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!

Shots Fired!

hanzosbm

Premium Member
But freemasonry for women exists - as co-masonry. Irregular, but very popular on the continent and in England.

women-in-line-1200x400.png
Those groups can call themselves whatever they want, but that doesn't mean that they are recognized as Freemasonry.
 

GrandJojo

Registered User
My understanding is that my Grand Lodge (the Regular Grand Lodge of Belgium) feels that Recognition is not just about meeting criteria for Recognition. If this was the case, I think a lot more PH GLs would be recognized, even by European Grand Lodges. So yes - judgement can be part of Recognition, which is a voluntary act.

I also try to think about our gay members, how do they feel in terms of us recognizing a Grand Lodge that bans them. Note I am at odds with recognizing Scandanavian GLs. I feel less ambigious with women because Freemasonry exists for them, and has for a very long time. Recognition from us could even be irrelevant for them. The UGLE considers them to be Freemasons, but does not recognize them.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
So wouldn't this make GA and TN clandestine to CA and DC ...

Often folks have no idea that clandestine and irregular mean different things. Clandestine means not having a valid lineage. Irregular means not practicing the landmarks.

The assertion is that banning by orientation brings sectarian religious discussion into tiled meetings. Since the origin of the objection to homosexuality comes from one line of one book in the Old Testament that means the objection comes from exactly one religion. That's how the word "sectarian" is defined.

The declaration is not that GA and TN are clandestine. Their lineage from the original GLs is well established.

The declaration is that GA and TN has chosen to cease practicing regular Masonry. We'll see how the vote goes in California.

I'll write my mother lodge in California to urge a vote to ratify this GM Decision. I'll discuss with my wife a vacation in San Francisco to go to GL to actually vote for it.

Every Brother gets to decide for himself what practices are and aren't regular. Every jurisdiction gets to decide for themselves what practices are and aren't regular - At which point the Brothers of that jurisdiction agree or leave or start working on repeal.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
So would this mean that CA and DC masons could no longer hold Masonic intercourse with TN and GA masons ?

Exactly. Go to the social event before the tiled meeting - No issue. Do not pass the tiler to attend the tiled meeting or degree.

Caveat - If both are visiting in another jurisdiction they need to know their exact rules. Some jurisdictions say to act like the locals when visiting some they could both stay. Some jurisdiction say to follow our own restrictions when visiting so one or both would have to leave.

Not being able to attend the tiled meeting is enough that many won't bother to attend non-tiled social events.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
What gives California or DC the right to pass judgment on another jurisdiction?

The landmark against introducing sectarian discussion in a tiled meeting. When you violate one of the landmarks you exist regular Masonry.

I get that not everyone is going to agree that banning gays equals introducing sectarian discussion in a tiled meeting. Does anyone disagree that's a landmark, though?

Explain to me how punishing an entire jurisdiction over one decision that a GL made benefits the whole of freemasonry?

When you discard the sanctuary feature of Masonry in one place you damage Masonry everywhere. Pulling recognition is the only option available between jurisdictions.

Do the GL's of DC or Cali recognize every PHA that UGLE recognize? For that matter, if freemasonry in these jurisdictions are so perfect, than why do PHA even exist, shouldn't all men meet on the level?

I'm not sure why you try to change the subject or why you pretend that history didn't happen, but I'll answer the first question anyways -

GLofDC is the first jurisdiction to grant blanket recognition - Automatically recognizing any PHA jurisdiction that gains local recognition. When another PHA state is recognized DC no longer has to vote. For them it's already handled and they automatically send the recognition notice. Multiple states have emulated the DC model for blanket recognition. Be clear what blanket recognition is and isn't.

California votes recognition for PHA jurisdictions every time a local recognition happens. Two jurisdictions have fallen through the cracks. I have active correspondence with the California Gr Sec on the topic. I need to submit legislation on the matter. I suspect that when the GM sees the paperwork he'll add it to the agenda instead of listing it among the topics voted on.

