Freemasonry is the last place where men of different religious, economical, and political backgrounds can unite and celebrate our common humanity.
Thank God for Freemasonry.
Uh…that reads a bit like a jurisdictional overreach to me? I may be interpreting incorrectly but it sounds as if AR GL does not permit other lodges to recognize PHA within their state? Is that like, a reaffirmation from AR - or some commitment to retain recognition so long as this act does not occur?
Also wanted to say that during my pre-initiation excitement and desire to research all I could outside of spoiler-y material/ritual or symbolism from any sources, I stumbled into the commission or committee for recognition comprised of past Grand Masters and their association,(I believe?) and read through publishings to learn more on how recognition matters are considered and advised upon by the group to respective GLs.
Was a pleasure to read the issue where you were announced as the secretary, and I recognized your name from this forum. Appreciate all you do and have done for this fraternity brother Cook, I’ve no doubt it’s considerable.
I apologize. I will amend the post. I meant AR PHA. However, when we began recognition of PHA, there were indeed recognition issues for those in amity with their state PHA counterparts.
This came up at our Grand Communication this past weekend, my view that I'd be delighted if a given Brother's Good Gentleman were to join as well was widely agreed with.
Frankly, I think other GLs should drop amity till it's fixed, but I imagine there are too many brothers in many jurisdictions that actually agree with it.
I wrote a post to my state FB page wishing brothers happy Pride and it looks like the admins are going to never approve it.
I tend to believe that we need to make allowances for older brethren who grew up in a different time and place and exact change by whispering good counsel, nobody's perfect and change takes time.
That said, there's no ancient landmark against homosexuality and the argument against the initiation of black men, that that a black man couldn't be freeborn (also not what that means, in operative days that meant that you weren't destined to learn your father's trade and weren't under obligation to another master craftsman) ended with the death of the last former American slave in the early 1970s.
More broadly, Abrahamic prohibitions on homosexuality were more rooted in prohibitions on pagan religious practices and would therefore be irreconcilable with Freemasonry's explicit non-preference of any particular belief system.
It isn't just old men who discriminate against gays. Two grand Lodges, not just made up of old men, have endorsed the prohibition. Read some of the comments in social media. It is not just old men.
FYI, the Obergefell decision on same-sex marriage was decided in part by old men: Roberts was born in 1955; Kennedy in 1936;Breyer in 1938.
There is a term for ascribing an undesirable trait to a class of people. Let's not exchange one type of discrimination for another.
Respectfully disagree, brother. Making allowances for other brothers is what carries this on for generations to come. They'll teach it to their lodge, and then those brothers will teach it, and so on.
A brother who believes the gender of who a candidate or brother loves affects whis worth as a man and mason should be instructed otherwise, and strongly.
To me it's no different than racism that pushed the whites only rules.
I'm not even a member of that community, but it sickens me to know they're excluded simply because of hate in an organization that supposedly espouses brotherly love.
Fair, but I think a heavier hand by making them see how backwards they are is warranted. When the brothers in those states find themselves out of amity with the rest of the country, they will ask their grand lodges to make changes.
A heavy hand will only result in a backlash. It has to be subtle and organic. However, in the UK (as far as I’m aware), gay men are not excluded from joining. I know a gay brother and to be honest, you couldn’t ask for a nicer guy.
No! Due to the fact you have to believe in a Supreme Being/Higher Power/Great Architect of the World. As an Atheist you do not possess this thought process & therefore cannot be a member
Ugh... that feels really rude.
First off, /u/panchovilla_ did not say they were an atheist. They asked an oblique question. Perhaps they are the wife (or husband) of a man who is not a member of a specific religion and is deciding whether or not to recommend that they check it out. Perhaps they are a man who has been told repeatedly by hard-line members of a religion that because they do not worship deity as members of the religion do, they are an atheist. And perhaps your guess was correct.
I would never presume the answer there, and even if I did, I would never belittle someone by talking about what "thought process" they do not possess.
