|
Post by middlepillar on Mar 27, 2007 20:37:41 GMT
I accept that Middlepillar has asked numerous Freemasons from masculine-only constitutions and found that most were opposed to the idea of altering their own rules to allow the inclusion of women. In my personal experience, however, I must admit that it seems more the position described by Bill: apathy and dis-interest, combined with some concerns about the views of their spouses should 'competition' enter the Lodge they themselves have perhaps no interest in joining, and the need for appropriate alterations to the ritual in at the very least altering the preparation of the candidate. Jean Michael The slightly worrying thing from my own perspective is that a couple of the brothers I have had very long conversations with this about, are members of some of the esoteric Orders! Yet they still have this opinion that Co Masons are not 'real'. And yes I stll do love them! Now I also see apathy like Bill does, but I must stress that I have actually spent a lot of time with several masons, some of whom I know extremely well, once I get through the normal stuff, including the jokes and the couldnt care less, I only get the fear, this is not a fear of dying or being hurt. It is a fear of the unknown, (If it isnt broke dont fix it) I know Tamrin is shouting It is, It is broken! Apathy yes, Not being bothered to even think about changing something they are comfortable with yes, but sit down and disect what you are being told, and ask why? I have only found a type of fear, fear of the unknown, fear of having to be 'uncomfortable' fear of change, fear of losing what they love (Maybe an irrational fear?). Maybe I am using the wrong word, I just cannot think of another one. I just know once you cut to the chase that is what is there. I must again re state my own view of this, I do not want to change, I believe all the GLs should stay as they are, I would just like to see mutual recognition and above all respect for the differences! I also absolutely love the fact that Tamrin is such a champion for the cause. Because even though I cannot be like him, I admire his stance very much. And this is so true; First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 27, 2007 21:34:49 GMT
Bros. Jean Michael and MiddlepillarMany thanks for your kind words.
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Mar 28, 2007 1:54:37 GMT
Bro MP - well said.
|
|
|
Post by Hubert (N. Z.) on Mar 28, 2007 5:42:21 GMT
jmd:
I agree with the sentiments that if we see wrong we should try to do something about it. Evidence here that many are now debating the issue of 21st Century ideaology and sexually separated organisations. It would all be just an amusement, if it wasn't for the expressed tenets of the Craft: Brotherly love, releif & truth. & in LDH Equality as well. We can only continue to show by our actions that no threat is either implied or proposed in agitating for a 'Union' of sorts, as was obviously the case when the 'Antients' & 'Moderns' combined!
--------------
lihin,
Just because a few authors suggest the Theosophical Society, is other than it is does not make it true. Blavatsky set out to Enlighten a darkened world with previously 'esoteric' (hidden) knowledge. This was in by "discussion & lectures". No religious "service' was ever established, tho' for a while there were TS schools, and young persons' groupings to instill moral ideals in the young (mainly member's children) ~ hence the 'Round Table' etc which was actually modelled on Masonic principles and taught by a system of 'ritual plays'. The modern TS is certainly not a religious organisation, as they readily point members to 'Kindred' groups. These groups have their own independant 'Bodies' complete with non TS adherents.
To accuse any person of bringing in 'Outside' influences into whatever current Organisation they follow, would condem the whole of humanity to only ONE organisation per individual per lifetime!
I really think we should discuss Freemasonry here rather than other organisations clouding issues.
