal differences.
But I can't locate this post to check this, so I may be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by generalpike on Jun 21, 2005 22:30:43 GMT
As I currently understand matters, as Ingo explained, the male only frats aligned themselves with the Natzis, changes the ritual/everything to fit in, but were persecuted anyway, while the comasons fought in the resistance. I think that most German Freemasons would find your last comments inflammatory and insulting. German Freemasons were snet to concentration camps during the Nazis reign in germany. This is taken from a quite recent paper on the subject "In 1935 shortly after Hitler’s brutal rise to power in Germany, it became evident that Freemasonry itself was in very real danger as he outlawed all masonic organisations not under the direct control of the Third Reich and dissolved the ten German Grand Lodges. He declared that all masonic lodges had engaged in subversive acts against the state, confiscated all lodge properties. Many prominent dignitaries and members of the Order were sent to concentration camps. The Gestapo seized membership lists of the Grand Lodges and looted libraries and collections of masonic objects. (Much of this masonic “loot” went on to form the basis of Goebbels’ "Anti-Masonic Exposition" held in Munich in 1937, it even included completely furnished masonic temples.) The Nazi Party ordered the words "Freemason" and "Lodge" to be discontinued and international Masonic relations to cease. The irregular Grand Lodge of the Three Globes became the "National Christian Order of Frederick the Great." Dr. Otto Bordes, its "grand master" agreed that masonic ceremonial would not be practised, and members would not be made Freemasons. They worked several "degrees" based on the "Aryan" myth. According to some researchers, there were approximately 70,000 Freemasons of good standing in Germany at the time. It is rumoured that Eichmann “secretly” issued orders that every single one should be put to death. Needless to say, these rumours also claim that in the region of 65,000 German brethren met their untimely deaths on the strength of these orders and that the remaining 5,000 (as for some reason their names were not listed in the books of their Grand Lodge) escaped and went underground. " Not even close to how you put it but I can see how the mistake could be made if no research is carried out.. GP
|
|