Benutzer Diskussion:JASpencer
Liberal Freemasonry
On the one hand, Liberal Freemasonry is based on the liberal ideas of Félix Dupanloup and Frédéric Desmons and on the other hand, they allow women to take part during their rituals (either as members or as guests).
A lot of liberal Grand Lodges them are members of CLIPSAS and/or have signed the Appeal of Strasbourg. „Its objective is to congregate Freemasons, men and women, who consider that ABSOLUTE LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE is the humanity's great victory over itself.“
References and further information
- http://www.clipsas.com/en/history.htm
- http://www.clipsas.com/en/aboutus.htm
- http://www.clipsas.com/en/members_f.htm
Best regards, --Liberaler Freimaurer (Diskussion) 16:17, 11. Nov. 2007 (CET)
Félix Dupanloup Émile Littré
The Roman Catholic Bishop Félix Dupanloup from Orléans Émile Littré requested masonic membership in 1875 at the Grand Orient de France and replied to the question of whether he believe the existence of God:
"A wise man of antiquity was asked the same question by a king. He thought about it day after day, but never felt in a position to respond. So I ask you, not to demand an affirmation nor denial. No science denies a first cause, because it doesn't find something that disproofs it, nor does it proof it. All knowledge is relative, again and again we find properties and causal laws, whose deepest reason we do not recognize. Who resolutely pronounces that he neither believes in God nor disbelieves in God, only proves his lack of understanding of the problem of the appearance and the disappearance of things."[1]
References
- ↑ Eugen Lennhoff, Oskar Posner, Dieter A. Binder: Internationales Freimaurer Lexikon. 5. Auflage 2006, Herbig Verlag, ISBN 978-3-7766-2478-6, page 299
--Liberaler Freimaurer (Diskussion) 18:36, 11. Nov. 2007 (CET)
Catholicism and Freemasonry: Lichtenauer Statement in 1970
Have you already read the Lichtenauer Statement?
--Liberaler Freimaurer (Diskussion) 22:15, 16. Nov. 2007 (CET)
SGOvD
My Grand Lodge is the Souveräner GrossOrient von Deutschland and I am member of the Phoenix lodge. The SGOvD has been founded with the help of the Grand Orient de France, the Grand Orient de Belgique, the Grand Loge de Belgique, the Grossorient der Schweiz and the Großorient von Österreich. We are independent (souverän) since there is no command structure above. We are interested to become a member of CLIPSAS, but even then we are still "independent" since CLIPSAS membership is based on signing the Appeal of Strasbourg - that's it. And we are not anti-clerical since religion is dependend on the belief of the single Freemason (freedom of conscience). --Liberaler Freimaurer (Diskussion) 19:22, 17. Nov. 2007 (CET)
Anti-Clericalism, politics, regularity
One should not forget that "regular" Freemasons also say that Freemasonry is not a religion. If not, then it should be open to all men - including atheists - but why do they require the belief in a "Supreme Being"? Another thing is that the pope had no power in England and Freemasonry was and English movement. If I would not know what Freemasonry exactly is, I would be sceptically, too. But since there were papal bulls against masonry, there were reactions esp. in italy where the Grande Oriente d’Italia created a monument for Giordano Bruno in 1889. And in 1972 the Grand Loge was recognised as regular by the United Grand Lodge of England.
Another thing is how you define "non-political". Anderson wrote that a mason "is never to be concern'd in Plots an Conspiracies against the Peace and Welfare of the Nation" and has to follow his duties. So lodges should not be a melting pot for plots against peace, but they are a melting pot for peace and welfare of the nation. That means they can peacefully work for human rights, humanity and welfare. In Germany and France you would say this is political - because the word has very different meanings, just have a look at the German article Politik. And of course, there will always be people that try to abuse structures for their own goals eg. P2 which had nothing to do with the ideas of Freemasonry.
I think the paragraph about anti-clericalism of en:Latin Freemasonry should be merged with en:Catholicism and Freemasonry and Latin Freemasonry should be renamed to Liberal Freemasonry. I've never heard of Latin Freemasonry, is there a source for that term? The Grand Orient de France should be Latin Freemasonry? Who says that? If you look at the website of the George Washington Union they use the term "liberal-type of Freemasonry", and there is the "Grand Lodge of Liberal Freemasons in Turkey" - but where is a latin Grand Loge of Freemasonry? I think that's propaganda.
It's the same thing with the term "regularity". According to the James Anderson's General Regulations no. VIII of 1723 you can find the following definition:
- “If any set or Number of Masons shall take upon themselves to form a Lodge without the Grand Master’s Warrant, the regular Lodges are not to countenance them, or own them as fair brethren and duly form'd, nor approve of their Acts and Deeds; but must treat them as Rebels, until they humble themselves, as the Grand Master, shall, in his Prudence, direct, and until he approve of them by his Warrant, which must be signified to the other Lodges, as the Custom is when a new Lodge is to be registered in the List of Lodges.” Source: http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/history/anderson/anderson_regulations.html
The problem is that the United Grand Lodge of England simply "redefined" this term after the schism in 1929 in their document "Basic Principles and Aims and Relationships of the Craft", so that they could claim they "own" the "true" masonry and call the others "irregular". Today, GOdF Freemasons now even use the by themselves - also this is just wrong. Best Regards --Liberaler Freimaurer (Diskussion) 05:30, 20. Nov. 2007 (CET)
Giordano Bruno and Masonic Friendship
I'm sure I'll add something to en:Statue of Giordano Bruno.
It's quite strange to read a claim that Liberal Freemasons are not best mates with UGLoE-regular Freemasons. Actually, it's the other way round: One of the main documents of Liberal Freemasonry is the Appeal of Strasbourg where it says that we:
„DECIDE AND DECLARE
To establish fraternal relations between themselves and to open the doors of their Temples -without condition of reciprocity- to any Freemason (man or woman) having received the Light in a just and perfect Lodge, provided that the Masonic specificity of the Lodge or of the Obedience allows for these visits.“
Lodges of Liberal Freemasons allow UGLoE-Freemasons to visit their rituals, but the UGLoE-Freemasons are not allowed to and they don't allow Liberal Freemasons to be part of their rituals. How else could Liberal Freemasons be liberal?
Although this is against the basic rule of all tolerance, they even have a specific rule that forbid that Liberal Freemasons can visit UGLoE-regular lodges. At least in Germany, this is against the law of (en:Freedom of assembly) and the Anderson's Constitution forbids that, too.
„Freemasons under its jurisdiction must be men, and it and its Lodges must have no Masonic contact with Lodges which admit women to membership.“
„II. Of the CIVIL MAGISTRATES supreme and subordinate. A Mason [...] is never [...] to behave himself undutifully to inferior Magistrates;[...]“
Best regards --Liberaler Freimaurer (Diskussion) 00:37, 21. Nov. 2007 (CET)