Cheers, Hubert
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 28, 2007 23:30:43 GMT
I really think we should discuss Freemasonry here rather than other organisations clouding issues. These words made me think of soup! Freemasonry is the soup and persons with other organisational backgrounds being the individual ingredients. Each brings its own flavour to the broth. An important step in soup making is clarifying it at the end. All the ingredients are still there, but the unwanted cloudy bits which are not absorbed by the broth are skimmed of and discarded. Maat
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 29, 2007 0:27:07 GMT
Re Theosophy - I have read my way through their vast library over the past 30 years. The number of books written by actual theosophical authors comprise only a minute part of the library, the rest of the vast collection come from 'everywhere' and is kept up to date with the very latest the world has to offer including books on scientific discoveries, agricultural practices, health modalities, etc. They do also have books on peoples personal experiences, including communication with those who have passed over, alien abductions, prophetic dreams/vision etc. Theosophists tend not to laugh at anybody, they stop and listen to all stories and then decide for themselves what might be 'real' or not. Which - reminds me of one of my favourite Nasruding stories.... Whom do you trustA neighbour comes to the gate of Nasreddin Hoja's yard. The Hoja goes out to meet him outside. "Would you mind, Hoja," the neighbour asks, "lending me your donkey today? I have some goods to transport to the next town." The Hoja doesn't feel inclined to lend out the animal to that particular man, however; so, not to seem rude, he answers: "I'm sorry, but I've already lent him to somebody else." Suddenly the donkey can be heard braying loudly behind the wall of the yard. "You lied to me, Hoja!" the neighbour exclaims. "There it is behind that wall!" "What do you mean?" the Hoja replies indignantly. "Whom would you rather believe, a donkey or your Hoja?" (What would you rather believe, a Truth which might make you feel uncomfortable or a Lie?) There were no religious services etc, only discussion groups of a philosophical nature, which tend to go round in circles after a while, just like this or any other Forum . The books and contacts at the TS led me to Freemasonry and the books from the library revealed, for me, the keys to understanding it. The picture is so clear I cannot understand why others cannot see it ! The TS or any other teaching or organisation can be judged by the amount of light they bring to the world - regardless of the personalities who founded them. Bit like Freemasonry really. Maat
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Mar 29, 2007 3:43:34 GMT
>Freemasonry is the soup and persons with other organisational backgrounds being the individual ingredients. Each brings its own flavour to the broth.
Long ago when I belonged to AMORC my wife told me her dream about the local lodge. It was a soup kitchen. Many people came for soup but few wanted to know how it was made
About a year later, a friend in the lodge dreamed that she had folded up the temple and put it on her back and taken it away. (see my comment on lodge energies for the folding and unfolding of the lodge)
Cheers
Russell
|
|
|
Post by hopefulmason on May 22, 2007 15:23:16 GMT
Maat.....I like the soup anology. Well put!
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on May 23, 2007 1:10:00 GMT
I wonder if there is not some assumption underlying the traditionalist position and that is that Masonry is a human institutions for and by humans - and hence arbitrary in its makeup
Another view however is that Masonry is inspired by an entity veiled by the name of Great Architect of the Universe - from whom we invoke a blessing when we open the lodge
Could it be that the Great Architect has a plan for creation?
If so, perhaps the GAOTU has some view about how Masonry should be conducted and for what ends
Could it be that our relationship with the GAOTU is a 2 way street?
Cheers
Russell
|
|
giovanni
Member
odi profanum vulgus, et arceo
Posts: 2,627
|
Post by giovanni on May 23, 2007 5:19:36 GMT
Russell,
I didn't understand what is a 2 way street. Can you elaborate, please?
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on May 23, 2007 6:02:41 GMT
Giovanni
"2 way street" is slang for a 2 way relationship. Thus if we are so bold to invoke a blessing from the Great Architect then the GA may expect something in return from us
And what might that be?
Well generally we do not think about it, and happily conduct Masonry in our own image and likeness rather than in the image and likeness of the Great Architect
Cheers
Russell
|
|
|
Post by todddrew on May 23, 2007 16:59:44 GMT
namaste' indeed Brother Russell.
This is another perfect example of half truths.
In the movie/ dvd "The Secret" (which I liked by the way) they talked a lot about what you can recieve from the universe however it did not mention if there was anything that had to be given back in return. It has been my experience that with every-thing there is a cost.
" The Lord Giveth and the Lord Taketh away. "
n' -td
|
|
|
Post by maat on May 24, 2007 1:05:02 GMT
To whom much is given, much is expected?!
|
|
|
Post by thesixthnapoleon on Jul 21, 2007 4:27:42 GMT
Here are two cents from a Southern American Entered Apprentice.
