# Renegade constituent lodges



## AndreAshlar (Mar 9, 2015)

Under what circumstances, due to being disenchanted with changing GL demands from new leadership, would you understand and support a regular, duly-constituted lodge actually CHOOSING to become irregular? Choosing to surrender their charter and continue to function as an irregular lodge simply to avoid changing with the times?


----------



## crono782 (Mar 9, 2015)

Unless I am also willing to renounce my standing memberships, I would not be able to support their decision to do that. In theory yes, in practice no. A lot of guys complain about how others are running the show, but it really is a democracy. The wildcard is how much time it will take to effect changes at the GL level.


----------



## dfreybur (Mar 9, 2015)

The recent American example I know about is Halycon Lodge in Ohio.  They grew to be very active and started doing programs of their own design.  The GL came down on them for doing something against the rules.  There was some sort of dispute about their building and the activities in it.  They left and formed their own irregular GL.  I wonder what I would have done had I been a member of Halcyon Lodge at the time.

So it's not always about not keeping up with the times.  At least once it was about actually keeping up with the times and being forbidden to do so.

It would seem that some clandestine jurisdictions that appear to have been formed by expelled Masons.  I've never been convinced those events were about keeping up or refusing to keep up.

Is some lodge in Arkansas contemplating such a change?  It is the most problematic jurisdiction in the US at the moment.  Tons of Arkansas brothers are affiliating out of state to get away, so why not a lodge doing so?


----------



## Bill Lins (Mar 9, 2015)

AndreAshlar said:


> Under what circumstances, due to being disenchanted with changing GL demands from new leadership, would you understand and support a regular, duly-constituted lodge actually CHOOSING to become irregular? Choosing to surrender their charter and continue to function as an irregular lodge simply to avoid changing with the times?


None whatsoever. We have a system already in place to to make changes, when needed, within our Grand Lodges. I would much prefer to work for improvement within the existing structure than to throw away the rights, lights, & benefits of belonging to a regular & recognized GL.


----------



## AndreAshlar (Mar 10, 2015)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> None whatsoever. We have a system already in place to to make changes, when needed, within our Grand Lodges. I would much prefer to work for improvement within the existing structure than to throw away the rights, lights, & benefits of belonging to a regular & recognized GL.


Precisely my sentiments.   I've tried explaining this to a few brothers but I'm not sure they hear me.


----------



## dfreybur (Mar 10, 2015)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> None whatsoever. We have a system already in place to to make changes, when needed, within our Grand Lodges. I would much prefer to work for improvement within the existing structure than to throw away the rights, lights, & benefits of belonging to a regular & recognized GL.



The question becomes When In The Course Of Human Events and so on ...

One of the advantages of having membership in multiple jurisdictions I have the luxury of terminating multiple membership if one of my jurisdictions goes off the rails.  I don't have to resign completely if one of my jurisdictions goes rogue.  In a similar vein many brothers who were in Arkansas have transferred their memberships out of state so they don't have to deal with a jurisdiction gone rogue.  But that's one brother at a time not one lodge at a time as mentioned in the original post.

An entire lodge leaving a jurisdiction is extreme.  But in the modern era where we have two jurisdictions in each geography.  If I were in a lodge in Arkansas I might put forward a vote to remove the lodge from the rogue jurisdiction and join the regular one.  Rather like if I were in a bogus lodge and I learned that I would put forward a vote to apply for healing to a real jurisdiction.

We have more options than just going irregular.  Both as individuals and as lodges.


----------



## Bill Lins (Mar 10, 2015)

JamestheJust said:


> My Grand Lodge lost the application from a candidate for Grand Master.  The lost application was from a very popular brother who might well have succeeded.  The brethren were not pleased but no action was taken to rectify the situation.


Could the Brother not apply again the following year?


----------



## Bill Lins (Mar 11, 2015)

JamestheJust said:


> I think the issue was that the GL administration was thought to be deliberate in the loss.


I understand that, but in the absence of proof, it could be written off as "Stuff happens".


----------

