# The Significance of Regularity



## Blake Bowden (Sep 14, 2013)

Freemasonry as a regular institution has been operating under a set of protocols that has sustained it as a speculative craft for almost 300 years. By accepting and maintaining those protocols our institution has become, perhaps, the most significant factor in the evolution of civil society outside of organized religion. Today historians are acknowledging the impact that Freemasonry's philosophy has had on individuals, and in turn, those individuals have had on the development of the standards by which society is judged. Our Craft has been a major player for several hundred years in creating the stimulus for men to learn and to develop and has served as a catalyst to bring together great men and to contribute to making men great. We have taken good men and have made them better men while instilling in them a dedication to the rights, freedom and equality of all men.

World Freemasonry today, however, is in a greater state of instability that it has been for probably the greater part of its existence, and for a number of reasons.

First Freemasonry is expanding more rapidly than it has probably for well over 100 years, and maybe 200 years. With the reemergence of Freemasonry in the Eastern bloc countries in Europe and the development of new Grand Lodges on the continent of Africa, Freemasonry is experiencing a surge of growth unseen for many decades. It is significant that irregular forms of Freemasonry are also expanding probably more rapidly than they have in their entire history, not only into these areas, but also into areas where regular Freemasonry already exists. This is a major concern for the stability of Regular Freemasonry. It has become almost competitive to see which style of the Craft can be established first.

Second, ignorance of the Craft and its purpose has become a way of life to many Freemasons. This is certainly true in North America and North American Freemasons represents the majority of Freemasons in the world. This presents a tragic commentary for an organization that changed the world.

Third, the Internet has become a valuable tool to spread misinformation and the ignorance of others to our brothers and to anyone else who reads it and who lack the knowledge to reject it, and this is the vast majority who read it.

My brothers, the subject of regularity in Freemasonry is not a recent phenomenon, although there are some of our members today who think they have discovered something new in the Masonic world. It was probably one of the first major considerations to confront early speculative Freemasonry. As a result, specific criteria have been established to which any Masonic Grand lodge must conform and adhere to, to be regarded as regular.

Today, we acknowledge that a Grand Lodgers regularity is contingent upon it having been created by another regular Grand Lodge, or by the action of three or more regular subordinate lodges. Regularity is also dependent upon adherence by a Grand Lodge to established practice and compliance to specific requirements.

These include, the belief in a Supreme Being, the presence of the volume of the sacred law upon the altar, the limitation of males only in membership, the avoidance of discussion of religion and politics within a lodge, a restriction of fraternal intercourse Freemasonry, and the respect of jurisdictional of other Grand Lodges, amongst others.

The Craft established the system of granting warrants to Grand Lodges and lodges around 1731 and thus created a method early in Speculative Freemasonry that was adhered to as a worldwide standard. Regularity of Freemasonry is the structural base upon which we have erected our edifice to project a constancy of purpose to the world outside of our Craft. Those Grand Lodges not operating within these standards, have not adopted or have eliminated some of the basic landmarks upon which we exist, i.e. the required belief in a Supreme Being, the volume of the Sacred Law upon the alter, the avoidance of involvement in politics and religion as an organization and the restriction to male only membership.

Regularity in Freemasonry has been accompanied by irregularity since close to its inception. There have been, and are Regular Grand Lodges in origin that became irregular in practice. There have been, and are Grand Lodges that comply with some of the requirements for regularity, but not all, and there exists Grand Lodges that have never been regular in either origin and or in practice. Masonic leaders have dealt with these issues effectively for almost 300 years. Now, there are some of our members who have developed an attitude that regularity is not significant to the Craft.

I met a young PhD Journalism professor in Romania several weeks ago who wanted to give me a copy of a book he had written on Freemasonry. He had studied the Craft for many years before he became a member and understood much of its philosophical foundation. He related this story to me. The first lodge created in that country following the fall of communism was operating under the Grand Orient of France, an irregular Grand Lodge that did not require a belief in God. He was approached to join and was told that belief in God was not a requirement because they felt that men should be free to not believe in a Supreme Being if they chose, and still become a Freemason. Knowing what this requirement had meant to Freemasonry for centuries, he declined to join, even though he had waited for years until he had the freedom to become a member. Here was a man willing to give up his dream to become a Mason rather than become part of a group not requiring this fundamental of the Craft for regularity.

