Grand Lodge of Arkansas dictates upon Shrinedom

[widows son]

How could the Shriners be shriners without being masons? Hasn't the shrine always been a Masonic organization? And arent their rituals Masonic, which would make a non mason not eligible to receive them? I'm not a Shriner so im just inquiring.

 

[sands67]

This is a bad situation...period. i have read about the case and I can see where this is nothing more than a pissing contest. It does appear that this decision was more politically motivated than anything. It is my understanding that the potentate actually stepped down and took a demit from the Shrine and the GL of Arkansas still wont change its mind. At each Imperial things are voted on by Shriners who are Masons. I have read here several times that The Imperial has tried to get the Masonic requirement dropped, but have never been able to find anything in writing on that. Is this just a Shriner myth or can someone produce something?

 

[DWSCHULZ]

All Grand Lodges are sovereign. Thus, Arkansas only applies within Arkansas.

I guess I was thinking a few moves ahead...ie: some Grand Master somewhere might be a Shriner who thinks the Arkansas Shriner was right and try to force the GLoA's, through non-recognition, to allow the Shriner to stay a Mason. I'm a Montana Mason but I live in Minnesota now. I remember several years ago when the Grand Lodge of Minnesota recognized some questionable Grand Lodge in France and 5-10 other Grand Lodges in the US threatened the Grand Lodge of Minnesota with non-recognition if they didn't resend recognition of the French Grand Lodge. The Grand Lodge of MN backed down but I think....I think the sitting Grand Master in MN that year was a Shriner and so on and so forth.

I am biased against the Shrine or either of the Rites that attempts to wag the dog instead of following dictates of the Grand Master...or I was until my Grand Master was removed. Past Grand's do make mistakes.

In a perfect world I would assume that the National Shrine body would impose their will upon the Shrine of Arkansas and require them to follow the dictates of the Grand Master of Arkansas. If the national Shrine body can't do that, then what good are they?

 

[MarkR]

I guess I was thinking a few moves ahead...ie: some Grand Master somewhere might be a Shriner who thinks the Arkansas Shriner was right and try to force the GLoA's, through non-recognition, to allow the Shriner to stay a Mason. I'm a Montana Mason but I live in Minnesota now. I remember several years ago when the Grand Lodge of Minnesota recognized some questionable Grand Lodge in France and 5-10 other Grand Lodges in the US threatened the Grand Lodge of Minnesota with non-recognition if they didn't resend recognition of the French Grand Lodge. The Grand Lodge of MN backed down but I think....I think the sitting Grand Master in MN that year was a Shriner and so on and so forth.

You probably ought to get more information on this before posting. It was not some "questionable" Grand Lodge, it was Grand Lodge of France, founded in 1728, which Minnesota voted to recognize simultaneously with the French National Grand Lodge, since it was the opinion of the Committee on External Relations that both were regular in their practices and that their fight with each other was not for Minnesota to decide. The Grand Master who was sitting for the period 2000-2001, when this recognition occurred, is as good a man and Mason as you could ever want to meet, and I don't see what his status as being or not being a Shriner has to do with any of this. The way you worded that last sentence makes it sound like there was some sinister connection (in all honesty, although I know the Most Worshipful Brother well from Scottish Rite, I don't know if he's a Shriner or not) and that his actions were somehow less than honorable.

His intention, and that of the Committee on External Relations, was honorable. The Grand Master who was sitting when Minnesota reversed itself has stated that they only did it because situations were arising where families were not allowed to attend lodge with each other when visiting other neighboring states due to suspended fraternal relations, and they simply wanted to end the strife.

You might want to note that now many Grand Lodges around the world have suspended fraternal relations with the French National Grand Lodge, and some are considering extending recognition to the older Grand Lodge of France now. French Freemasonry has been somewhat of a mess for some time, with three large Grand Lodges existing simultaneously, and the one with the most members, the Grand Orient of France, is recognized by almost no one.

 

[sands67]

Exactly...what does being a Shriner have to do with it. I have read time and time again remarks about Shriners from some on here and not always in a positive light. For those who seem to forget Shriners are Masons. Please remember your five points of fellowship before slighting them so quickly.