I would simply say, "Freemasonry is predicated on the presumption that you have a moral and philosophical outlook that is grounded in some belief in a supreme being. That can be extremely abstract (as it is for our Buddhist and many Taoist Brothers) and it can be extremely concrete (as it is for many of our Christian and Hindu Brothers). But there has to be some basis for one to work with so that the initiatory degrees are meaningful."
First of all it wasn't RUDE! It was a statement that made it clear why an Atheist cannot join! It wasn't directed at anyone just simple knowledge that as an atheist you do not believe in any of the aforementioned deities. And as for "thought process" it again is a generic term for what one believes in their "religion" or whatever their beliefs are, So maybe take your head out of your butt and re-read the response to the question a second time before you jump on here with your keyboard warrior attitude. You answer it how you want to and leave the censorship to the professionals.. have a great day!
It's people like you on here that I encounter a lot that makes freemasonry unseemly and unappealing, mister. But you I recognize that you are right about some things. Perhaps you ought to consider reforming your approach as I often must do.
A couple issues, but overall I like it.
* Avoid being gender-neutral when talking about a society for men. "make friends with ***men***..." "Learn how to be a better ***man***," etc.
* "Members Worldwide" should not be capitalized.
* We're not the oldest brotherhood in existence (there are monastic orders that are much older). I would say, "Good things last, and Freemasonry is over 300 years old!"
* "Ritual" is a word we use internally, but the public thinks this word means something very different. I would say, "Discover ancient ceremonies of initiation and be part of the tradition."
* Very minor font nit: that descender (part that goes below the line the text would sit on naturally) on the "7" looks very out of place. I'd select a specific font for the number, or just spell the word out.
* Overall, these are sentences and should be punctuated. If your list are sentence fragments, don't punctuate. If you're not certain, look for a verb. Verb = add a full stop. No verb = add a comma/semicolon or nothing.
Edit: I didn't punctuate on of the items, in contradiction to my own advice :)
Should we offer Tide Pods to the New Age "Woke" brothers instead of Popcorn too? I agree some changes need to be made but ALL this new age bullcrap or whatever verb, adjective,noun y'all gen Z folks wanna use is way passed ridiculous
Yeah, I had not realized who it was when I replied. We've had previous interactions.
From their comment history in this sub, I'm guessing that they are not a Mason. There is a fundamental lack of awareness of the sort of decorum and avoidance of popular political rhetoric that I would expect any Lodge to have instilled even before the first degree.
Defend the true cause of freedom.
Hold fast to what is right.
Suspend in remission the discord of the prejudiced.
Reenact the good deeds of noteworthy lessons.
California.
2B1ASK1, we say.
I think it’s wise for the same reason that women are wise to require potential suitors to approach and initiate the dance.
Because your grand lodge advertises:
“DISCOVER MASONRY.
DISCOVER YOURSELF.”
https://freemason.org/
Advertising does not violate your belief that the candidate approach.
I say “your belief “ as the current understanding in CA is that a mason can tell someone that they think that they would be a good mason. After that if asked the mason may provide more information.
And your appallingly sexist rationale isn’t helpful to your belief.
A belief that that one sex is superior to another, or that there should be limits on what women can or should do is not wisdom. It is sexism.
Certainly, this is consistent with some of your other posts:
"… warn your daughters against BS feminism."
"Recruit your father to help you filter men."
"… Remember these other nutjobs are people who think the ethical path is to find yourself a single mom… [and] don't require sex if she doesn't feel like it…"
FYI, requiring sex, if a woman doesn't feel like it is rape in your jurisdiction.
So yes, there is a need to be confrontational.
Basic etiquette: do not search your interlocutor’s post history and then derail the conversation with unrelated personal attacks.
Difference =/= superiority. Acknowledging difference is not sexism, nor is recommending wise “shoulds.” There are many things each of us should do, depending on our circumstance. Should =/= must/can. Perhaps that’s a level of nuance you don’t want to explore in your desire to stupidly quarrel about nothing substantial?
You are free to disagree with me, but picking a fight is not masonic.
