How do you respond

[coachn]

My conclusion embraces the reality of the logical extension of your outrageous claims. If it is valid to say that Freemasonry can violate the Landmarks and be a sorority, it is equally as valid to violate the Landmarks have a "Freemasonry" that is atheist. If you can throw out one Landmark, why not others? Why cherry-pick?

Some new Light for you: There exists a multitude of "Recognized" Jurisdictions who don't recognize Landmarks at all. Furthermore, the few that do recognize Landmarks don't agree amongst themselves upon what these Landmarks actually are.

Suggestion: When you feel insulted that someone would dare offer Light that differs from what you have naively chosen to embrace, try to accept that there is much more in heaven and earth that are dreamt of in your philosophy. Freemasonry is practiced in many ways and in many differing forms that are seemingly contrary to the structures that you, in isolation, are being raised within. When you get to Travel a bit, you might possibly just see this yourself. Until you do, you remain invalid in many of your logical conclusions.

BTW - I don't cherry-pick. I leave that up to the various Jurisdictions to do on their own free will and accord. It appears though that your ignorance of different Freemasonic structures is only outrageously exceeded by your ignorance of my beliefs. I pray that this shall change for you sometime soon.

Future reference: It is not valid to say that "Freemasonry can violate the Landmarks and be a sorority". Therefore, what you claim to be equal is invalid too.

 

[BryanMaloney]

No amount of injured pride on the part of the clandestine when called out for their illegitimacy can change that. Admitting women is the act of an irregular and clandestine body.

What specific regular Masonic jurisdictions admit women as "Brothers" (or is it "Sisters")? Name them, and we will see if they are truly regular.

 

[coachn]

No amount of injured pride on the part of the clandestine when called out for their illegitimacy can change that. Admitting women is the act of an irregular and clandestine body.

What specific regular Masonic jurisdictions admit women as "Brothers" (or is it "Sisters")? Name them, and we will see if they are truly regular.

Your points and questions are mote. The issues you bring forth are convoluted. You confuse "Regularity" with "Recognition". The former is determined by the Organization alone. What is "Regular" to one Organization, may not be to another.

Likewise, "Recognition" is extended between Organizations who have determined their separate Organizations are compatible enough to warrant such.

Irregularity and Clandestine bodies are not Irregular or Clandestine to themselves; only to those bodies who do not consider them Regular and choose not to Recognize them. There is no Patent, copyright or ownership of Freemasonry. That's what makes all these "variation" possible. The GL era created a standardizations and franchise-ment between themselves and those who choose attachment. This does not mean one can dismiss one's obligations to one's GL. It merely means the judgments one places toward and upon other organization should be tempered in this Light.

BTW - Clandestine Bodies is often a misused term since clandestine means "secret". They cannot be Clandestine if you know about them.

 

[BryanMaloney]

And that tells me everything I need to know. It is the sort of defensiveness that is very common among the irregular and clandestine when asked about specifics. Whether or not an organization is irregular or clandestine from the point of view of this bulletin board tends to follow the usages of the Grand Lodge of Texas, or so it has appeared. If you are saying that GLoTX is wrong, okay, but you still refuse to name specific organizations, so they can be specifically known. As for the use of "clandestine" herein, its non-Masonic use does not necessarily determine its Masonic use.

 

[coachn]

And that tells me everything I need to know. It is the sort of defensiveness that is very common among the irregular and clandestine when asked about specifics. Whether or not an organization is irregular or clandestine from the point of view of this bulletin board tends to follow the usages of the Grand Lodge of Texas, or so it has appeared. If you are saying that GLoTX is wrong, okay, but you still refuse to name specific organizations, so they can be specifically known. As for the use of "clandestine" herein, its non-Masonic use does not necessarily determine its Masonic use.

It appears that you're fooling yourself once again. I belong to a GL that is Recognized by your GL, among many many others. What you "interpret" as defensiveness is you're own prejudices deceiving you. As far as what one GL puts forth as acceptable use, I have shared nothing herein that conflicts with this. Regarding refusal, I participate in fruitful discourse with well informed Brethren. I don't expect you to understand, agree or to see anything differently than how you've been trained. My responses on this thread are not for your benefit; they are for those Brothers who want Further Light, are open to receiving it and have the ability to see it without biases. BTW - I'm not defending anything. I'm merely share available Light.

 

[Mac]

And I think we've hashed that particular area of the discussion out as far as it needs to go. Any further discussion between the two of you is probably best done via private messages.






Freemason Connect HD

 

[coachn]

And I think we've hashed that particular area of the discussion out as far as it needs to go. Any further discussion between the two of you is probably best done via private messages.
Freemason Connect HD

I agree.