|
Post by maximus on Oct 13, 2008 12:58:19 GMT
This discussion is getting tedious.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 13, 2008 13:55:02 GMT
OK , after you then. .......... I will do my best Run that past me again, "if it is accepted it does not make it so". ?? from : www.droit-humain.org/In the 18th century, two events were to make the development of speculative masonry. - Firstly, a marked secularisation. It contained, according to the ideology of the Constitutions of Anderson, a base on which all men could agree: Deism, a kind of natural religion, free of all inhibition and seeking the happiness of everyone (Anderson is the author of the Constitution of Freemasons 1723 a fundamental work, based on masculine speculative Freemasonry). - Thereafter, a tendency for universality which showed itself through an approach towards the thoughts of the Enlightened, characterised by the respect for tolerance and fraternity. Now remind me was that the same Anderson that wrote the Constitution for 'Premier Grand Lodge of England' which resulted in the formation of the United Grand Lodge of England in 1813 and it was GOdF that changed that constitution. In 1877, on a proposal of the Protestant priest Frédéric Desmons at the convention of the GOdF, they removed references to the Great Architect of the Universe (GAOTU) from their Constitution. How am I doing so far. Well if I don't have the right to ask 'if it was a right thing to do', what and why are we talking about it. It does not make sense to have a subject and not understand why the subject came to where it is now. Why does a Grand Lodge recognise another Grand lodge, to support it ? to give it some legitimacy ? surely. To give it credibility , to have open intervisitation, and why is this important and why in somebody else's Country. I do not agree, we are on a public forum talking about something which to many of us is a challenge to "freemasonry" it is a fundamental universal point of respect or disrespect toward other Freemasons. My GL does not recognise yours, my GL does not recognise my Italian friends GL, it does not recognise GOdF. Do I think less of any Freemason because of that? no not at all, we still care about what happens to each others Freemasonry, there is absolutely no reason why there can not be various Freemasonic Groups with different principles. It just means we have a different Lodge structure. We meet and we talk openly and in numbers, we even find that some Females of non recognised GL's, win competitions organised by a UGLE Lodges. What we must have is respect for each other, that respect does not travel far if we find Lodges trying to co-opt members away from their current GL does it. I have been a Freemason for about the same amount of time as Bro. Steve. In that time I have never heard a UGLE Freemason say a bad word about Female Freemasons, never a bad word about Co Masons. So why do the Co Masons insist on criticism of UGLE is a complete mystery to me, there is no animosity in UGLE that I have witnessed toward other forms of Freemasonry. What I will resist and I believe that 95% of all Freemasons will resist is a FREE for ALL. It would be an open door for the truly Clandestine, the Crooks and Con Man who would use that open door for their own purposes. It will not be allowed to happen.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 13, 2008 13:57:09 GMT
This discussion is getting tedious. Maybe another photo of that chastity belt. Of course this is purely voluntary, no one is forced to read.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Oct 13, 2008 15:23:06 GMT
Maybe another photo of that chastity belt. Good idea. Psst...Russell, how 'bout them bees?
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Oct 13, 2008 16:20:33 GMT
Not tedious so much as both threads have reached their present conclusion. I, for one, am content that Bro. Architekt has answered the questions put to him as best he can. And he hurled a challenge to the gods in the process. I'm content to wait for it. And, until the topic has aged a bit more, duck out of both threads
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Oct 13, 2008 22:21:49 GMT
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.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Oct 14, 2008 6:54:22 GMT
In fact 99% no nothing about such matters or that there are other 'brands' of Masonry. And I feel that as this changes, and more and more become aware of women in Freemasonry the more "normal" it will be. Even today there is greater awareness than just a few short years ago, imagine then what level this will be in a few generations from now. In fact, each and every time these discussions come up on fora such as this we are bringing more understanding about women in the Craft. The Internet is a most wonderful tool.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 8:01:25 GMT
Co-existence without confrontation is the answer. Live and let live. Some recent forum comments would have us believe that where mainstream Freemasonry has regarded co-masonry and female masonry at all it has been benign. Not so. I have posted the minutes of UGLE's mocking debates from the 1920's, I have spoken to women masons, who described the pressures their mainstream husband were under to dissuade them. I received advice from my Grand Registrar at the time (writing in that capacity, 11 May 2000), saying, " ...part of the discipline of being a Freemason who is member of a ‘regular’ Grand Lodge ... includes firm opposition to ‘Co-masonry’." As Gandhi said: " First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." He seems to have left out the stage where they propose co-existence without confrontation (after have confronted just that possibility).