But now, my Brothers, there is a pervasive attitude beginning to permeate our Craft regarding regularity and fraternalism that none out of us can choose to ignore. There are those within the Fraternity today, predominantly in North America, who have developed the attitude that anyone calling themselves Freemasons should be regarded as Freemasons. There are those, even including a small segment of our leadership who feel that almost 300 years of history, practice and tradition is no longer applicable in today's world. These brothers probably have no idea how many Grand Lodges exist in the world. The last I heard there were 91 Grand Lodges in Italy alone. There are 17 known Grand Lodges in New York City. Twice while I was Grand Secretary, members of another Grand Lodge came to me seeking support in breaking away from their Grand Lodge and forming another.

Unquestionably, this results from the ignorance of the vast majority of Freemasons concerning Masonic history, its contributions to the world and even its purpose for existence. Couple this ignorance with ego and we have a blueprint for disaster. Our leaders should be informed enough to know better, and it is difficult to comprehend the motives, that inspire these men to conclude that our Brothers of the past were so wrong when they accomplished so much.

Lack of knowledge is certainly a major factor, but ego and arrogance is another, and present-day liberalism is probably a third. Whatever the motives, we cannot afford to ignore their actions. If permitted to continue, it will destroy Freemasonry as it has been known for almost three centuries. We simply cannot permit these attitudes against our protocols to exist in our membership. Our members, who choose to violate their obligation as a Freemason, should be removed before their destructive thinking is spread farther.

For many years our Craft has been a relatively quiescent Fraternity in regard to increasing numbers of Regular Grand Lodges in the world. During this period of time, irregular and unrecognized Freemasonry has also been relatively quiet. This period of quiescence has been replaced in recent years with a flurry of activity by both categories. The result is that present- day leadership is being confronted with the need to make decisions that will impact our Fraternity far into the future, and many are ill equipped to deal with these decisions due to a lack of knowledge, not only in procedures, required for recognition, but also concerning the Grand Lodges in question. Grand Lodges outside of North America have been dealing with these issues for centuries, but leadership in North America has rarely faced it, and now it is in their hands.

My Brothers, Freemasonry is the most successful fraternal organization that has ever existed and if there was a way of determining it, it could very well be the most successful organization of any kind that ever existed. It has impacted the world well beyond any other institution created by the mind of man. It has existed longer and has grown larger. It has caused change in the direction of the development of civilization. It has promoted civility, in civil society. And now, there are those in our fraternity today with the impression that they have a wisdom superior to our past brethren who have created and sustained it for 300 years.

Several years ago, I saw on a Web site an evaluation by one of our members, of the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America. The member making the evaluation determined that after his thorough study he had determined that the Commission had outlived its purpose in today's world. Upon checking with this member's Grand Lodge, I found that he had been a of the Craft for all of three years. Consider that, a three-year member with the brilliance and knowledge outshining brothers of the caliber of the men who made usÂ« What arrogance. What ignorance. The problem is that there are those who read it and believed it.

There has also been a marked increase in schisms in regularly concentrated Grand Lodges resulting in two Grand Lodges in the same jurisdiction, both claiming to be the legitimate Regular Grand Lodge, The result has been that some Grand Lodges recognizes one, while other mainstream Grand Lodges recognizes the other. This is an untenable situation, which weakens our fraternity and presents to the world an unstable organization worth little note.

To further compound this problem, Masonically affiliated appendant bodies have become instrumental in causing some of the schisms to occur. There are also appendant bodies promoting recognition of irregular forms of Freemasonry including those not requiring a belief in a Supreme Being, not requiring the Volume of the Sacred Law upon the alter and or who admit female members into the Craft. Those bodies must be stopped before the harm they cause becomes irreversible.
Craft Masonry created the appendant organizations and they are subject to Grand Lodge control. Any organization that requires Masonic membership as a prerequisite for membership is subject to Grand Lodge rule in the jurisdiction in which they operate. My Brothers, Craft Masonry is what impacted this world, and these actions should be intolerable to us as members. Historians are writing about Freemasonry today and its impact on civil society, but not about any appendant body.

