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!
Ladies Freemasonry in the UK video
- Thread starter Matt L
- Start date
Warrior1256
Site Benefactor
Interesting even if clandestine.
Bloke
Premium Member
Good Video, go ladies !
Been watching Freemasonry for Dummies Blog ? The UK press has been at us again, interesting the Police were mentioned in this video - the UK press seems obsessed with it.
As an aside, you might also be interested in the full 1933 video sampled - its here but there are lots of them... i didn't know they split in 1913; a daily step has been made
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/honourable-fraternity-of-ancient-freemasons/query/Freemason
Been watching Freemasonry for Dummies Blog ? The UK press has been at us again, interesting the Police were mentioned in this video - the UK press seems obsessed with it.
As an aside, you might also be interested in the full 1933 video sampled - its here but there are lots of them... i didn't know they split in 1913; a daily step has been made
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/honourable-fraternity-of-ancient-freemasons/query/Freemason
Thomas Stright
Premium Member
Rubbish IMHO
CLewey44
Registered User
I honestly don't know how to feel about it. I do not understand clandestine / irregular Lodges. It's a bit like playing dress up or make believe. While I have zero desire to recognize them, (obviously) they can do their own thing separate from us.
I'm the same, I can't decide how I feel about that entire conversation. I'm an undecided voter lol.
Warrior1256
Site Benefactor
Exactly the way that I feel.I do not understand clandestine / irregular Lodges. It's a bit like playing dress up or make believe. While I have zero desire to recognize them, (obviously) they can do their own thing separate from us.
They aren’t “cashing in” on anything. Everything about them with the exception of gender is the same as any of our lodges. And they’ve been at it for quite some time. Don’t like it? Don’t join. Otherwise worry about your own Grand Lodge.
Bloke
Premium Member
While I can easily appreciate the hostility towards "Bogus" Freemasonry, designed to make people part with their money or self promote an individual, I get surprised by some of occasional but very strong objections from Freemasons towards these two groups of Woman Freemasons in England. Both were founded pre WW1 and conform to the ancient landmarks, with the exception of gender. I understand they use an emulation ritual and over the years have seen and read interviews of them, they always seem to act with decorum and class. If the genders had been switched here, we'd all be (probably) saying what a good job they did answering questions, and in the interviewers mind, she sees little difference between UGLE and OWF/HFAF and they face some of the same prejudices we do, they share in the same nature and are partakers of the same hope.
I think after a century, both have earned their strips and some respect. Unlike Le Droit Humain which might provide a "competitive threat" for membership, the OWF and HFAF never will compete with us in their current forms. I think they have to call themselves "Freemasons" because they appear to operate exactly like a regular UGLE Lodge, but with gender swapped.
If you've ever struggled to keep a lodge alive, get candidates, put a team together, keep a building, deal with a disciplinary matter and a personality clash or held the hand of a dying member, you will know it is not easy to be a Brother and keep Freemasonry alive and well.. These woman, for more than a century have been through these things. And they help keep a rich tradition alive, and I think, make it richer by standing apart for what they believe in - they should be able to operate their own lodge and GL - just like our Prince Hall Brothers did two centuries ago. They don't seem bend on challenging us and I've never read about them belittling UGLE or any other regular GL, so why would we do it to them ?
Now, despite that, I cannot, nor would I want to, be in a tyled lodge with them, but that does not mean they should not have our mutual respect. We respect different religions, and for me, it's not much of a stretch in that spirit of tolerance, to respect other masonic traditions which are benevolent. These woman are and I hope they go into the future and from strength to strength.
More broadly, if any "irregular" body of Freemasons present a threat to "us regular Freemasons", then we should look internally to how we make our own GLs weak or compromised, and how we make them strong. For me, that's being single sex creating a special and unique male, but not misogynistic space, and condeming the OWF/HFAF does nothing to make Freemasonry in general strong, more strengthen our own particular GLs.
UGLE seems to agree (although I often see this from secondary sources and not UGLE itself) that "...Freemasonry is not confined to men"
Statement issued by UGLE - 10th March 1999
There exist in England and Wales at least two Grand Lodges solely for women. Except that these bodies admit women, they are, so far as can be ascertained, otherwise regular in their practice. There is also one which admits both men and women to membership. They are not recognised by this Grand Lodge and intervisitation may not take place. There are, however, discussions from time to time with the women's Grand Lodges on matters of mutual concern. Brethren are therefore free to explain to non-Masons, if asked, that Freemasonry is not confined to men(even though this Grand Lodge does not itself admit women). Further information about these bodies may be obtained by writing to the Grand Secretary.