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 8:30:48 GMT
The 1920's is not the present. Nevertheless, it is part of the relevant history. The letter I received (UGL NSW & ACT) was in 2000 and the experience of ladies I spoke to was in-between. This latest position taken by UGLE would seem to go not even as far as current community norms, towards redressing its previous stance.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 8:45:28 GMT
Except that these bodies admit women, they are, so far as can be ascertained, otherwise regular in their practice. That is a huge "Except": In other words if not for the women, they would be regular!?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 8:50:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by parisfred on Oct 14, 2008 8:53:52 GMT
if 90% percent of male masons don't know about all the co-masons, Go's and other liberal, theosophist, atheist Freemasons why worry ? You don't have to fear that "others" will change your freemasonry: it won't happen.You should be more relaxed and try, if the subject interest you of course, to understand other type of freemasonry. It often lead us to know more about ourself, our masonic path and also... make new friends. I am more tolerant now than a few years ago thanks to masonry but also to forum as this one and brethren that I learn to listen to, and not only judge or confront.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Oct 14, 2008 9:02:49 GMT
For once I agree with you Philip. I always thought that statement by UGLE to be a bit pious and twee. Women's Freemasonry being "Regular" except that it admits WOMEN! There's a paradox to tax even a philosopher such as yourself.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 9:18:51 GMT
Can a woman visit her husband's lodge or visa versa, to participate in each other's masonic milestones?
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Oct 14, 2008 10:07:32 GMT
Philip, UGLE and the other GLs in Amity on the one hand and here in England the two Women Only Gls (OWF and HFAF) expressly forbid any Intervistation and neither side wish it anyway. Indeed although there are many UGLE Masonic Halls which are hired out to Women Only Lodges there are strict rules that Male Masons are not present and vice versa at the other's Meetings.
However, I am well aware that there are couples who are in their respective Lodges be they UGLE or HFAF who help each other learn their Rituals etc. Indeed, some years ago when I was in UGLE I went to a pub owned by a Mason who's wife was also a Mason in HFAF. I was sitting in the bar with my Ritual Book waiting for him to come back from a Meeting when she came over to me and asked me what I was learning. Knowing her to be On the Square, indeed a Past Master of her Lodge, I told her The Obligation in the Third , she then sat down and went through it with me in a very competent manner. (I would add that the Lounge Bar was empty at the time).
So there is more cooperation albeit at grass roots level between UGLE Brethren and their Female Masonic relatives and friends that the Powers that Be may think.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Oct 14, 2008 10:37:39 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.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 14, 2008 11:02:00 GMT
There is absolutely no reason why a UGLE Lodge could not have a White Table Festive Board and invite Female and Co Masons to the meal. In the same way as Wives , friends etc can be invited to the same festive board.. The white table just ceases to be part of the Lodge ritual. It was imakegarb by the way who won the prize, I know she is too shy to say anything.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 14, 2008 11:20:11 GMT
architeck is just giving you more or less what I have said on this forum many times, he is right in my opinion.
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.
The truth is simple the vast majority of UGLE Freemasons do not know there is Co Masonry and don't much care.
Why is it do you think we very rarely hear of Women Freemasons complaining about UGLE, cant say it does not happen , but I have never heard or seem it myself.
Yet I know many UGLE Masons who's wives are in HFAF. And proud of it.
So this argument that UGLE is anti female in Masonry, just does not hold water.
|
|
|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 11:34:48 GMT
... So there is more cooperation albeit at grass roots level between UGLE Brethren and their Female Masonic relatives and friends that the Powers that Be may think. I think the powers that be know what goes on alright. Certainly when "Spenny" Northampton has presented an award at a meeting in England to a lady Mason who lives in the USA. Oh, he has done more than that. He greeted us like Brothers should, and he publicly endorsed the points so meticulously presented by said lady -- who is actually a co-mason. I believe you have, er, "met".
|
|
|
Post by corab on Oct 14, 2008 11:36:47 GMT
In England there is no discrimination - there is plenty of choice for women who want to become Freemasons. About that we are certainly in agreement, and I very firmly support the current "tri-partite" system.
|
|