 

[widows son]

The Shriners I knows are a great group of guys, I just hope this is all over soon.

 

[Custer148]

Exactly...what does being a Shriner have to do with it. I have read time and time again remarks about Shriners from some on here and not always in a positive light. For those who seem to forget Shriners are Masons. Please remember your five points of fellowship before slighting them so quickly.

Custer148

Re: Grand Lodge of Arkansas dictates upon Shrinedom
I don't want to see this --- I know that Imperial Shrine for a couple of years has been trying to do away with the requirement of a man having to be a Master Mason in order to become a Shriner, this may be the push that is necessary for them to be successful. Still, if the Arkansas Grand Lodge still says that Arkansas MMs may not be Shriners, it would be a moot point at best. ​

If my above post in this thread was included in this remark, I apologize, I am a Shriner and as such do not want to offend anyone who may or may not be one. I have a really good friend who is a Past Potentate of Tehama Shrine, he and I have talked a lot and I really respect what it takes to be Potentate.

I second widows son and also hope this will be over soon.

 

[widows son]

Do you guys really think they would do away with the requirement of being a master mason? To me I would make no sense if they did.

 

[Traveling Man]

Do you guys really think they would do away with the requirement of being a master mason? To me I would make no sense if they did.

Yes, I think it's just a matter of time. They don't have the financial resources (endowments, etc.) that they used to have to support their charities, it's a shame too. If you think Freemasonry cannot replenish their membership rolls, look at the Shrine it's in worse shape. Why do you think they waivered the YR & SR requirements? It's sad but the reality of this modern society. I also think that's the underlying purpose of the "all the way in one day" phenomenon we see presently. The re-investments that were used to enhance the endowment funds no longer have the yields they used to have. These funds have reach the point of diminished returns, where else can they turn?

 

[widows son]

I understand. But aret their ritual etc that only a MM would and should only know? I wouldn't know, I'm not in the shrine or familiar with its workings.

 

[Traveling Man]

I understand. But aret their ritual etc that only a MM would and should only know? I wouldn't know, I'm not in the shrine or familiar with its workings.

Yes you're quite right about the (Obligations) rituals but I could see "associate membership" a philanthropic type membership where there doesn't need the Masonic requirement. Like I said they have dropped the YR & SR prerequisite; one has to wonder, what next?

 

[Brother JC]

The rituals aren't "masonic," any more than the rituals of the Eagles, Elks, Meese, et cetera ad nuaseum are. They could easily open membership to the general public.

If Freemasonry's numbers are dwindling, the Shrine is being hit harder. A smaller pool, and a number within that pool who aren't interested. I've even heard rumours of Shrine Clubs wanting to give free memberships to new MMs, hoping to boost next year's dues.

 

[DWSCHULZ]

It was not my intent to slight anyone. The French Grand Lodge in question was clearly "questionable" per the reaction the Grand Lodge of Minnesota received from several other American Grand Lodges. Just because someone is a member of the governing body of an American Grand Lodge does not place their actions beyond question or comment. My point in bringing up the event concerning the Grand Lodge of Minnesota was that governing members of Grand Lodges make mistakes regardless of how long ago their Grand Lodge was founded. And that sometimes their mistakes seem to be rooted in their affiliation with other bodies such as the Shrine. The notion is not at all as unbelievable as you make it out to be. I've seen it happen several times and in several jurisdictions, including my own.

 

[sands67]

What I sometimes see is that Shriner's sometimes forget they are masons when in a Shrine meeting or other function. If we brought it back so that people remember the basic ideals of being a Mason than the Shrine membership would take care of itself. I have worked hard in my lodge and hard as a Shriner as to me one is just part of the cause for the other. I do it not for recognition, but for the ideals of being a Mason and the cause of being a Mason who helps kids by being a Shriner. Freemasonry is supposed to make good men better men and to me being a Shriner is just a part of that experience. That is why I get bothered when I hear rumblings of Masons (Shriners ) at the Imperial forgetting their roots and politics getting between Masons on the lodge side. Where are the better men coming from if we cannot fix our own house? Why would anyone want to join with this stuff going on? Pressure must be brought to bear on the GLoA and Shriners to get this worked out ASAP. Since it cannot be done by Masons in Arkansas since the GM there has "outlawed" even discussing Shrinedom it seems that other Grand Lodges should be doing this while at the same time telling the Shrine to get back to the table. This should not be allowed to carry on any further as it is easy to see the damage it is causing when even I am hearing talk of it in Eastern Canada.

