Dontrell Stroman
Premium Member
Key word CONSIDER, that doesn't actually mean they are correct ?
Sent from my 831C using My Freemasonry Pro mobile app
Sent from my 831C using My Freemasonry Pro mobile app
My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Irregular Masonic Bodies Operating in Texas
- Thread starter Bro_Vick
- Start date
Bloke
Premium Member
An old saying, but since women can now be on the front line and die thete; we should probably send it the way of the dodo
There is no commonly accepted definition of the term "clandestine." Under their codes (and there are more than one who use this term when not in amity), they are correct.
Warrior1256
Site Benefactor
It certainly can get confusing!
Warrior1256
Site Benefactor
You're right, this certainly does simplify it.
"most" not all...!
As a former ruler inside a UGLE lodge, I decided, after considerable soul searching, that UGLE Freemasonry is at variants with my my religious, moral and principle beliefs in life. That is all I am prepared to reveal at this time. My reasons will become clear inside an international leading Masonic magazine who are covering my transition from UGLE to another Grand Lodge.
"Clandestine?" As May West once stated; 'frankly my dear I don't give a damn'
Yes, that's what I said. ??
1. Ruler. As I remember, you were a Master who felt unable to complete his term. I would not place great emphasis on having been a "ruler."
2. Clearly you do care, as shown by this and your many other posts on the subject.
3. To be clear, I have no problems with people joining unrecognized grand lodges. Regular Freemasonry is not a good fit for everyone. Indeed, not every regular lodge is a good fit for every regular Mason.
Last edited:
Dear. Dear Dear....typical UGLE response...!
Maybe but he made some valid points. You would have probably agreed with them in the past.
I never agreed with them in the past MRichard, but comments like that are generally from those that end with the letters UGLE in their 'sig line'. Live and let live as my late father used to say.
So, specifically, which parts do you believe are in error? Are you saying you did complete the office? Are you saying I should have a problem with Co-masonry?
Ahh, but that is one of the problems I see in your posts. You can leave UGLE, but you cannot leave it alone. Thus, the biased attacks against the system, rather than explaining specifically perceive errors in others arguments. Simply saying that one is wrong because one belongs to UGLE is not persuasive.
Yeah but that used to be you whether you had those letters in your sig line or not. You were a representative of the UGLE.
Warrior1256
Site Benefactor
Actually, that was the character Rhett Butler in "Gone With the Wind".
Oh yes....should have been 'if you got them, flaunt them'
Hmmmmm, my mind postively boggles...!
Warrior1256
Site Benefactor
On this subject my feeling is "To each his own". If someone wants to belong to a clandestine co-mason lodge I have no problem with it, more power to them. But don't try to tell me that regular Masonry is wrong because it does not admit women. One of the main reasons that I joined was that it is a fraternity. If regular Masonry ever decided that it was going to admit women I would demit.