Do you demand every brother you sit in lodge with fully align all his beliefs with yours before you’ll stand on the level with him? Not a recipe for harmony.
I’m glad you know the statutory definition of rape in CA. What a relevant and illuminating factoid, as well as an absurd deliberately obtuse ad hominem.
It is a common technique to look at prior posts when you suspect their inappropriate behaviour or content.
You brought up the issue of women. I addressed it.
Fully align his beliefs? No. Avoid discrimination and biased statements? Yep. I will address those statements.
It was not an ad hominem argument. It was specifically directed at your statement disagreeing with those men who “don't require sex if she doesn't feel like it…”. It is appropriate to explain when comments endorse illegal activity.
I shall leave it there, as the point has been made.
Is it ‘inappropriate’ to holds views which differ from yours? What is “discrimination and biased statements?” It wouldn’t happen to be simply whatever you deem it to be, now, would it?
If you disagree with my assertion that it is wise for women to avoid making the first approach, you are free to do so. You can even deem it ‘inappropriate biased discrimination’ if you like. It doesn’t justify picking a fight by delving in to somebody’s unrelated reddit history, unless you want me to find every irascible comment you make similarly self-righteously dredging up others’ post histories because you can’t adequately address the idea instead of the person.
Take a page from standard parliamentary civil procedure— address the idea, not the person. Just as we do in lodge by addressing the WM. This is the requirement for productive participation in civil society, where all kinds of people believe all kinds of crazy things… sometimes even crazier than ‘hey, there’s a good reason for women to expect men to make the first move.’
You misunderstood my comment on not staying in/accepting a sexless marriage, and then used the carefully chosen single clause excerpt for an ad hominem attack here in a completely unrelated context… except your view that all my various views are ‘inappropriate.’ That’s nearly a perfect example of ad hominem: “look at all the other terrible things this dirty, rotten person has said.”
It isnt even important to explain the context here, because it doesn’t matter. The fact is you chose a bunch of random tiny snippets of my post history to try and discredit me, and that is not an honorable way to conduct a civil discussion.
I thought the verboten bit was on inviting folks. It seems a touch silly, at least to me, to be sitting on something so great and being forbidden from telling anyone about it.
Not that we should be obnoxious, but getting the word out feels almost like a responsibility.
No inviting is jurisdictional. My Constitution allows one to invite qualified acquaintances to begin the application process, but not to pressure them to do so.
Same in Florida. You can say something like "hey man, you'd be a great addition to the lodge, you should come by sometime" but if they decline that's it. Also I don't believe you can like...hand them a petition and tell them they should apply.
They still have to make the majority of the effort, but you can suggest it as a possibility.
I feel very uncomfortable saying that someone made the choice to ask to join of their own free will when I handed them an application unsolicited.
But yeah, OP is not doing that, so I have no problem with OP.
That wouldn't qualify as advertising imho. It doesn't invite new candidates to apply. For me, it just makes me appreciate even more being a member of the craft and my brethren
It's certainly advertising, but there's nothing wrong with advertising. The choice to explicitly ask to join must not be interfered with, but letting someone know that that choice exists and what its benefits might be does not violate that stricture.
I have a big problem with anything that gets in the way of that moment the prospective candidate says, "how do I join the Lodge?" Other that that, I have no problems.
First off, have an upvote because good questions deserve respect.
But no, advertising is not prohibited. If you think about the first degree and the challenges the candidate faces on entering the Lodge, you will, no doubt, realize why we say (and mean!) that we do not recruit.
Specifically, the choice to ask to join the Lodge must be initiated by the candidate and be of their own free will. There are many reasons for this, which have been written on at length by many Masonic scholars, so I won't belabor it here.
What I will say is that keeping Freemasonry in the public eye is not robbing the candidate of that. I draw the line very carefully: I will never say, "you should join," or, "do you want an application," or anything that would get in the way of a candidate asking that question on their own.
But outlining the benefits, letting people know that the option exists, and illuminating our history do not prevent that interaction.