These boycotts won't change anyone's mind

Was that true in Florida a couple of years ago? At least on jurisdiction voted that they would pull recognition if the edict banning by named religion was ratified. In the case of TN that's the same situation - TN has the chance to vote down their edict and stay regular.

I am surprised that this action was taken without intermediate steps. When GEKT formed its clandestine rectified rite, Mark Mason Hall gave notice it would consider withdrawing recognition at its next general purposes meeting. GEKT cleaned up its act before the meeting and no action was required. If CA and had announced their intention at CGMNA less than a month ago, it would have given notice both to TN and DC, but also to its sister GLs who may have supported the action, and lead to change without this sanction. Further, it is widely reported that this matter was to be addressed at the next TN Communication. Why not give notice and wait another six weeks for the matter to be addressed?

I read the GM Decision. TN does in fact have the chance to have recognition if they vote down this move into irregularity.

I echo your question about advance announcement back at GA and TN. They are the ones who decided to exit regular practice so they are the ones who should have announced at the CGMNA conference.

I'm not surprised that CA and DC took a long time to act. I've wondered if any jurisdiction would act.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
A quick question - is discrimination against homosexuals legal anywhere in the USA? My understanding, is that it's not - based on a number of Supreme Court decisions.

Gender preference are not protected statuses.

Making discrimination against the rules has a limited meaning. It means state and local governments can't discriminate but it is still allowed for businesses to discriminate.

Giving gender, gender preference and gender orientation protected status means businesses aren't allowed to discriminate.

The situation varies in many details by state and evolves year to year.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
I'd never hold Masonic intercourse with woman nor visit a lodge that admits women.

I also understand that attending any of their social events does not count under those rules. Any of us are allowed to attend their non-tiled social events.

So far I have been invited to one such event. I didn't attend. I knew I could but couldn't quite bring myself to rearranging my calendar to get to the event. In my own practice I'm slightly more restrictive than the letter of the law on this topic, so far. But I know I was allowed to go without violating any rule as long as their was no tiler and I had no need to pass a tiler.
 

Ripcord22A

Site Benefactor
When GEKT formed its clandestine rectified rite, Mark Mason Hall gave notice it would consider withdrawing recognition at its next general purposes meeting.

GEKT??? Had to googel this one...Grand Ecampent Knight Templar..is this correct? How could they form their own rite? Do you have a link or something that I could read about this incident. I am not a York Rite Mason but I would still like to know about it
 

Ripcord22A

Site Benefactor
The declaration is that GA and TN has chosen to cease practicing regular Masonry.

I dont see how the decisions make them irregular. There is nothing that mentions Homosexulity in any thing ive ever read in masonry. we stop females from joing why couldnt they stop homsexuals?

Do i agree with the ruling...NO! I think GLs have WAY MORE IMPORTANT things to worry about then who their members are legally having relations with. Now if that Gay brother goes to a Gay rally and presents him self as a Freemason then that is another issue all together. In the incident in TN they voted these brothers in, I believe one of them was even the master of his Lodge. Hes obviously a good man, His lodge brothers attended his "wedding." The way GL found out was he posted pics on the FB. If they are going to expell them for being gay should they not also expel the brothers that attended and took part in the wedding?

Being gay doesnt make you a bad or immoral person. I believe that the act of being gay is an immoral act, thats my opinion. Some people belive looking at pornography is immoral, guess what ive done that, especially when i was deployed. That doesnt make me a an immoral person.

I support CAs decision.
 

hanzosbm

Premium Member
The landmark against introducing sectarian discussion in a tiled meeting. When you violate one of the landmarks you exist regular Masonry.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe this is a landmark. It is a charge given to EAs, but that has no bearing on recognition.
 

MRichard

Mark A. Ri'chard
Premium Member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe this is a landmark. It is a charge given to EAs, but that has no bearing on recognition.

Not only that but since each grand lodge is sovereign, there is not much consistency in the landmarks they use.
 

darsehole

Registered User
When you discard the sanctuary feature of Masonry in one place you damage Masonry everywhere. Pulling recognition is the only option available between jurisdictions.