Grand Lodge officers must not continue to permit interference in Regular Freemasonry by organizations subjective to Grand Lodges. Violations of our accepted operating protocols must be recognized and confronted. If we fail to face and resolve these issues, we have absolutely no hope that Freemasonry will ever achieve the full potential for its existence nor come close to emulating its past.
I have heard recently that an attempt will be made to create a form of irregular Freemasonry that will preside over all of North America. We cannot ignore, nor accept, our members supporting this or any form of irregular Freemasonry or any appendant body that supports it.

Interestingly, the use of the Internet is now creating problems that just may be for us, of a magnitude perhaps unseen in our past. It is not only a tool for our enemies to attack us, but it also has become the major mechanism by which erroneous information is dissipated throughout the membership by our own members. Those members who have read it and assumed it was factual spread much of the information in error.

Not all of it is spread in error, however. It is being used today by those within the Craft who feel they have a vision for the future of Freemasonry that lies beyond the parameters of what made and sustained our greatness. It is within this small cadre of our own membership that lies perhaps the greatest threat to our survival as a viable institution, and again we cannot choose to ignore it.

Personally, my Brothers, I would like nothing more than to see all Freemasonry in the world united as a like-minded brotherhood of men dedicated to a common goal. Such an entity could only contribute to the strengthening of our noble institution. It would increase our potential to be an influence for the ongoing evolution of civil society and world peace. This cannot happen, however, so long this we remain ignorant of, or ignore the protocols of fraternal relations. Nor can it, nor will it happen, so long as conformity to the protocols which has sustained us for almost 300 years are not complied with by those seeking recognition. We, my Brothers, cannot be seduced into accepting anything less.

For the sake of Freemasonry it is therefore imperative that we become capable of divesting ourselves of our own limiting egos, and goals of creating self-perpetuating images and become more aware of the foundations upon which we have thrived for hundreds of years. We must become more concerned about the future of Freemasonry, and less about our own images.

My Brothers, the subject upon which I speak may be the greatest singular threat to our survival as a viable institution capable of impacting society in this millennium. Yet, the problem confronting us is one that we ourselves are causing, by creating or permitting disunity within the Craft, by supporting irregular instead of regular Freemasonry, by reacting instead of acting, and by failing to recognize our own ignorance on specific issues. We are not only, not helping the perpetuation of our Masonic craft; we are aiding and abetting in its demise. Our Grand Lodges should not accept it, and Freemasonry should not tolerate it.

If our Craft is to have a stable and contributory future, we must support our requirements of regularity, and requirements for fraternal recognition. We must also be unwilling to accept deviations from these requirements We must be prepared to remove from our brotherhood, those who choose not to conform to its protocols. Fraternal relations must be limited to Regular Freemasonry. Those Grand Lodges seeking recognition know what is required. If they cannot, or will not accept these parameters, then they fail to gain recognition, and if a Regular Grand Lodge chooses a divergent pathway, then they must risk losing recognition.

We must remember that fraternal relations between Grand Lodges is not a right, it is a privilege. Every member has a right to accept what he chooses, but he must also accept that this choice will determine his right to membership. Each Grand Lodge is also free to choose, but if that choice contributes to disunity, then Regular Freemasonry has the responsibility to reunification. Only through unity, can there be unity.

Freemasonry has been facing a loss of image in present day society for decades and my brothers, we are the cause. The philosophy has not changed. We are the variable. We have not only permitted but stimulated a decline in the quality of the membership. We have required too little to be a member and far to little to remain a member. We have caused ignorance to become the norm in an organization that has always encouraged an acquisition of knowledge. We have cheapened our organization by being cheap ourselves, and now we are permitting egos rather than brains to drive us.

We must now decide whether we wish to survive as an institution that will impact future society, or if we choose to continue to slide into history as a once great society of men who changed this world, but which no longer exists. What do you want my Brothers? It will be you who will decide.

Source: *Thomas Jackson, World Conference of Masons, Executive Secretary*


----------



## Roy_ (Oct 8, 2014)

I have just finished René Guénon's (1886-1951) "Studies in Freemasonry & the Compagnonnage", an English translation of 2002, of a compilation of articles from 1910 to 1951 that were published in 1946 (in the French tongue). I have known and read Guénon for about a decade and he highly influences the way I look at things, but I didn't follow up to his conclusions when I joined my irregular lodge.