In my heart, I personally respect and encourage comasonry and female-only Masonry.
I also want very much to see a unification of Prince Hall Masonry and our "mainstream" Grand Lodge in my home state of South Carolina.
That said, it may surprise you to know that I simply, without much in the way of rational defence, prefer my "Malecraft" Lodge. I'm not sure what it is that appeals to me about it, and I don't know that I should have to supply a structured, rhetorical defense of it. I just like it the way it is.
I am a business owner, and in my city there are business networking events for women only. I've spoken to ladies who attend these events, and they simply describe it as a fun night out with other women, where they can dress up fancy and meet other female entrepeneurs and business leaders and drink wine and eat good food. Doesn't bother me a bit, even though there is a real, tangible benefit to their meetings (namely, social networking and business dealings) that I will never be privy to. It's "their thing," and who am I to try to butt my way in?
To each their own, and thank God for our differences!
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jul 21, 2007 4:44:33 GMT
That said, it may surprise you to know that I simply, without much in the way of rational defence, prefer my "Malecraft" Lodge. I'm not sure what it is that appeals to me about it, and I don't know that I should have to supply a structured, rhetorical defense of it. I just like it the way it is. I am not surprised. I've heard this sentiment expressed by many Malecraft Masons. I've heard similiar sentiments expressed by Femalecraft and Co-Masons concerning their own prefered type of Masonry. I also have no desire to suggest you should do otherwise. Or to try to defer you from your path. The forced integration of Malecraft lodges, and Femalecraft lodges, is, to me, completely, and utterly, wrong. It would be as bad as forcing Co-Masonic lodges to segregate. Likewise, I know of no Femalecraft Mason or Co-mason who would do so. However, Malecraft Masons are not always so kind. There are Malecraft lodges, Femalecraft lodges and Co-Masonic lodges. We know it *can* work this way, largely because it does. Those who prefer Malecraft Masonry have that option. In spades. Those who prefer Femalecraft or Co-Masonry . . . well, that often is made difficult but it's there. Aside from not continuing to make things difficult, I see no reason at all to change this system. This sounds like fun and I, do indeed, enjoy a night out with the girls. However, I can't imagine you'd really equate your time in lodge and your journey in Masonry as simply a night out with the guys. If you did, I cannot imagine why you'd bother going to lodge or advancing daily in Masonry. Seems to me there is something you would miss if you didn't go to lodge or continue on your path. If this be so, perhaps there's something the majority of women, called to Freemasonry, would miss as well, if they were and truly barred from Masonry. Why is it some Freemasons think it's OK to block a woman's access to Femalecraft lodges, and men's and women's access to Co-Masonic lodges, but not so OK block the men from Malecraft Masonry? Is it possible that blocking anyone from Masonry is wrong now, has always been wrong, and will always be wrong? Indeed so. I'm glad you feel this way ;D
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 21, 2007 4:59:44 GMT
I am reminded of an astute comment by Bro. JMD under "Freemasonic Regularity," Reply #87: I personally cannot agree with "There exists today Freemasonry for men, Freemasonry for women and mixed Freemasonry, so the UGLE’s wish not to admit women is hardly relevant is it?"... I suppose, the above quote has the exact equivalence to my ears were I to hear a GL say: "There exists today Freemasonry for whites, Freemasonry for blacks and mixed Freemasonry, so this GL’s wish not to admit blacks is hardly relevant is it?" BTW, elsewhere this quote was taken, perhaps disingenuously, to be an accusation of racism. On the contrary, it relies on readers NOT being racist so as to appreciate the analogy.