They had many options. Pulling recognition was a strong arm tactic that was politically driven. Is putting political opinions before fraternal brotherly love any damage to freemasonry?


I'm not sure why you try to change the subject or why you pretend that history didn't happen, but I'll answer the first question anyways -

I'm not changing the subject. Discrimination against blacks and discrimination against homosexuals has something in common-discrimination. I thought that would be rather obvious.

The fact that PHA still feels a need to exist in many jurisdictions openly suggests that there is some form of racial divide in freemasonry. How is drawing attention to past discriminations pretending that history didn't happen? Your insinuations are nonsensical.






Was that true in Florida a couple of years ago? At least on jurisdiction voted that they would pull recognition if the edict banning by named religion was ratified. In the case of TN that's the same situation - TN has the chance to vote down their edict and stay regular.

TN is regular. California, DC and Belgium simply pretend they aren't. As long as UGLE says TN is regular, who cares what California says, except perhaps DC and Belguim, so far.

The truth is I don't like homophobia in the fraternity either, but we aren't changing anyone's minds. Nobody's. At best, TN and Georgia will bend and allow homosexuals in lodge, but they will still be ostracized. All that will be the end result is a distaste from TN and GEO towards Cali, DC, Belgium and whoever else. You'll just reinforce and justify their hatred. It doesn't work. Ever. Ask North Korea. Or Cuba. Or Venezuela. Or Israel. Or Iran.

You want to change their minds? Visit their lodge and confront them. Over and over again. Tell them this isn't YOUR vision of freemasonry. Convince them. If that's too difficult, wait them out.

Progression and tolerance take time, especially where old prejudices die hard. Everyone thinks they can hold their breath and stomp their feet, and magically the world will change. You need to win their hearts and minds. That takes time, patience and persuasion. That's how you beat hatred.
 
Last edited:

darsehole

Registered User
I think regularity is the big one. Only one regular lodge per jurisdiction will be recognized by United Grand Lodge of England.

It doesn't matter in California, DC or Belgium recognize TN & GEO or not, as long as UGLE recognizes them, they are regular.

If another GL pops up in TN or GEO, it will be irregular as long as UGLE still recognizes the "homophobic" ones as regular. If Cali, DC or Belgium recognize a irregular lodge, then they jeopardize their relationship with UGLE, and could be clandestine.

At least that is my understanding. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
 

hanzosbm

Premium Member
As long as UGLE says TN is regular, who cares what California says, except perhaps DC and Belguim, so far.
You seem to be under the opinion that the UGLE is somehow superior to the Grand Lodges of each individual States within the US. Or that the Grand Lodges in some way are subservient to the UGLE. Who cares what the Grand Lodge of California says? Probably more than who cares what the UGLE says.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
I think regularity is the big one. Only one regular lodge per jurisdiction will be recognized by United Grand Lodge of England.

It doesn't matter in California, DC or Belgium recognize TN & GEO or not, as long as UGLE recognizes them, they are regular.

If another GL pops up in TN or GEO, it will be irregular as long as UGLE still recognizes the "homophobic" ones as regular. If Cali, DC or Belgium recognize a irregular lodge, then they jeopardize their relationship with UGLE, and could be clandestine.

At least that is my understanding. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Well, not quite. Absent treaty, UGLE will recognize only one jurisdiction. edit: There are three regular GLs sharing jurisdiction in CA by mutual consent, including Iran in Exile.

No, UGLE isn't the arbiter of regularity. If you are a member of a SGL (state GL), then your GL recognizes a different GL than does UGLE
 
Last edited:

MRichard

Mark A. Ri'chard
Premium Member
Quite right, I was blurring recognition with regularity. Still is there not a scope for new GL that are recognized?

First of all, those grand lodges only suspended relations presumably by grand master edicts. It would probably have to be voted on at their annual communication or meeting if they wanted to withdraw recognition.

Secondly, a new grand lodge would need a legitimate charter. Who is going to give them one?
 
Top