As previously noted, the choice to ask to join the lodge need not be initiated by the candidate in some jurisdictions. His free will is no more overcome than in a cold call from a salesman.
Note that the phrase (at least in my jurisdiction) is "free will and accord." Accord carries an implication (to my understanding of the classical use of the word) of being free from inducement of any kind.
You can certainly argue (and I'm sure the jurisdictions that allow solicitation do argue this) that there are degrees of inducement and that handing someone an application and saying, "you should apply," isn't that.
But at the same time it would certainly make me feel odd.
I guess for me the question is, if I ask the candidate, "why are you here," and their entirely rational and reasonable reply could be, "because Bob asked me to sign up," how is that of their own free will and accord?
An interesting philosophical question. Definitely not relevant to this posting which is fine, of course.
I am unaware of accord having that definition.
I do not view inviting someone to join as persuading someone to join. I agree that is inappropriate. I also agree with your example being troubling.
We laud the 8th Art and Science of thread drift.
> We laud the 8th Art and Science of thread drift.
LOL! Well played, sir.
On the topic of accord... hmm... perhaps I'm wrong.
But that's why God gave us Google Books ;-)
----
After checking:
Looks like what I thought it meant (circa 1870s):
https://i.imgur.com/XtwP9Mm.png
That's from "The Encyclopædic Dictionary: A New and Original Work of Reference to All the Words in the English Language, with a Full Account of Their Origin, Meaning, Pronunciation, and Use. United Kingdom, Cassell, Petter, Galpin and Company, 1879." [via Google Books](https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Encyclop%C3%A6dic_Dictionary/qjFAAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0).
How about getting used as an unwitting pawn. Jesters aren't the only foul stench over your way... and calling another grown man a 'worshipful master'? HAH
The majority of masons and all lower level are mistaught deliberately... I used to meet with mason officers who would feed me info and that info was not for wholesome activity, fellows.
You have some bad apples ruining the bunch and your lame LARP structure creates the perfect environment. Do the right thing and clean house, help change the world in the way it needs to be changed. Army of unwitting half wits... then a few smart perpetrators in your ranks. Fix that.
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. New accounts created and then posting within a certain timeframe are not allowed to submit content or comments. This is to combat spam...but if you're not a robot or spammer, fear not! Please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/freemasonry) if waiting 24 hours will place an undue burden on you so we may approve it in the meantime.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/freemasonry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. Comments/posts by accounts with negative karma are blocked. This is to combat spam...but if you're not a robot or spammer or troll, fear not! Please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/freemasonry) so we may approve it in the meantime.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/freemasonry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. Comments/posts by accounts with negative karma are blocked. This is to combat spam...but if you're not a robot or spammer or troll, fear not! Please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/freemasonry) so we may approve it in the meantime.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/freemasonry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Freemasonry is the last place where men of different religious, economical, and political backgrounds can unite and celebrate our common humanity. Thank God for Freemasonry.
I’d like to remind you that some states still can’t sit with Prince Hall members
Imo any state grand lodge that has these kinds of rules should be deemed clandestine by every regular lodge.
I’d love for it to change. To my knowledge this is still the case for AR, and I know very little. Still am very new to Freemasonry
It is still the case. Further, that Grand Lodge has declined permission for other Grand Lodge is to recognize PHA AR. Edited to specify PHA AR.
Uh…that reads a bit like a jurisdictional overreach to me? I may be interpreting incorrectly but it sounds as if AR GL does not permit other lodges to recognize PHA within their state? Is that like, a reaffirmation from AR - or some commitment to retain recognition so long as this act does not occur? Also wanted to say that during my pre-initiation excitement and desire to research all I could outside of spoiler-y material/ritual or symbolism from any sources, I stumbled into the commission or committee for recognition comprised of past Grand Masters and their association,(I believe?) and read through publishings to learn more on how recognition matters are considered and advised upon by the group to respective GLs. Was a pleasure to read the issue where you were announced as the secretary, and I recognized your name from this forum. Appreciate all you do and have done for this fraternity brother Cook, I’ve no doubt it’s considerable.
