I really appreciate your willingness to consider all sides of the story, in the Intel schoolhouse it was a requirement. Having to learn to identify your own biases and cross examine them clinically.
Having to look at things devoid of emotional influence to determine what caused the chain of events that occurred, or to predict them based on past patterns and experiences. Any attempts to allow emotional or personal bias into the mix often led to disastrous outcomes.
I appreciate you taking the time to pause and propose alternative considerations. Have a Blessed one and safe Travels!
Back when I was a boot chief my skipper used to say "when you think you're right, think again.... you may still be right... but it's aways worth a second thought"
Could it be that those lodges still exist, but they restrict visiting and membership? Not all men are equal, and those that don't demonstrate that standard simply don't learn of, or receive an invite from such lodges. I know at least two lodges in England of that ilk.
“The TO movement is a niche solution for a niche problem.”
It would probably be better for failing lodges to close and have their membership fold into more successful lodges so those active Masons can maintain their membership, rather than allow Masonry as a whole to continue to deteriorate. Those warrants can always be resurrected in the future if Masonry is able to recover.
“The gatekeeping you’re advocating for has an ugly history.”
You have capitalised the B in Black, but not the W in White.
Thanks for engaging with it this closely. I should clarify the structure. This essay is the counterargument and rebuttal, where I tried to present the strongest objections to my own position as fairly as I could. The preceding piece, "What We Were Before We Forgot," is where the actual argument lives. This one exists because I think you owe your reader the honesty of showing you've considered the other side.
On the capitalization, fair catch. Too many revisions moving too fast. I wouldn't read into it.
If you get a chance to read the companion piece, I'd be curious what you think.
I really appreciate your willingness to consider all sides of the story, in the Intel schoolhouse it was a requirement. Having to learn to identify your own biases and cross examine them clinically.
Having to look at things devoid of emotional influence to determine what caused the chain of events that occurred, or to predict them based on past patterns and experiences. Any attempts to allow emotional or personal bias into the mix often led to disastrous outcomes.
I appreciate you taking the time to pause and propose alternative considerations. Have a Blessed one and safe Travels!
Back when I was a boot chief my skipper used to say "when you think you're right, think again.... you may still be right... but it's aways worth a second thought"
Thanks for the share my friend.
“You’re romanticizing the Enlightenment lodge.”
Could it be that those lodges still exist, but they restrict visiting and membership? Not all men are equal, and those that don't demonstrate that standard simply don't learn of, or receive an invite from such lodges. I know at least two lodges in England of that ilk.
“The TO movement is a niche solution for a niche problem.”
It would probably be better for failing lodges to close and have their membership fold into more successful lodges so those active Masons can maintain their membership, rather than allow Masonry as a whole to continue to deteriorate. Those warrants can always be resurrected in the future if Masonry is able to recover.
“The gatekeeping you’re advocating for has an ugly history.”
You have capitalised the B in Black, but not the W in White.
Thanks for engaging with it this closely. I should clarify the structure. This essay is the counterargument and rebuttal, where I tried to present the strongest objections to my own position as fairly as I could. The preceding piece, "What We Were Before We Forgot," is where the actual argument lives. This one exists because I think you owe your reader the honesty of showing you've considered the other side.
On the capitalization, fair catch. Too many revisions moving too fast. I wouldn't read into it.
If you get a chance to read the companion piece, I'd be curious what you think.