In any case, Guénon's ideas on regularity and initation are wholly different from the views one usually hears. Let me give you a few pointers, just as something to think about (certainly not meant to be presented as the truth):



> So much has been written on the subject of Masonic regularity, and so many different and even contradictory definitions given, that far from being resolved, the problem has perhaps only become more confused. The question itself seems to have been badly framed, for regularity is always taken to be based on purely historical considerations, on the real or supposed proof of an uninterrupted transmission of authority from some more or less distant period. Now we would of course have to admit that from this point of view a degree of irregularity could easily be found in the origins of all the Rites practiced today, but we think this a far less important point than some have for various reasons wished to imagine, for we see true regularit as residing essentially in Masonic orthodoxy. And this orthodoxy consists above all in faithfully tradition, in carefully preserving the symbols and ritual forms that express and as it were clothe it, and in resisiting every innovation that smacks of modernism.


Read the rest of the text here (Google books).

Now that does not sound all that different, but when Guénon speaks of initiation and that combined with the above...



> We must now re-emphasize a key point: this affiliation must be real and effective [...] This is easy to understand since it necessarily involves the transmission of a spiritual influence which must be effected according to definite laws.


"Perspectives on Initiation" page 28. (Illegally) available here as PDF.

Guénon had more to say about FM. Is the man read in Masonic circles and if so, how is he looked upon? Perhaps that is better a question for a separate thread?


----------



## BryanMaloney (Oct 8, 2014)

Guenon was far more an occultist than Masonic scholar. For him, Freemasonry was merely a means to an end, and his end was to "restore" an occultism in the West that never existed outside the imaginations of 19th-century and early 20th-century European occultists. In Masonic circles, he's a nonentity.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Oct 8, 2014)

BryanMaloney said:


> Guenon was far more an occultist than Masonic scholar. For him, Freemasonry was merely a means to an end, and his end was to "restore" an occultism in the West that never existed outside the imaginations of 19th-century and early 20th-century European occultists. In Masonic circles, he's a nonentity.


Well said sir.


----------



## Roy_ (Oct 8, 2014)

He was certainly no Masonic scholar, but neither was he an occulist. Most of what he writes is against the people you seem to refer to (Theosophists and the like).

But what about the line of thought on regularity (since that is what this thread is actually about)? Is regularity nothing more than recognition by UGLE? What does that make of initiation? Is that nothing more than acceptance to the group?


----------



## dfreybur (Oct 8, 2014)

Roy_ said:


> Is regularity nothing more than recognition by UGLE?



Recognition is binary - yes or no.  We need more options than that.  We need criteria on which to base recognition.

Regularity is floating point (percentage of adherence to landmarks) or ordinal (number of boxes checked in the list of landmarks).  Regularity is how the UGLE can state that female only Masonry is regular on all topics except gender of its members.  They went down the list asking about policies and all but one was checked. Recognition takes all of the questions on the list getting checked but how many get checked and how many don't does matter.

Irregular jurisdictions have good folks as members and are forces for good in their communities, but it has to be and is about more than just votes on the floor at UGLE.  It's not that shallow.


----------



## Roy_ (Oct 8, 2014)

I am actually 'fishing' to what you all think initiation (and therefor regularity) _actually _is, since in my head the two subjects are intwined. Your (dfreybur) answer is of course 'administratively' correct, but rather 'materialistic'/'historical'.

Let me requote Guénon:


> We must now re-emphasize a key point: this affiliation must be real and effective [...] This is easy to understand since it necessarily involves the transmission of a spiritual influence which must be effected according to definite laws.



In this regard, when the initiation is "real and effective", the initiators are "regular" and he must be member of a regular organisation (otherwise the initiation could not have been "real and effective").
(Of course, in pondering about this, we don't only have to look at FM. Guénon was a Sufi and of course there are more initiatic organisations.)

Any more people thinking along these lines?


----------



## Zack (Oct 8, 2014)

Not I.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Oct 8, 2014)

Zack said:


> Not I.


Same here.


----------



## Levelhead (Oct 8, 2014)

Warrior1256 said:


> Same here.


Same here.


----------



## Roy_ (Oct 9, 2014)

I don't know if I'd better make a spin-off thread, but what then is initiation to you?


