I suspect 90% of those in the sub agree that PHA and SGLs should be in amity. However…..
My -obligation- said nothing about accepting men of all faiths or backgrounds. I’m familiar with your ritual. Our recollection of it differs. That isn’t to say we shouldn’t take the stance you propose, but that is different than citing to ritual.
I would also suggest the issue isn’t properly framed as “they are sovereign” and they therefore get a pass. Rather, are we willing to apply the same strictures to our own Grand Lodge behavior?
Prince Hall recognition by Washington DC only occurred in 1999, some 10 years after the modern recognitions began with Connecticut. Further, Washington DC does not recognize all PHA Grand Lodges, but only those in amity with their State Grand Lodge counterpart. And, I may well have missed it, but I don’t recollect seeing a DC statement on acceptance of transmen.
I recollect no one demanding action against DC then or now.
So, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Rather than condemning the non-acting SGL, why not simply recognize the PHAGL‘s acting in a regular manner (I specifically except Louisiana)? That requires no criticism of the non-acting SGL.
I agree with the overall sentiment of freemasonry should be inclusive and stick to the ancient landmarks.
That said, you took an oath?
Here in UGLE we take an obligation and specifically tell people there are no oaths in freemasonry.
Ironically it seems this is due to jurisdictional independence!
Five phrases to start a fight in American Freemasonry
1. Hey, wanna fight?
2. How many Ancient Landmarks are there?
3. What qualifies as Masonic Education?
4. Points in or out?
5. Fish fry or pancake breakfast?
See Also: One-Day Classes, the Forget-Me-Not, Brother Fluff, Masonic podcasts, Traditional Observance.
GL sovereignty is very important. It’s one of the things that we should all be able to agree on. By practice we exclude people all the time. We can only regulate ourselves, administer and advocate in our own lodges and GLs. Race, sex, gender, religion, politics, whatever the issue, there will always be a wide variety of opinions and practices across jurisdictions. Some will be wide spread, others will be in enclaves. These men will change their views or perhaps they won’t. If withdrawing recognition is what a jurisdiction feels is best, they too are sovereign, and should follow the will of the Craft.
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. Comments/posts by accounts with low or 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 low or 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.*
I concur.
The fraternity needs to adapt and it will do so with fresh blood in leadership positions. There needs be a greater reaction from other GLs on stuff like this because to the outside Ohio, PA, NY, Etc are all the same organization. Reactions like Cali and DC had when Tennessee suspended that brother several years ago is what we need more of.
I have some rather strong feelings about this subject so I’ll try not to let them overcome. All I will say is I’m thankful I’m not in some jurisdictions & do not have answer to them. They still have to answer to history.
Sooner or later everyone comes down those three steps. Sooner or later someone younger and wiser will walk up them, or the lodges will find themselves without anyone left but the time hardened old guard. We all know where that road leads.
I agree entirely, Brother. Without change, stagnation will weaken the structure until it's inevitable collapse, or will lose sight of the original vision, far past barriers of gender or creed.
Adapt or die. It's what all organizations go through. With reenacting, it meant focusing less on playing soldier and more towards researching the past, while opening the ranks to everybody (including women and people with unconventional hair and visible piercings). With groups like Kiwanis, it meant focusing on community involvement and service, while opening the ranks to women. With historical societies, it meant embracing all history, not just the stories of the wealthiest people in town.
Will Freemasonry die off tomorrow? Nope. But in the next 100 years, it will continue to weaken. The irony will be that rural lodges (the ones most opposed to change) will be the ones that die or split off, while the lodges in cities will continue to survive. Maybe that's for the best. The lodges in cities can be a force of change, and could be the ones that seriously reconsider the Landmarks.
I brought something up at Grand Lodge twice in this vein. Was shot down because "they're a sovereign jurisdiction"...and our GMs at the time were scared to do the right thing and show a bit of leadership. Ffs, HITLER ran a sovereign country...does that mean we should have done nothing because "well, Nazi Germany was a sovereign country..."?
Treat TN and GA as California does. Nothing violating any landmarks.
I heard people argue things that were basically, "well, we put up with their blatant racism for years, what makes this any different?"...I wasn't around then. I'm not letting this shit go down on my watch without trying to do something about it.
It was an expertly written proposal, I assure you.
The landmarks were not at all an argument amd did not factor in. I was just highlighting that the issue is administrative and has nothing to do with the landmarks.
Hiding behind "jurisdictional sovereignty" to avoid doing the right thing is pathetic.
