That being said I think this letter from the Grand Master of South Carolina is a big deal. Kudos to him for supporting the idea that if the Shrine wants a relationship with Masonry it should be supportive of the Grand Lodges in the jurisdictions it operates in.
5 comments:
http://www.freemasoninformation.com/2012/12/more-light-on-the-arkansas-shriner-purge/
I am a strong believer in Blue Lodge Masonry being a priority for Masons and was disappointed to see that the Shrine took a stance that seemed in violation of their agreement with Freemasonry as a Fraternity, if not in letter in spirit for certain.
Come, come, now.
When a man is a member of Lodge under two different GLs, and one of them refuses to honor his expulsion by the other, the fact that Shrine law recognizes he is still a Mason in good standing in Blue Lodge, and the expelling GM willfully ignores ever addressing that in any of his edicts, that is certainly a violation of the spirit of maintaining a Master Mason's honor and carefully preserving it as his own.
Suppose, for a minute, that a Brother were expelled by the most recent ruling out of Florida (R&D#3), and he is ALSO a member in the GL of NY, and the NY GL does not honor that expulsion, believing it to be un-Masonic.
What then should the Shrine's response be?
Good point MP... It seems we have a problem at the grand lodge level. While I agree with the fact that one who is not a mason, should not be a Shriner, he is still a mason so no problem... If a grand master goes around expelling people without just cause then it is he that is acting unmasonic. If you read into the Shrines side of the story, you will get the full picture. Also, funny thing is that letter from the grand master to the Imp. potentate, well he had me up until the end when he basically made fun of the stenographer for underlining and incorrectly capitalizing words. Hey Most Worshipful Brother, there is no place for that in an official communication and it makes you look small and petty. Are you going to talk about the clothes he wears next? You're only in this for a year, what are you trying to prove? You have damaged freemasonry by doing this and you should begin repairing it before you leave office.
John Gjonola, PM
Nellis Lodge #46
Las Vegas, NV
As a Mason under two jurisdictions myself, I would have to frame it in terms of myself. If (and may the Great Architect not let this happen) I were to be expelled in Oregon and Washington did not recognize it because they considered it un-Masonic it would simply revolve around where I laid my head. If I continued to live in Oregon then yes I would have to be expelled that being the will of the Grand Master in whose jurisdiction I reside. If I chose to move my residence across the river to Washington, then the opposite would apply as I would be acknowledged a Mason by that Grand Master. So I would refer back to MP and ask where did said Brother, expelled in one state and accepted in another, lay his head?
It all depends on where he resides. If he is expelled in one jurisdiction and continues to reside in that jurisdiction then he is expelled even if he retains membership in another jurisdiction. If he moves outside of the jurisdiction in which he is expelled then it is at the discretion of the jurisdiction in which he resides.
Since we do not have all the facts here no call of fair or fowl can be made.
Post a Comment