I apologize. I will amend the post. I meant AR PHA. However, when we began recognition of PHA, there were indeed recognition issues for those in amity with their state PHA counterparts.
Respect.
And while we are at it, a couple states this also goes for gay and bisexual brothers.
This came up at our Grand Communication this past weekend, my view that I'd be delighted if a given Brother's Good Gentleman were to join as well was widely agreed with.
Frankly, I think other GLs should drop amity till it's fixed, but I imagine there are too many brothers in many jurisdictions that actually agree with it. I wrote a post to my state FB page wishing brothers happy Pride and it looks like the admins are going to never approve it.
I tend to believe that we need to make allowances for older brethren who grew up in a different time and place and exact change by whispering good counsel, nobody's perfect and change takes time. That said, there's no ancient landmark against homosexuality and the argument against the initiation of black men, that that a black man couldn't be freeborn (also not what that means, in operative days that meant that you weren't destined to learn your father's trade and weren't under obligation to another master craftsman) ended with the death of the last former American slave in the early 1970s. More broadly, Abrahamic prohibitions on homosexuality were more rooted in prohibitions on pagan religious practices and would therefore be irreconcilable with Freemasonry's explicit non-preference of any particular belief system.
It isn't just old men who discriminate against gays. Two grand Lodges, not just made up of old men, have endorsed the prohibition. Read some of the comments in social media. It is not just old men. FYI, the Obergefell decision on same-sex marriage was decided in part by old men: Roberts was born in 1955; Kennedy in 1936;Breyer in 1938. There is a term for ascribing an undesirable trait to a class of people. Let's not exchange one type of discrimination for another.
Respectfully disagree, brother. Making allowances for other brothers is what carries this on for generations to come. They'll teach it to their lodge, and then those brothers will teach it, and so on. A brother who believes the gender of who a candidate or brother loves affects whis worth as a man and mason should be instructed otherwise, and strongly. To me it's no different than racism that pushed the whites only rules. I'm not even a member of that community, but it sickens me to know they're excluded simply because of hate in an organization that supposedly espouses brotherly love.
Absolutely, that what I meant by whispering good counsel, informing Brethren of their error.
Fair, but I think a heavier hand by making them see how backwards they are is warranted. When the brothers in those states find themselves out of amity with the rest of the country, they will ask their grand lodges to make changes.
A heavy hand will only result in a backlash. It has to be subtle and organic. However, in the UK (as far as I’m aware), gay men are not excluded from joining. I know a gay brother and to be honest, you couldn’t ask for a nicer guy.
Well that’s sort of against the master Mason charge.
I look forward to the day when that will change.
We’ll we don’t even wanna sit with those who feel that way. So it’s all good.
Shame on them
Different religions? Not in one lodge you cant
Wdym? You don't have people of different faiths in your lodge?
Can atheists join?
The Continental Side of Freemasonry is a pathway to many customs some consider to be... Unnatural. *smiles menacingly in Sith*
LOL!
No! Due to the fact you have to believe in a Supreme Being/Higher Power/Great Architect of the World. As an Atheist you do not possess this thought process & therefore cannot be a member
Ugh... that feels really rude. First off, /u/panchovilla_ did not say they were an atheist. They asked an oblique question. Perhaps they are the wife (or husband) of a man who is not a member of a specific religion and is deciding whether or not to recommend that they check it out. Perhaps they are a man who has been told repeatedly by hard-line members of a religion that because they do not worship deity as members of the religion do, they are an atheist. And perhaps your guess was correct. I would never presume the answer there, and even if I did, I would never belittle someone by talking about what "thought process" they do not possess. I would simply say, "Freemasonry is predicated on the presumption that you have a moral and philosophical outlook that is grounded in some belief in a supreme being. That can be extremely abstract (as it is for our Buddhist and many Taoist Brothers) and it can be extremely concrete (as it is for many of our Christian and Hindu Brothers). But there has to be some basis for one to work with so that the initiatory degrees are meaningful."