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Jul 21, 2007 5:38:30 GMT
Ah, Bro. Philip, it's where you and I diverge, and I'm sorry for it. We could get into it, I suppose. I could point out that racial integration was/has/is being achieved (in sensible jurisdictions anyway) without destroying anyone's traditions and that gender does not exactly square with race but . . . We've also discussed this difference, before, on these pages. I can't imagine either of us has anything new to add. I would not dream of changing you and I would hope you would grant me the same courtesy. I'm hoping we can just agree to disagree about it
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 21, 2007 6:31:04 GMT
Indeed my Brother,We must it seems agree to differ on whether or not the otherwise tolerant and inclusive principles of Freemasonry do or do not not support exclusion on the basis of gender. Your comparison of gender discrimination with that of race is an apt one. I could point out that racial integration was/has/is being achieved (in sensible jurisdictions anyway) without destroying anyone's traditions and that gender does not exactly square with race but . . . 1. There were indeed many who felt their traditions would be destroyed (and perhaps feel it has) by the abolition of Apartheid and elsewhere by the introduction of busing. 2. When one comes down to the core principles of discrimination, I am not at all sure how gender and race are so different. This is what I would like to hear—A defense of the present system based on principles and especially on Masonic principles, rather than on gut feelings, comfort zones and individual preferences. You are of course entitled to your opinion but, at present, that is all it is, "opinion." Your opinion does not place you on the side of the angels and mine is not, as you have previously said it is, "evil." Until, I am convinced otherwise and while ever there is a single, worthy woman wanting to join a convenient lodge, which presently happens to exclude her solely on the basis of gender, I stand ready to support her.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Jul 21, 2007 10:52:48 GMT
Firstly, the whole idea of Groupthink makes me shudder! Since childhood I have always been an Individualist who as far as is legally and practically possible makes his own decisions. The idea of having to unthinkingly toe a party line is distasteful to me. Also when I read the word "Groupthink" I visualise brownshirted mobs throwing books on a bonfire, blue tunic wearing mobs waving a little red book, the orchestrated "spontaneous" street demonstrations of loyalty to their "Beloved Leader and Great Helmsman" in North Korea etc. Roads down which I hope I never have to travel.
Now to make my own position clear. I was in UGLE, over the years I became very disillusioned with it for various reasons. I then discovered through Fora such as this and some of the posters thereon the existence of Co-Masonry in Le Driot Humain. After due examination and meeting with various Co-Masons and seeing things first-hand for myself I resigned from UGLE and all the various Orders and Bodies associated therewith and became a Co-Mason, a version of the Great Family of Freemasonry Universal which was far more suited to me and to which I was in turn more attuned.
Now as far as I am concerned a Freemason is a Freemason and I accept Bros Chris (Middlepillar), Karen, Cora, Russell, Bill etc, etc, etc, as being such. That in some cases the Rules of our respective GLs and Obediences prevent our sitting together in a Tyled Lodge is sad, but it does not prevent me calling then all Brother.
Whilst acknowledging that we are all Masons I would NOT wish to see a one size fits all Craft. If Malecraft wishes to remain Men Only , fair play to them and likewise to HFAF and OWF which are Female only Freemasonry. For my part I do not want a shotgun marriage between UGLE and LDH, if such an idea was remotely possible, given the differences - over and above the obvious- between the two types of Freemasonry. There is sufficient room in the World of Freemasonry to cater for Mixed, Female Only and Male Only variants .
I would add that, as with any contentious matter, the opinions stated herein are purely personal to myself and in no way are to be taken as those of my Masonic Obedience.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 21, 2007 12:37:07 GMT
Firstly, the whole idea of Groupthink makes me shudder! Since childhood I have always been an Individualist who as far as is legally and practically possible makes his own decisions. The idea of having to unthinkingly toe a party line is distasteful to me. Also when I read the word "Groupthink" I visualise brownshirted mobs throwing books on a bonfire, blue tunic wearing mobs waving a little red book, the orchestrated "spontaneous" street demonstrations of loyalty to their "Beloved Leader and Great Helmsman" in North Korea etc. Roads down which I hope I never have to travel. Bro. LauderdaleWelcome back, I value your contributions. I too am averse to Groupthink. However, the term as used here has a specific meaning somewhat different to the meaning you appear to be reading into it. Here it refers to a particular type of dysfunctional group decision making, rather than to the mentality of a mob.
|
|