----------



## BryanMaloney (Oct 9, 2014)

This (Regularity) is a lot like canonicity within the Orthodox Church.


----------



## dfreybur (Oct 9, 2014)

Initiation is definitely intended to trigger a spiritual phase transition.  That's one of the reasons I deliberately avoided reading content of the degrees before I took those degrees.  It's up to the brother to see it that way, though.  Some do some don't.  Raising is even more explicitly a type of symbolic rebirth into a more spiritual life.

I figure regularity has little impact on that but I have promised to not attend tiled lodge with irregular brothers.  In essence I'm expected to "administratively" see an irregular brother as not having been put through that phase transition.  It makes what would otherwise be an optional and subjective judgment into a formal one.


----------



## Roy_ (Oct 9, 2014)

Thank you Doug. It looks like we're on the same line here. Following Guénon, I think that initiation is (should be) a transmission of a "spiritual substance". Naturally this can only be done by someone who 'possesses' the 'substance' and 'in the right way'. If all that is how it should be, the transmission is 'regular' (but Guénon would not have put it that easily). If you mean by "I figure regularity has little impact on that" that recognition by UGLE is no guarantee, and certainly not the only way, of effective initiation, you can see how I managed to navigate myself into an (UGLE) irregular body (the story is a bit longer, but off topic here).

This is all as theoretical for me as before I joined my lodge (perhaps that answers a question!), but I was just curious how other people look at these things.

An interesting subject though.


----------



## MaineMason (Oct 10, 2014)

Regularity in freemasonry is important, in my opinion. Five generations after the first Mason in my grandfather's line took his obligation in England, I have taken a very similar one. In my family, however, we have always taken a broad view of "The Deity" and the "Law". That being said, I took a solemn oath that those of us are Master Masons have taken which specifically binds us not to make an atheist a Mason along with several other categories. I took that oath, under symbolic penalty, and I intend to keep it. I made that oath at the Masonic Altar on the Bible. Had I been a Muslim, and had I done it on the Koran, I suspect that would have been acceptable. 

Of course, there is no reason why someone who does not come from the Judeo-Christian tradition cannot become a Mason. The tradition of the Orient de France, though thoroughly rooted in the enlightenment, misses the idea that there is something greater than ourselves operating in the universe. Call me a traditionalist, but "regularity" is important to me and the many Masons I know and associate with. The ONLY objection I have are those Grand Lodges who do not recognize PHA. Ours does, and many do, and some who do not do so--in my opinion--not out of Masonic principles, but rather out of other principles which, in my personal opinion as a Master Mason, Royal Arch Mason, and Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret 32nd Degree, have absolutely NO place in Freemasonry whatsoever. 

We all took an oath. As I remember it, regularity is mentioned. Sectarian religion is not, be one a Theist, and race and ethnicity is not mentioned as well. All Masons raised in a regular and duly constituted Lodge should do well to remember that.


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 6, 2014)

AmigoKZ said:


> My 50 cents.  May be 'regularity' is important. But, if I'm not mistaken, 'rituals' and other 'procedures' have similarities. So I think, -- spiritual development of adepts are same -- within regular or liberal Freemasonry.


Regular Freemasonry--be it in the Blue Lodge or the appendent degrees of other rites (In the US, that would mean Royal Arch/York Rite freemasonry or the Scottish Rite and perhaps the Shrine)--membership in appendent bodies is predicated on a Mason's being a member of a Blue lodge, that is to say, having been raised to the degree of a Master Mason in a lodge recognized by one of the 50 Grand Lodges in the United States of America or one being in harmony with the United Grand Lodge of England or other lodges recognized by those bodies. In the United States, everything is regulated by the Grand Lodge of your jurisdiction. If you fail to pay your dues, after a period of time (in my jurisdiction, two years) you'll lose your privileges in York or Scottish Rite or the Shrine. I cannot speak for French or German lodges here (and my most recent encylopedia of Freemasonry is a bit old) but as far as I know co-masonry, that is, women in the lodge, remains forbidden in the US, Canada, and the UK in terms of Grand Lodges in brotherhood with the UGLE. While I remain firmly in the camp of equal rights for women when it comes to the franchise, and equal pay, I am no one to speak about admitting women to a regular lodge of Masons. That is not my decision to make. On the other hand, I am a great supporter of Eastern Star and of the DeMolay Order for youth of both genders.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Nov 6, 2014)