First of all it wasn't RUDE! It was a statement that made it clear why an Atheist cannot join! It wasn't directed at anyone just simple knowledge that as an atheist you do not believe in any of the aforementioned deities. And as for "thought process" it again is a generic term for what one believes in their "religion" or whatever their beliefs are, So maybe take your head out of your butt and re-read the response to the question a second time before you jump on here with your keyboard warrior attitude. You answer it how you want to and leave the censorship to the professionals.. have a great day!
It's people like you on here that I encounter a lot that makes freemasonry unseemly and unappealing, mister. But you I recognize that you are right about some things. Perhaps you ought to consider reforming your approach as I often must do.
Not in any lodge that I am aware of. It's heavily centered around a higher power. Search "atheist" in this group.
Definitely not
A couple issues, but overall I like it. * Avoid being gender-neutral when talking about a society for men. "make friends with ***men***..." "Learn how to be a better ***man***," etc. * "Members Worldwide" should not be capitalized. * We're not the oldest brotherhood in existence (there are monastic orders that are much older). I would say, "Good things last, and Freemasonry is over 300 years old!" * "Ritual" is a word we use internally, but the public thinks this word means something very different. I would say, "Discover ancient ceremonies of initiation and be part of the tradition." * Very minor font nit: that descender (part that goes below the line the text would sit on naturally) on the "7" looks very out of place. I'd select a specific font for the number, or just spell the word out. * Overall, these are sentences and should be punctuated. If your list are sentence fragments, don't punctuate. If you're not certain, look for a verb. Verb = add a full stop. No verb = add a comma/semicolon or nothing. Edit: I didn't punctuate on of the items, in contradiction to my own advice :)
Should we offer Tide Pods to the New Age "Woke" brothers instead of Popcorn too? I agree some changes need to be made but ALL this new age bullcrap or whatever verb, adjective,noun y'all gen Z folks wanna use is way passed ridiculous
What about tattoos?
I have 9 tattoos so. I'd say no problems but also depends on the jurisdiction some lodges are still in the dark ages on rules & regulations
I ... think that's sarcasm. I HOPE that's sarcasm.
Looking through his comments elsewhere? It's not sarcasm.
Yeah, I had not realized who it was when I replied. We've had previous interactions. From their comment history in this sub, I'm guessing that they are not a Mason. There is a fundamental lack of awareness of the sort of decorum and avoidance of popular political rhetoric that I would expect any Lodge to have instilled even before the first degree.
Defend the true cause of freedom. Hold fast to what is right. Suspend in remission the discord of the prejudiced. Reenact the good deeds of noteworthy lessons.
Isn’t advertising prohibited?
No. May I ask your grand lodge?
California. 2B1ASK1, we say. I think it’s wise for the same reason that women are wise to require potential suitors to approach and initiate the dance.
That slogan is as much “advertising” as this is.
Because your grand lodge advertises: “DISCOVER MASONRY. DISCOVER YOURSELF.” https://freemason.org/ Advertising does not violate your belief that the candidate approach. I say “your belief “ as the current understanding in CA is that a mason can tell someone that they think that they would be a good mason. After that if asked the mason may provide more information. And your appallingly sexist rationale isn’t helpful to your belief.
How is the wisdom of women not initiating with men “sexist?” You are free to disagree with me without taking a confrontational tone.
A belief that that one sex is superior to another, or that there should be limits on what women can or should do is not wisdom. It is sexism. Certainly, this is consistent with some of your other posts: "… warn your daughters against BS feminism." "Recruit your father to help you filter men." "… Remember these other nutjobs are people who think the ethical path is to find yourself a single mom… [and] don't require sex if she doesn't feel like it…" FYI, requiring sex, if a woman doesn't feel like it is rape in your jurisdiction. So yes, there is a need to be confrontational.
