There's no place for "Racism" in Freemasonry

[Dontrell Stroman]

Besides the brother that joined the lodge in Georgia, (that almost got disband) I don't know of many Regular GLs in the south that would accept blacks. I can name many lodges around where I live that won't even give petitions to non whites. But yet they have no problems accepting Hispanics. Something else I never understood.

 

[Dontrell Stroman]

Ok so im gonna say it....ITS NOT RACISM! Its the lineage that some GLs have a problem with.in some places yes its racisism as to why they wont recognize pha...however there are white mebers in PHA and black in mainstream. One of my references for my petition was a WHITE princehall mason. From the ft drum military lodge. The Tiler of my lodge here in NM is black. Here in NM officers from both GLs visit the others constituent lodges regulary. My WM is in the process of setting up a visit of our lodge to visit a PHA lodge in Albuquerque and then for their lodge to vist ours.

If it was purely racism then they wouldnt allow blacks to join and vice versa. Also they would recognize the white pha members...im jus sayin

You might not agree brother, but just because something is lineage / tradition doesn't mean the history behind it wasn't somewhat racist / prejudice. There was a lot of things that happened years ago that was wrong then and it's still wrong now. The problem is, people have this mentality that "that's just the way it is, or we are trying to preserve our heritage." When you truly know better, you do better.

 

[Dontrell Stroman]

I will say this, I dont won't to be recognized solely for the purpose of a GL trying to be politically correct. If a freemason doesn't truly see me as a brother then what's the point. I took the same obligation as they did. And I don't remember my ob, stating I will only help PHA masons, or I will only help mainstream masons. No, I will help any regular Freemason.

 

[MRichard]

Ok so im gonna say it....ITS NOT RACISM! Its the lineage that some GLs have a problem with.in some places yes its racisism as to why they wont recognize pha...however there are white mebers in PHA and black in mainstream. One of my references for my petition was a WHITE princehall mason. From the ft drum military lodge. The Tiler of my lodge here in NM is black. Here in NM officers from both GLs visit the others constituent lodges regulary. My WM is in the process of setting up a visit of our lodge to visit a PHA lodge in Albuquerque and then for their lodge to vist ours.

If it was purely racism then they wouldnt allow blacks to join and vice versa. Also they would recognize the white pha members...im jus sayin

Actually, it is racism. The lineage argument is BS. http://bessel.org/masrec/phaugle.htm
There were quite a few grand lodges that were formed irregularly and are recognized now with no issues at all but PHA is the only issue. And just because you have Blacks in mainstream lodges or even Whites in PHA, it doesn't mean there is no racism. Just means that not all lodges judge based on the external. But in some of these areas, it is very difficult for a Black person to join a mainstream lodge. It depends on where you are talking about of course. Might not be an issue at all in some places. But take a look at the Bessel map link I posted earlier. It speaks louder than words.

 

[Warrior1256]

I still don't understand the point of recognition without visitation. What are they recognizing? That each other exists? The right of visitation is an ancient landmark. If I can't visit your lodge and you can't visit mine, do we really recognize each other?

Kind of confusing to me also.

 

[Glen Cook]

Ok so im gonna say it....ITS NOT RACISM! Its the lineage that some GLs have a problem with.in some places yes its racisism as to why they wont recognize pha...however there are white mebers in PHA and black in mainstream. One of my references for my petition was a WHITE princehall mason. From the ft drum military lodge. The Tiler of my lodge here in NM is black. Here in NM officers from both GLs visit the others constituent lodges regulary. My WM is in the process of setting up a visit of our lodge to visit a PHA lodge in Albuquerque and then for their lodge to vist ours.

If it was purely racism then they wouldnt allow blacks to join and vice versa. Also they would recognize the white pha members...im jus sayin

Both the Home GLs and CGMNA have found PHA to be regular. That issue really has been put to bed.

 

[MRichard]

You will not change a man once he reaches a certain age and he is not willing to change. Freemasonry is supposed to take good men and make them better. Sounds good in theory. Unfortunately, too many were not good men when they came in. West Gate.

This may sound harsh but I have heard it a few times. What is needed for change is masonic funerals and time. It does help to have a dialogue about it but that might sway a very few but it won't change anything. Patience.

 

[Glen Cook]

You will not change a man once he reaches a certain age and he is not willing to change. Freemasonry is supposed to take good men and make them better. Sounds good in theory. Unfortunately, too many were not good men when they came in. West Gate.