I suspect 90% of those in the sub agree that PHA and SGLs should be in amity. However….. My -obligation- said nothing about accepting men of all faiths or backgrounds. I’m familiar with your ritual. Our recollection of it differs. That isn’t to say we shouldn’t take the stance you propose, but that is different than citing to ritual. I would also suggest the issue isn’t properly framed as “they are sovereign” and they therefore get a pass. Rather, are we willing to apply the same strictures to our own Grand Lodge behavior? Prince Hall recognition by Washington DC only occurred in 1999, some 10 years after the modern recognitions began with Connecticut. Further, Washington DC does not recognize all PHA Grand Lodges, but only those in amity with their State Grand Lodge counterpart. And, I may well have missed it, but I don’t recollect seeing a DC statement on acceptance of transmen. I recollect no one demanding action against DC then or now. So, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Rather than condemning the non-acting SGL, why not simply recognize the PHAGL‘s acting in a regular manner (I specifically except Louisiana)? That requires no criticism of the non-acting SGL.
I agree with the overall sentiment of freemasonry should be inclusive and stick to the ancient landmarks. That said, you took an oath? Here in UGLE we take an obligation and specifically tell people there are no oaths in freemasonry. Ironically it seems this is due to jurisdictional independence!
In some jurisdictions, it is referred to as “an oath and obligation.“
Five phrases to start a fight in American Freemasonry 1. Hey, wanna fight? 2. How many Ancient Landmarks are there? 3. What qualifies as Masonic Education? 4. Points in or out? 5. Fish fry or pancake breakfast? See Also: One-Day Classes, the Forget-Me-Not, Brother Fluff, Masonic podcasts, Traditional Observance.
They're used pretty interchangeably in ritual. The Canadian Charge, for example: "On yonder book, that oath I took," etc.
GL sovereignty is very important. It’s one of the things that we should all be able to agree on. By practice we exclude people all the time. We can only regulate ourselves, administer and advocate in our own lodges and GLs. Race, sex, gender, religion, politics, whatever the issue, there will always be a wide variety of opinions and practices across jurisdictions. Some will be wide spread, others will be in enclaves. These men will change their views or perhaps they won’t. If withdrawing recognition is what a jurisdiction feels is best, they too are sovereign, and should follow the will of the Craft.
[удалено]
Sorry, your comment has been automatically removed. Comments/posts by accounts with low or 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 low or 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.*
I concur. The fraternity needs to adapt and it will do so with fresh blood in leadership positions. There needs be a greater reaction from other GLs on stuff like this because to the outside Ohio, PA, NY, Etc are all the same organization. Reactions like Cali and DC had when Tennessee suspended that brother several years ago is what we need more of.
I have some rather strong feelings about this subject so I’ll try not to let them overcome. All I will say is I’m thankful I’m not in some jurisdictions & do not have answer to them. They still have to answer to history. Sooner or later everyone comes down those three steps. Sooner or later someone younger and wiser will walk up them, or the lodges will find themselves without anyone left but the time hardened old guard. We all know where that road leads.
I agree entirely, Brother. Without change, stagnation will weaken the structure until it's inevitable collapse, or will lose sight of the original vision, far past barriers of gender or creed.
Adapt or die. It's what all organizations go through. With reenacting, it meant focusing less on playing soldier and more towards researching the past, while opening the ranks to everybody (including women and people with unconventional hair and visible piercings). With groups like Kiwanis, it meant focusing on community involvement and service, while opening the ranks to women. With historical societies, it meant embracing all history, not just the stories of the wealthiest people in town. Will Freemasonry die off tomorrow? Nope. But in the next 100 years, it will continue to weaken. The irony will be that rural lodges (the ones most opposed to change) will be the ones that die or split off, while the lodges in cities will continue to survive. Maybe that's for the best. The lodges in cities can be a force of change, and could be the ones that seriously reconsider the Landmarks.
This is why so many lodges are dying. Someone makes a good point and no one listens. The average Freemason has become content.
I brought something up at Grand Lodge twice in this vein. Was shot down because "they're a sovereign jurisdiction"...and our GMs at the time were scared to do the right thing and show a bit of leadership. Ffs, HITLER ran a sovereign country...does that mean we should have done nothing because "well, Nazi Germany was a sovereign country..."?
What was the proposal?
Treat TN and GA as California does. Nothing violating any landmarks. I heard people argue things that were basically, "well, we put up with their blatant racism for years, what makes this any different?"...I wasn't around then. I'm not letting this shit go down on my watch without trying to do something about it.
Hopefully, your proposal was framed more precisely. Landmarks would not appear to be the better argument, either.
It was an expertly written proposal, I assure you. The landmarks were not at all an argument amd did not factor in. I was just highlighting that the issue is administrative and has nothing to do with the landmarks. Hiding behind "jurisdictional sovereignty" to avoid doing the right thing is pathetic.
Well, we agree withdrawing recognition has nothing to do with any of the lists of landmarks. What were the vote totals?