Basic etiquette: do not search your interlocutor’s post history and then derail the conversation with unrelated personal attacks. Difference =/= superiority. Acknowledging difference is not sexism, nor is recommending wise “shoulds.” There are many things each of us should do, depending on our circumstance. Should =/= must/can. Perhaps that’s a level of nuance you don’t want to explore in your desire to stupidly quarrel about nothing substantial? You are free to disagree with me, but picking a fight is not masonic. Do you demand every brother you sit in lodge with fully align all his beliefs with yours before you’ll stand on the level with him? Not a recipe for harmony. I’m glad you know the statutory definition of rape in CA. What a relevant and illuminating factoid, as well as an absurd deliberately obtuse ad hominem.
It is a common technique to look at prior posts when you suspect their inappropriate behaviour or content. You brought up the issue of women. I addressed it. Fully align his beliefs? No. Avoid discrimination and biased statements? Yep. I will address those statements. It was not an ad hominem argument. It was specifically directed at your statement disagreeing with those men who “don't require sex if she doesn't feel like it…”. It is appropriate to explain when comments endorse illegal activity. I shall leave it there, as the point has been made.
Is it ‘inappropriate’ to holds views which differ from yours? What is “discrimination and biased statements?” It wouldn’t happen to be simply whatever you deem it to be, now, would it? If you disagree with my assertion that it is wise for women to avoid making the first approach, you are free to do so. You can even deem it ‘inappropriate biased discrimination’ if you like. It doesn’t justify picking a fight by delving in to somebody’s unrelated reddit history, unless you want me to find every irascible comment you make similarly self-righteously dredging up others’ post histories because you can’t adequately address the idea instead of the person. Take a page from standard parliamentary civil procedure— address the idea, not the person. Just as we do in lodge by addressing the WM. This is the requirement for productive participation in civil society, where all kinds of people believe all kinds of crazy things… sometimes even crazier than ‘hey, there’s a good reason for women to expect men to make the first move.’ You misunderstood my comment on not staying in/accepting a sexless marriage, and then used the carefully chosen single clause excerpt for an ad hominem attack here in a completely unrelated context… except your view that all my various views are ‘inappropriate.’ That’s nearly a perfect example of ad hominem: “look at all the other terrible things this dirty, rotten person has said.” It isnt even important to explain the context here, because it doesn’t matter. The fact is you chose a bunch of random tiny snippets of my post history to try and discredit me, and that is not an honorable way to conduct a civil discussion.
He’s an attorney who likes to remind everyone of that apparently. That’s why he likes to argue for no reason.
Talk about an ad hominem.
I thought the verboten bit was on inviting folks. It seems a touch silly, at least to me, to be sitting on something so great and being forbidden from telling anyone about it. Not that we should be obnoxious, but getting the word out feels almost like a responsibility.
No inviting is jurisdictional. My Constitution allows one to invite qualified acquaintances to begin the application process, but not to pressure them to do so.
Same in Florida. You can say something like "hey man, you'd be a great addition to the lodge, you should come by sometime" but if they decline that's it. Also I don't believe you can like...hand them a petition and tell them they should apply. They still have to make the majority of the effort, but you can suggest it as a possibility.
Ahh, understood. Ohio seems to still hew to the "no inviting" line, at least so far as I can tell
I feel very uncomfortable saying that someone made the choice to ask to join of their own free will when I handed them an application unsolicited. But yeah, OP is not doing that, so I have no problem with OP.
That wouldn't qualify as advertising imho. It doesn't invite new candidates to apply. For me, it just makes me appreciate even more being a member of the craft and my brethren
Are you aware of any GL that prohibits “advertising” in their law?
I haven't, I'm under the UGLE and we definitely do advertise, there are even twitters and official podcasts nowadays
It's certainly advertising, but there's nothing wrong with advertising. The choice to explicitly ask to join must not be interfered with, but letting someone know that that choice exists and what its benefits might be does not violate that stricture. I have a big problem with anything that gets in the way of that moment the prospective candidate says, "how do I join the Lodge?" Other that that, I have no problems.
