Ancient Landmarks
Dec 14, 2012 9:37:45 GMT 9.5
Post by stepnwolf on Dec 14, 2012 9:37:45 GMT 9.5
Recently a Grand Master of Florida cited the Ancient Landmarks in his defense of expelling BB in his state who espouse "Paganism, Wiccan and Odinism, and secondarily Agnosticism and Gnosticism." Quite obviously the GM felt that he was justified by tradition in taking this move.
Reference is often made to the Ancient Landmarks, but relatively rarely do we find a list of them as a guide. (see http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/doron.html). Mackey gave 25 landmarks, while the Grand L. of Kentucky lists 40. In reference to them all Mackey says, "The first great duty, not only of every lodge, but of every Mason, is to see that the landmarks of the Order shall never be impaired."
The purpose of this provision is to prevent any modifcation the Fraternity might be tempted to make because of circumstances. It makes for a stable Order but it also leaves little room for growth. When change comes some effort is made to wiggle around the landmark. An example is the admission of women to masonic labor. The landmark is clear: no women. Apologists refer to isolated cases where women were initiated as justification for their appearance in a L. or to use the customs in more ancient times and places. It might be more honest to say simply that the times have changed, requiring a change in Masonic practice.
The French seem to be more honest in this regard, removing references to the GAOTU, and even initiating woman. The UGLE, on the other hand, took a step backward in ruling that "Regular Freemasonry does not permit within it any form of esoterism which encompasses or tends towards occultism, sorcery, alchemy, astrology, profane mysticism, transcendentalism, supernaturalism, druidism, rosicrucianism, satanism or any concept or movement related to any of these." (ref tamrin.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=policies&action=print&thread=1618 )
It seems that the UGLE would support the Florida Grand Master in expelling BB for the reasons given.
It is a radical idea, but could we remove the landmark that affirms the immutability of the Ancient Landmarks?
Reference is often made to the Ancient Landmarks, but relatively rarely do we find a list of them as a guide. (see http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/doron.html). Mackey gave 25 landmarks, while the Grand L. of Kentucky lists 40. In reference to them all Mackey says, "The first great duty, not only of every lodge, but of every Mason, is to see that the landmarks of the Order shall never be impaired."
The purpose of this provision is to prevent any modifcation the Fraternity might be tempted to make because of circumstances. It makes for a stable Order but it also leaves little room for growth. When change comes some effort is made to wiggle around the landmark. An example is the admission of women to masonic labor. The landmark is clear: no women. Apologists refer to isolated cases where women were initiated as justification for their appearance in a L. or to use the customs in more ancient times and places. It might be more honest to say simply that the times have changed, requiring a change in Masonic practice.
The French seem to be more honest in this regard, removing references to the GAOTU, and even initiating woman. The UGLE, on the other hand, took a step backward in ruling that "Regular Freemasonry does not permit within it any form of esoterism which encompasses or tends towards occultism, sorcery, alchemy, astrology, profane mysticism, transcendentalism, supernaturalism, druidism, rosicrucianism, satanism or any concept or movement related to any of these." (ref tamrin.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=policies&action=print&thread=1618 )
It seems that the UGLE would support the Florida Grand Master in expelling BB for the reasons given.
It is a radical idea, but could we remove the landmark that affirms the immutability of the Ancient Landmarks?