This may sound harsh but I have heard it a few times. What is needed for change is masonic funerals and time. It does help to have a dialogue about it but that might sway a very few but it won't change anything. Patience.

This is not age related, in my experience

 

[MRichard]

This is not age related, in my experience

I think it is a variable. The older a man gets, the less likely he is to change. There have been men who were racist at one time that came to realize that was the wrong way of thinking. So it is possible. I am talking about the likelihood of changing if you are that way. Just my opinion.

 

[Glen Cook]

I'm confused. You were hoping for Masonic funerals. That is usually an age related issue, unless you are going all bell tower on us

 

[MRichard]

I'm confused. You were hoping for Masonic funerals. That is usually an age related issue, unless you are going all bell tower on us

I didn't say I was hoping for masonic funerals. I said (and I have heard many others say the same), that will be the likely catalyst for change. That could be right or wrong. It's an opinion.

 

[Bill Lins]

WARNING! If political incorrectness causes you to wet the bed, DO NOT READ THIS POST!

In my (rarely) humble opinion, any Grand Lodge which extends recognition based upon the regularity of another Grand Lodge but refuses to allow ALL the privileges attached thereto, including visitation, is guilty of unMasonic conduct and should be dealt with accordingly.

You may now return to your normal programming.

 

[MRichard]

WARNING! If political incorrectness causes you to wet the bed, DO NOT READ THIS POST!

In my (rarely) humble opinion, any Grand Lodge which extends recognition based upon the regularity of another Grand Lodge but refuses to allow ALL the privileges attached thereto, including visitation, is guilty of unMasonic conduct and should be dealt with accordingly.

You may now return to your normal programming.

Don't mess with the Bridge Builders! Are there any states that have recognition without visitation? Kentucky maybe?

I would say that any grand lodge that refers to another regular but unrecognized grand lodge as clandestine is engaging in unmasonic conduct.

Recognition without visitation is not ideal but it is a starting point in the process.

 

[Dontrell Stroman]

Well said brethren. All regular masons meet on the Level.

 

[Glen Cook]

WARNING! If political incorrectness causes you to wet the bed, DO NOT READ THIS POST!

In my (rarely) humble opinion, any Grand Lodge which extends recognition based upon the regularity of another Grand Lodge but refuses to allow ALL the privileges attached thereto, including visitation, is guilty of unMasonic conduct and should be dealt with accordingly.

You may now return to your normal programming.

1. In my even more rarely humble opinion, it is parlous for one Mason to decide what is unmasonic. Cook's corollary: the first one to use "unmasonic" in a debate loses.
2. Limited visitation appears to have become an accepted process in the recognition process. Remember also, visitation is not a right in all jurisdictions.
3. And offending GLs will be dealt with by whom?

 

[Warrior1256]

Recognition without visitation is not ideal but it is a starting point in the process.

Agreed. Hopefully the visitation issue here in Kentucky will be worked out soon by both Grand Lodges.

 

[Bill Lins]

1. In my even more rarely humble opinion, it is parlous for one Mason to decide what is unmasonic. Cook's corollary: the first one to use "unmasonic" in a debate loses.

You have yours, I have mine. Equal value to each.

3. And offending GLs will be dealt with by whom?

In North America, COGMINA.

 

[Bill Lins]

visitation is not a right in all jurisdictions.

Do I understand your statement correctly that there are regular & recognized GLs which do not permit their members to visit the constituent Lodges of other GLs with which they are in amity? If so, which GLs do not & by what reasoning do they prohibit such (excepting the curious situation of American GLs which have what I would call "partial recognition" with PHA GLs)?

 

[Ripcord22A]

Do I understand your statement correctly that there are regular & recognized GLs which do not permit their members to visit the constituent Lodges of other GLs with which they are in amity? If so, which GLs do not & by what reasoning do they prohibit such (excepting the curious situation of American GLs which have what I would call "partial recognition" with PHA GLs)?

Yes. UGLE is one. You must get prior permission from them to visit. Also from what i gather from WB Cooks previous posts, in Utah you dont have the right to visit even lodges within their own jurisdiction.

 

[Glen Cook]

You have yours, I have mine. Equal value to each.

In North America, COGMINA.

CGMNA has no enforcement powers.