|
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 16, 2009 13:24:08 GMT 10
Admission of Women vs "Mainstream" Recognition Among "mainstream" (i.e., UGLE amity) grand lodges, the debate about whether or not women may be Freemasons has moved on from the fallacy of claiming they are simply following operative customs. Currently they have reached an impasse or stand-off, whereby each is, in effect, saying the obstacle is that, if they were to admit women, they presume their sister grand lodges would withdraw recognition. To get past what I suspect is a welcome obstacle, I pose an open, hypothetical question to each: If not for the presumed position of other grand lodges,
would your particular grand lodge choose to admit women? If we find enough grand lodges answer in the affirmative, then the obstacle is seen to be a mirage. If any answer in the negative, then one may reasonably ask them to move on and provide their real objection. |
|
|
|
Post by corab on Mar 2, 2011 9:45:11 GMT 10
Admission of Women vs "Mainstream" Recognition Currently they have reached an impasse or stand-off, whereby each is, in effect, saying the obstacle is that, if they were to admit women, they presume their sister grand lodges would withdraw recognition. The question one would have to ask one self in response to such hypothetical withdrawal is: "What would it matter?" After all, how does one know oneself to be a Freemason? That's right, "By the regularity of my Initiation, repeated trials and approbation, and by my being willing at all times to undergo an examination when being called on." Point 1: Each Sovereign Masonic Body is entitled to establish its own standards of regularity, and as long as one is regularly Initiated in accordance with those standards, that is - in earthly terms - all that matters. Point 2: If one was regularly Initiated in a Lodge which was at the time of one's Initiation considered to be Regular by other bodies, then arguably that regularity stands - it is only those Initiated from the time of 'de-recognition' onwards who can strictly speaking be deemed to be 'ir-regular'. Admittedly, that's getting into the nitty-gritty, but then again, that's what recognition protocols are about: diplomatic nitty-gritty on an utterly human level. Being a Co-Freemason I'm not in a position to answer that particular question, however it does seem Grand Orient de France is grappling with exactly that issue, and it's causing a bit of a stir. It sure is interesting to watch. With h.g.w., |
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 2, 2011 20:05:52 GMT 10
The question one would have to ask one self in response to such hypothetical withdrawal is: "What would it matter?" After all, how does one know oneself to be a Freemason? Well I guess a large part of the stand-off on this and a few other issues has been that it matters because it is useful to say it matters: I have witnessed officers pushing through dubious motions in Grand Lodge with warnings of the dire prospect of other Jurisdictions withdrawing recognition if the motions do not pass. Official rhetoric aside, Freemasonry is a fraternity and a positive part of my masonic mindset is the prospect of finding a convenient, warm welcome in many lodges around the world, whether I often avail myself of that privilege or not. Thus, although recognition may be overrated, it still has some legitimate value for me. |
|
|
|
Post by corab on Mar 3, 2011 4:00:08 GMT 10
The question one would have to ask one self in response to such hypothetical withdrawal is: "What would it matter?" After all, how does one know oneself to be a Freemason? Well I guess a large part of the stand-off on this and a few other issues has been that it matters because it is useful to say it matters: I have witnessed officers pushing through dubious motions in Grand Lodge with warnings of the dire prospect of other Jurisdictions withdrawing recognition if the motions do not pass. Official rhetoric aside, Freemasonry is a fraternity and a positive part of my masonic mindset is the prospect of finding a convenient, warm welcome in many lodges around the world, whether I often avail myself of that privilege or not. Thus, although recognition may be overrated, it still has some legitimate value for me. Fair point. It's not something that I had considered because as a member of an International Order, I am blessed to find that within my own Order, as well as in its extended 'family' of those Sovereign Masonic Bodies who do recognise us. With h.g.w., |
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Mar 3, 2011 4:53:04 GMT 10
"Within my own Order" being the operative phrase.  |
|
|
|
Post by corab on Mar 3, 2011 7:21:08 GMT 10
"Within my own Order" being the operative phrase. Well, it would be a sad day if one didn't find the "convenient, warm welcome" Tamrin referred to in the Lodge's of one's own Order, wouldn't it? With h.g.w., |
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Mar 3, 2011 9:38:36 GMT 10
"Within my own Order" being the operative phrase. Well, it would be a sad day if one didn't find the "convenient, warm welcome" Tamrin referred to in the Lodge's of one's own Order, wouldn't it? With h.g.w., That would be rather strange, wouldn't it?  |
|
|
|
Post by lanoo on Mar 3, 2011 12:21:01 GMT 10
Maybe less often "convenient" if not "mainstream"
|
|