The Board is also aware that there exist other bodies not directly imitative of pure antient Masonry, but which by implication introduce Freemasonry, such as the Order of the Eastern Star. Membership of such bodies, attendance at their meetings, or participation in their ceremonies is incompatible with membership of this Grand Lodge.
http://freemasonsfordummies.blogspot.com.au/2008/01/english-lodge-in-sussex-shares-with.html
I think after a century, both have earned their strips and some respect. Unlike Le Droit Humain which might provide a "competitive threat" for membership, the OWF and HFAF never will compete with us in their current forms. I think they have to call themselves "Freemasons" because they appear to operate exactly like a regular UGLE Lodge, but with gender swapped.
If you've ever struggled to keep a lodge alive, get candidates, put a team together, keep a building, deal with a disciplinary matter and a personality clash or held the hand of a dying member, you will know it is not easy to be a Brother and keep Freemasonry alive and well.. These woman, for more than a century have been through these things. And they help keep a rich tradition alive, and I think, make it richer by standing apart for what they believe in - they should be able to operate their own lodge and GL - just like our Prince Hall Brothers did two centuries ago. They don't seem bend on challenging us and I've never read about them belittling UGLE or any other regular GL, so why would we do it to them ?
Now, despite that, I cannot, nor would I want to, be in a tyled lodge with them, but that does not mean they should not have our mutual respect. We respect different religions, and for me, it's not much of a stretch in that spirit of tolerance, to respect other masonic traditions which are benevolent. These woman are and I hope they go into the future and from strength to strength.
More broadly, if any "irregular" body of Freemasons present a threat to "us regular Freemasons", then we should look internally to how we make our own GLs weak or compromised, and how we make them strong. For me, that's being single sex creating a special and unique male, but not misogynistic space, and condeming the OWF/HFAF does nothing to make Freemasonry in general strong, more strengthen our own particular GLs.
UGLE seems to agree (although I often see this from secondary sources and not UGLE itself) that "...Freemasonry is not confined to men"
Statement issued by UGLE - 10th March 1999
There exist in England and Wales at least two Grand Lodges solely for women. Except that these bodies admit women, they are, so far as can be ascertained, otherwise regular in their practice. There is also one which admits both men and women to membership. They are not recognised by this Grand Lodge and intervisitation may not take place. There are, however, discussions from time to time with the women's Grand Lodges on matters of mutual concern. Brethren are therefore free to explain to non-Masons, if asked, that Freemasonry is not confined to men(even though this Grand Lodge does not itself admit women). Further information about these bodies may be obtained by writing to the Grand Secretary.
The Board is also aware that there exist other bodies not directly imitative of pure antient Masonry, but which by implication introduce Freemasonry, such as the Order of the Eastern Star. Membership of such bodies, attendance at their meetings, or participation in their ceremonies is incompatible with membership of this Grand Lodge.
http://freemasonsfordummies.blogspot.com.au/2008/01/english-lodge-in-sussex-shares-with.html
I have no concerns about what they are doing, i think they are simply doing themselves a disservice by saying they are Freemasons as the questions of authority to perform degrees will always be there.
Devils advocate but I’m not sure that being a time immemorial lodge applys to clandestine orders..
LK600
Premium Member
The gender of these people is only relevant in so far as it is the most obvious reason they are NOT recognized and can not be Freemasons. The probable fact that they have been operating clandestinely for so long is sad. Having said all that, I have no desire to somehow stop them (or have anything other to do with them).
Not in a million years Brother. They... are irregular, and I have the exact same feelings towards ANY irregular "Lodge" regardless of sex. There is no difference. PHA is NOT in this category for obvious reasons and I would never try to place them there.
The key phrase there for me would be "appear to operate like..."
I don't disagree with anything you said there. They have the right... not sure that's in dispute. They are just not Brothers (sisters?).
I have noticed that (online, podcasts, forums etc), their have been instances where some Mason's openly show affinities towards clandestine / irregular organizations. I do not understand it, I obviously do not agree with it, and I'm fairly certain that's not going to change. I respect you Bloke, as I do Brother JC, but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this area.
To be honest I’m happy that they are getting value from the lessons of the craft, I just can’t imagine that going along with the Masonic ritual while being fundamentally clandestine would be a huge benefit over using and interpreting Masonic and orders ritual or using original content, But that’s just me.
While not recognized, UGLE provides that we are allowed to state that Freemasonry is not confined to men.
Edit: by “we” I mean UGLE Masons. Others’ mileage may vary.
Last edited:
Exactly. Can a woman be a Freemason? Yes. Can a woman be a Freemason in my Grand Lodge? No. Pretty simple equation.
To add further light to the subject; my obligation does not state that a woman can’t be a Freemason, it states that I won’t be present at her Degrees or sit in lodge with her. It also separates (and this is key) women from clandestinely made Masons. Why the separation of women can’t be Masons?