Wednesday, February 13, 2013

GL of Arkansas Approves Shrine Decision

Last week, the assembled delegates of the Grand Lodge of Arkansas formally approved (in what amounts to a referendum) the decision of the Grand Master declaring the Shrine clandestine. Last year the delegates approved declaring the shrine clandestine. This vote approved the statements and letters issued by the current GM concerning the shrine, and the choice he declared his members must make concerning either being a member of the shrine or blue lodge, but not both.


In another matter, Grand Lodge approved background checks on new petitions.

8 comments:

Raconteur said...

I imagine the shrine will just eliminate the requirement for members to be Masons, and that will solve the clandestine issue. You can't be clandestine if you're not claiming affiliation with Masonry. And then membership in both will decline. And it'll probably hurt the masons more than the shriners. Shame.

Rory Robinson said...

I believe that the brothers made a poor decision. How can an organization made up of members from your own jurisdiction be clandestine?


Rory Robinson,PM

Thomas Johnson said...

We Freemasons make decisions based on own personal experience or lack of it. Masonic attainment is not necessarily equal among Masons and the learning is a life-long process, for all Masons.

My own limited experience with the horrible, awful, "DARK" of this world has convinced me that any organization which helps children or women must continue and be allowed to have the full support of the Masonic fraternity.

To tell a good man to choose between being a Shriner or a Mason, but not both, is to imply both organizations are good, but they are not good together. This is ridiculous.

Jay Adam Pearson said...

Brethren I agree this all can be solved when the expelled masons are removed from the rolls of Shriners International. Lets pray cooler heads will prevail.

Jay Adam Pearson
Grand Master of Masons in S.C.

MP said...

I wonder ... if a Brother with membership in both Florida and Vermont (say he's a snowbird) were expelled from FL due to the most recent R&D #3 from GM Jorge Aladro, and the Shrine (rightly) refused to expel him, how many GLs would be declaring the Shrine clandestine?

Scott Sanford, PM Chief Rabban of Saladin Temple said...

Brother Pearson, that is not going to happen. What needs to be done is to remove the requirement of Masonic membership to be a Shriner. Then all good men can be a member of one or both without the egos.

Joshua Jones said...

The only thing I feel needs to happen is for the Shrine to remove members who the GL expelled. It seems odd that the potentate at Scimitar was allowed to stay potentate at an Arkansas temple when he isn't an Arkansas Mason. After all, we are Masons first and the others come second. I know we help our own but not when it interferes with our own GL laws. For the Shrine to keep expelled Masons as members in my opinion is unmasonic and just begging for a division of brothers. I'd love to be a shiner as long as it doesn't conflict with my obligation... In its current state, it seems like it does. :(

Traveling Man said...

Well, when Grand Masters forget that they to are only human, and Brothers, and arrogate to themselves the power to declare Brethren expelled (without benefit of Trial at which they are present or represented to defend themselves) then perhaps it is time to see who needs whom? I am NOT a Shriner, but the arrogance of the G L of Arkansas is of such magnitude, I would not be unhappy to see the Shrine proceed to sever all ties with the Lodge. Then if the Lodge suffers more than the Shrine does, (and we all know lots of men join only as a gateway to the Shrine, we never see them afterward)then we will all know who was the first to make the bed of their own choosing. W. Dale Dietzman, PM