MaineMason said:


> Regular Freemasonry--be it in the Blue Lodge or the appendent degrees of other rites (In the US, that would mean Royal Arch/York Rite freemasonry or the Scottish Rite and perhaps the Shrine)--membership in appendent bodies is predicated on a Mason's being a member of a Blue lodge, that is to say, having been raised to the degree of a Master Mason in a lodge recognized by one of the 50 Grand Lodges in the United States of America or one being in harmony with the United Grand Lodge of England or other lodges recognized by those bodies. In the United States, everything is regulated by the Grand Lodge of your jurisdiction. If you fail to pay your dues, after a period of time (in my jurisdiction, two years) you'll lose your privileges in York or Scottish Rite or the Shrine. I cannot speak for French or German lodges here (and my most recent encylopedia of Freemasonry is a bit old) but as far as I know co-masonry, that is, women in the lodge, remains forbidden in the US, Canada, and the UK in terms of Grand Lodges in brotherhood with the UGLE. While I remain firmly in the camp of equal rights for women when it comes to the franchise, and equal pay, I am no one to speak about admitting women to a regular lodge of Masons. That is not my decision to make. On the other hand, I am a great supporter of Eastern Star and of the DeMolay Order for youth of both genders.


I feel the same about co-Masonry. Women are every bit the equals of men, absolutely! But Masonry was founded as a FRATERNITY. Fraternities are no more sexist than are sororities. One of the things that appealed to me about Masonry was that it is a fraternity and if it was ever decided to admit women to the lodge I would immediately demit.


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 6, 2014)

Warrior1256 said:


> I feel the same about co-Masonry. Women are every bit the equals of men, absolutely! But Masonry was founded as a FRATERNITY. Fraternities are no more sexist than are sororities. One of the things that appealed to me about Masonry was that it is a fraternity and if it was ever decided to admit women to the lodge I would immediately demit.


I don't feel so as you do about women, because my great grandmother was well taken care of by the Masons when her husband died. She also had no intent to try to get into the Masons. Her husband's grave bears a square and compasses and "perpetual care". From the Masons. She was OK with that and were she alive (1892-1984) she'd be OK with it today.


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 6, 2014)

I will add that my great grandfather's grave has been well taken care of (he died in 1952) all these years by many members of my family and by his son, my grandfather, and my father and my uncle, and by me and by many Masons in the community in a small town in Massachusetts where none of us live anymore.


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 6, 2014)

AmigoKZ said:


> Thanks for the info! I just wanted to ask: is there any difference in, ifit's possible to say, in "masonic "skills" between regular/irregular freemason? For example, I mean, if a student goes to 'bad teacher'(musicians or painter) that 'bad teacher' will teach bad. And the student's skills will be 'bad' as result. I mean, Frenchmasons think that they are also 'true' masons. What's the difference of 'skills' of The Crafts?


I have no comment on the Grande Orient de France or any other Masonic body not in unity with the United Grand Lodge of England. Nothing against the French, by the way.


----------



## Brother JC (Nov 6, 2014)

As is being discussed in another thread, the GLNF and UGLE are once again in amity.


Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 6, 2014)

trysquare said:


> As is being discussed in another thread, the GLNF and UGLE are once again in amity.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry


Well I'll be damned. It seems to me that that's not necessary, I thought that was hashed out a hundred years ago. Oh well...thanks for the update though.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Nov 7, 2014)

MaineMason said:


> I don't feel so as you do about women, because my great grandmother was well taken care of by the Masons when her husband died. She also had no intent to try to get into the Masons. Her husband's grave bears a square and compasses and "perpetual care". From the Masons. She was OK with that and were she alive (1892-1984) she'd be OK with it today.


I do not disagree with anything that you have said brother. My lodge also looks after the widows of its members. I have respect for everyone, women most definately included. I am simply saying that regular Masonry is a fraternal organization and, in my opinion, should stay that way.


----------



## dfreybur (Nov 7, 2014)

MaineMason said:


> ... I thought that was hashed out a hundred years ago ...



That one was the Grand Orient in France.  Still irregular.