 

[MarkR]

It was not my intent to slight anyone. The French Grand Lodge in question was clearly "questionable" per the reaction the Grand Lodge of Minnesota received from several other American Grand Lodges. Just because someone is a member of the governing body of an American Grand Lodge does not place their actions beyond question or comment. My point in bringing up the event concerning the Grand Lodge of Minnesota was that governing members of Grand Lodges make mistakes regardless of how long ago their Grand Lodge was founded. And that sometimes their mistakes seem to be rooted in their affiliation with other bodies such as the Shrine. The notion is not at all as unbelievable as you make it out to be. I've seen it happen several times and in several jurisdictions, including my own.

Again, I suggest that you find out more about it before judging. Most Minnesota brethren who pass around information about the incident know nothing more than rumors. The reaction of the other U.S. Grand Lodges had a lot more to do with international Masonic politics than it did anything about the Grand Lodge of France being "questionable."

Also, you make a connection that somehow being a Shriner had something to do with it, yet you give no indication why you would think that. As far as I know, the Shrine has no connection to France. I'm not a Shriner, but I just don't get why you make some connection to this incident. The PGM involved is a good friend, he was badly hurt by this incident, and for people to now try to cast some unsupported aspersion on him over a decade after the fact does anger me.

Give a look at this article about the politics involved in the three competing Grand Lodges in France, with a good explanation of what happened in Minnesota: http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/masonic_foreign_recognitions.html

 

[DWSCHULZ]

Again, I suggest that you find out more about it before judging. Most Minnesota brethren who pass around information about the incident know nothing more than rumors. The reaction of the other U.S. Grand Lodges had a lot more to do with international Masonic politics than it did anything about the Grand Lodge of France being "questionable."

Also, you make a connection that somehow being a Shriner had something to do with it, yet you give no indication why you would think that. As far as I know, the Shrine has no connection to France. I'm not a Shriner, but I just don't get why you make some connection to this incident. The PGM involved is a good friend, he was badly hurt by this incident, and for people to now try to cast some unsupported aspersion on him over a decade after the fact does anger me.

Give a look at this article about the politics involved in the three competing Grand Lodges in France, with a good explanation of what happened in Minnesota: http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/masonic_foreign_recognitions.html

Clearly I am being misunderstood with my analogy here. I am not attempting to smear anyone's good name. Let's forget the actions of Grand Lodge of Minnesota for a moment and I hope you can forgive me for bringing it up. If one brother makes a error in judgement aren't we suppose to whisper good council in his ear towards his reformation? I guess Shriners don't sit in positions of authority in Minnesota as they do elsewhere in the United States. I have personally witnessed Shriners who have sat as state Grand Masters make errors in judgement based upon their putting the increase of members of Shrinedom over all else. But you're right, that one does not have to be a member of Shrine to lose sight of the ancient landmarks, but it has been my experience that the two go hand in hand.

Personally, I agree with the Grand Master of Arkansas and I'm surprised the Shrine International doesn't apply pressure on the Shrine in Arkansas to get back in line.

 

[sands67]

It is my understanding, I do not know for certain, that the potentate which all of the issues are about did indeed step down from the Shrine.

 

[DWSCHULZ]

I know what the Grand Master decides in Arkansas, only applies to Arkansas Masonry...that is, until the Grand Master of South Carolina wants to throw his "two-cents" into the discussion. Know any other opinionated state Grand Masters? I don't think South Carolina will be the last.

 

[sands67]

A sad turn of events when they dont look at the situation and just make it black and white like this. It will be to the detriment of both Organizations.