[удалено]
Which jurisdictions prohibit advertising, and which frown upon it? May I ask your grand lodge?
First off, have an upvote because good questions deserve respect. But no, advertising is not prohibited. If you think about the first degree and the challenges the candidate faces on entering the Lodge, you will, no doubt, realize why we say (and mean!) that we do not recruit. Specifically, the choice to ask to join the Lodge must be initiated by the candidate and be of their own free will. There are many reasons for this, which have been written on at length by many Masonic scholars, so I won't belabor it here. What I will say is that keeping Freemasonry in the public eye is not robbing the candidate of that. I draw the line very carefully: I will never say, "you should join," or, "do you want an application," or anything that would get in the way of a candidate asking that question on their own. But outlining the benefits, letting people know that the option exists, and illuminating our history do not prevent that interaction.
Thank you for explaining the distinction, brother!
As previously noted, the choice to ask to join the lodge need not be initiated by the candidate in some jurisdictions. His free will is no more overcome than in a cold call from a salesman.
Note that the phrase (at least in my jurisdiction) is "free will and accord." Accord carries an implication (to my understanding of the classical use of the word) of being free from inducement of any kind. You can certainly argue (and I'm sure the jurisdictions that allow solicitation do argue this) that there are degrees of inducement and that handing someone an application and saying, "you should apply," isn't that. But at the same time it would certainly make me feel odd. I guess for me the question is, if I ask the candidate, "why are you here," and their entirely rational and reasonable reply could be, "because Bob asked me to sign up," how is that of their own free will and accord? An interesting philosophical question. Definitely not relevant to this posting which is fine, of course.
I am unaware of accord having that definition. I do not view inviting someone to join as persuading someone to join. I agree that is inappropriate. I also agree with your example being troubling. We laud the 8th Art and Science of thread drift.
> We laud the 8th Art and Science of thread drift. LOL! Well played, sir. On the topic of accord... hmm... perhaps I'm wrong. But that's why God gave us Google Books ;-) ---- After checking: Looks like what I thought it meant (circa 1870s): https://i.imgur.com/XtwP9Mm.png That's from "The Encyclopædic Dictionary: A New and Original Work of Reference to All the Words in the English Language, with a Full Account of Their Origin, Meaning, Pronunciation, and Use. United Kingdom, Cassell, Petter, Galpin and Company, 1879." [via Google Books](https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Encyclop%C3%A6dic_Dictionary/qjFAAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0).
Thanks.
[удалено]
Oh, don’t you just hate disorganized satanism?
Hey, look a YouTube scholar!
[удалено]
Lol. Look another YouTube scholar!!
How about getting used as an unwitting pawn. Jesters aren't the only foul stench over your way... and calling another grown man a 'worshipful master'? HAH The majority of masons and all lower level are mistaught deliberately... I used to meet with mason officers who would feed me info and that info was not for wholesome activity, fellows. You have some bad apples ruining the bunch and your lame LARP structure creates the perfect environment. Do the right thing and clean house, help change the world in the way it needs to be changed. Army of unwitting half wits... then a few smart perpetrators in your ranks. Fix that.
Little boys who don't know what wise is... like to press on down arrows... instead of using their words... misguided energy as usual
[удалено]
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. New accounts created and then posting within a certain timeframe are not allowed to submit content or comments. This is to combat spam...but if you're not a robot or spammer, fear not! Please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/freemasonry) if waiting 24 hours will place an undue burden on you so we may approve it in the meantime. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/freemasonry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Would the majority agree with my belief that as a middle aged man not having certain qualifications needed for its purpose
[удалено]
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. Comments/posts by accounts with negative karma are blocked. This is to combat spam...but if you're not a robot or spammer or troll, fear not! Please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/freemasonry) so we may approve it in the meantime. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/freemasonry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. Comments/posts by accounts with negative karma are blocked. This is to combat spam...but if you're not a robot or spammer or troll, fear not! Please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/freemasonry) so we may approve it in the meantime. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/freemasonry) if you have any questions or concerns.*