The GNLF is the regular lineage in France.  There was an explosion in their grand line a few years ago that triggered pulling recognition by many but not all jurisdictions.  Eventually they expelled the person at the center of the storm and things settled down.  Recognition restoration has been rolling back in.


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 7, 2014)

dfreybur said:


> That one was the Grand Orient in France.  Still irregular.
> 
> The GNLF is the regular lineage in France.  There was an explosion in their grand line a few years ago that triggered pulling recognition by many but not all jurisdictions.  Eventually they expelled the person at the center of the storm and things settled down.  Recognition restoration has been rolling back in.


Good to know, thank you for the clarification, Brother.


----------



## MaineMason (Nov 7, 2014)

Warrior1256 said:


> I do not disagree with anything that you have said brother. My lodge also looks after the widows of its members. I have respect for everyone, women most definately included. I am simply saying that regular Masonry is a fraternal organization and, in my opinion, should stay that way.


I agree with you, Brother.


----------



## Roy_ (Nov 12, 2014)

AmigoKZ said:
			
		

> Thanks for the info! I just wanted to ask: is there any difference in, ifit's possible to say, in "masonic "skills" between regular/irregular freemason? For example, I mean, if a student goes to 'bad teacher'(musicians or painter) that 'bad teacher' will teach bad. And the student's skills will be 'bad' as result. I mean, Frenchmasons think that they are also 'true' masons. What's the difference of 'skills' of The Crafts?


I am sure that some will take this as a rant from a co-Mason, but you can ask the question about regular FM as well. Is every lodge 'good', just because it is linked to a regular organisation and is every lodge that is not by definition 'bad'? I know a FM who has little good to say about the Dutch Grand Orient even though they are regular (the man himself is of the Regular Grandlodge of Belgium). He can talk for hours what the problems are in his opinion. Or what about France. Were Grand Orient lodges 'bad' when the Grand Orient was irregular and did they suddenly become 'good' when relations with UGLE were reastablished? 

In my limited experience, there are co-Masonic lodges that went astray by skipping the GAOTU (I personally see no use of FM without 'something higher'), while others think the experience is the same and the lodges are still valuable. Also I have spoken to regular FMs who seem to see just the social side of their lodge, they seem to have no clear idea about initiation or spirituality and keep talking how good it is to have global a business network. Personally I doubt I would feel at home in such a lodge, whether regular or not. Some irregular lodges seem more conservative than some regular lodges (if that says anything).

It all depends on the members, the lodges they are in contact with, etc. I think. I doubt a FM has 'skills' just because he is a regular FM or not because (s)he is not. I suppose everybody should try to find a lodge that 'fits', whether regular or irregular, for it to 'work'. Numbers show that for most people this is regular FM (in most countries), which is good, right?

As for the actual discussion of this thread, it is a more 'technical' one to me as you can see in my previous posts.


----------



## Joaben (Nov 8, 2015)

Brother JC said:


> As is being discussed in another thread, the GLNF and UGLE are once again in amity.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using My Freemasonry


It has nothing to do with freemasonery but with politics.
Taking this example, do you think that next day after derecognition of GLNF masons, meetings, lodges have changed at a point we are not acceptable to meet ? And The contrary when Glnf was re-recognized ? There is something totally  artificial in this matter of regularity.


----------



## coachn (Nov 8, 2015)

Joaben said:


> It has nothing to do with freemasonery but with politics.


Some can argue, and quite convincingly so, that freemasonery [SIC] IS nothing BUT politics.


----------



## Glen Cook (Nov 8, 2015)

Joaben said:


> It has nothing to do with freemasonery but with politics.
> Taking this example, do you think that next day after derecognition of GLNF masons, meetings, lodges have changed at a point we are not acceptable to meet ? And The contrary when Glnf was re-recognized ? There is something totally  artificial in this matter of regularity.


How do you define "politics"?  The term is often used by the losing side in a dispute who used the  same competition methods, just not successfully.


----------



## Bill Lins (Nov 8, 2015)

Roy_ said:


> there are co-Masonic lodges that went astray by skipping the GAOTU


They first went astray by being co-Masonic.


----------



## Warrior1256 (Nov 8, 2015)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> They first went astray by being co-Masonic.


This is certainly the way that I see it.


----------

