Brethren all,

I am aware that there are some non-regular Lodges (according to the different constitutions of course) that have women members. Is there any Brother here that belongs to such a Lodge? If so, can you kindly shed some light on basic things which you are allowed to disclose? Thanks.

S&F

I believe this forum is mainly inhabited by what is classed as "Regular" freemasons.

I do know of a board that has I quantity of co-masons and female equivilant of freemasonry members, although I am reluctant to post an url to take people away from this forum, if you would like it please pm me.

Thanks for the reply Bro. Bondi. I do know a Brother whose wife belongs to the Eastern Star. Rather, I am curious of what is going on in that aspect in Europe in particular, something I know nothing of. However, I have no desire to open Pandora's box and rest my case.
Brethren all, I appologize if my initial question was out of place in this forum.

S&F

Brother

I belonged from about 10 years to a Co-Masonic lodge (under Le Droit Humain) working a scottish ritual (Adyar ritual).

The primary differences compared with most all-male lodges that I have visited or joined are:

- a greater interest in the spiritual meaning of the work
- a richer ritual
- acceptance of visitation from brethren pretty much regardless of Grand Lodge affiliation.

The ritual differences include:

- processing into a darkened lodge room
- use of a thurifer and incense
- ritual lighting of candles
- invocation of the elementals in EA degree
- an empty chair in the North
- slight differences in degree signs

It is a matter of regret that my current GL does not permit visitation

Cheers

Russell Holland

Didn't realise you were here Russell, my apologies.

Very enlightening indeed Bro. Russel, much obliged. I used to be a non-Masonic Rosicrucian, prior to being invited to into Societas Rosicruciana. Some points you describe remind me of the meetings I used to attend in the non-Masonic body. Thanks & cheers.

Bro. Bondi, seems I'm missing out on something here...heh heh

S&F

Bondi, no apology necessary.

aylok2006 wrote:

Very enlightening indeed Bro. Russel, much obliged. I used to be a non-Masonic Rosicrucian....S&F

It is many years since I was an AMORC Rosicrucian. But in those days the lodge initiation for their first degree bore a distinct resemblance to Masonic ritual.

Cheers

Russell

A really good read is "The Secret History of Freemasonry" by Paul Naudon. The book deals with the history of continental operative masonry, and makes no dogmatic statements about the supposed connection with speculative Freemasonry. It DOES, however, make clear that women were active in many of the early guilds and may have been able to carry on the work of their deceased husbands. Why does 'modern' specualtive Freemasonry object to women as part of the lodge membership?

>Why does 'modern' specualtive Freemasonry object to women as part of the lodge membership?

I have suggested this elsewhere but I suspect that the exclusion of women comes to us from orthodox judaism. As far as I know, the tradition was to keep women out of sight in the synagogue - even a curtain to separate them.

The problem was apparently that men of lower passions cannot pray whilst in sight of women.

Having spent 10 years in a mixed lodge, I have never noticed that.

But no doubt the various Grand Lodge brethren know their members better than I.

Cheers

Russell

Holland: I very much enjoyed your rather 'tongue-in-cheek' statement re Grand Lodges knowing their own members. Very humourous, indeed! However, I think that British Freemasonry in particular was under the misperception that women were worth very little except for sex and bearing children - at the time of the setting of regulations for lodge governance. The writings of most of the women of that era will make this clear. There really is no rational reason for excluding women from the lodge. In fact, for those who adhere to the revelation of scripture, there is the 'creation account' in the book of Genesis, which notes that woman was created after man had discovered that he was lacking something; she was made as a complement or completer of the man. Hence, the two became one flesh. Woman would have a great deal to give to Freemasonry and would, indeed, help make a good man better. Now that should stir the pot!!!

> Woman would have a great deal to give to Freemasonry and would, indeed, help make a good man better.

Well I went through the offices with my wife one step behind. So we were deacons together and then RWM and WSW together. It seemed to work pretty well.

I like Masonry as a family business.

But more generally, I have found that the most profound stages of my spiritual life have occurred when in deep and spiritual relationship with a woman.

There may be parallels possible in lodge work.

For example, the WSW position is arguably implicitly female.

Cheers

Russell Holland

Go to the site of the Centre for Research into Freemasonry at the University of Sheffield. Look at the subjects of the presentations given at the 2002 and 2004 conferences. Women scholars presenting, and many presentations on Women in Freemasonry. For many of the "old" brothers, I must point out that one day in the very foreseeable future, some group of women is going to make a legal issue of this. How will we be prepared to answer? Better to be prepared beforehand, than to scramble about in the midst of the controversy. In any case, I like the idea of women in the lodge.

Women in Freemasonry is and will continue to be a hot topic. Bro Russell and I saw that in other masonic group forum. I think my last post on the subject was about asking everybody to calm down.

No disagreement here in re: to womens ability and potential contribution to the Craft however, like any Fraternity, our Craft is inhabited by like-minded men and Sorority is about like-minded women. Birds of same feathers flock together stuff. Legal proceedings might produce rulings about certains issues but will not nor ever be force a man or woman to "like" to join any voluntary organization. Who knows, we might see three "brands" of "regular" and "accepted" Freemasonry, F&AM(M)-all-male, F&AM(W) all-female and F&AM(X)mixed. As long as there is a freedom to choose instead of being restricted/forced into a group one is not confortable with, I dont see problem looming except for taking anybody without regards to the set standards such as "ultimately reflect honor to our ancient Institution." If we as the group agreed on lowing the standard for the sake of quantity and discard that Charge then by Brethren, we are really screwed.


S&F/
Rudy

I guess I take a more idealistic (perhaps naive) approach to the idea of brotherhood (including sisters in that). My 'take' is that if one becomes a Freemason, then one does so because he wants the brotherhood to succeed, and wants to help it succeed. For me, success would be a truly world-wide fraternity, without divisions of any sort within that fraternal framework. I would guess that this would be framed somewhat under the same terms as Rousseau's Social Contract, as I understand it. The individual would give up certain rights in order to be a part of, and gain protection etc. from, the group. In the case of Freemasonry, this would be a global group of individuals (male and female) who want the group to succeed.

holland wrote:

I have suggested this elsewhere but I suspect that the exclusion of women comes to us from orthodox judaism. As far as I know, the tradition was to keep women out of sight in the synagogue - even a curtain to separate them.

The problem was apparently that men of lower passions cannot pray whilst in sight of women.
Russell

I don't think this has much to do with Masonic exclusion of women. First off, the separation does not exclude women who play an important part in Jewish ritual, especially among the Orthodox.

One of the main reasons for the division is ironically to create a greater sense of unity within the synagogue as a community. Division of the sexes prevents families from forming smaller groups within the synagogue.