Specifics behind a lack of amity.

[Casey]

As some may have read, the GL of West Virginia suspended amity and fraternal relations with the GL of Ohio last spring. Now, the questions are two-fold.

One, I understand that I, being an Ohio Mason, could not travel to WV and be received Masonically. However, what of the reverse? I presume a WV Mason could travel here, but I'm not sure.

Two, and this may be a bit of a thorny situation, why was there suspension of amity in the first place? I get that Bro. Haas was expelled from WV due to his stance on Prince Hall, but there's nothing saying that expulsion from one GL automatically prevents another GL from accepting them.

Even ignoring the PH debate entirely, I can't wrap my head around why the GL of WV would really even care- it's not as if there is any power held by one side over the other. Even if the unlikely occurred and Bro. Haas became Grand Master of Ohio, he still would have no jurisdiction over WV.

I'm just boggled. Withdrawal of amity seems to be the last upraised middle finger, the Masonic equivalent of a declaration of war, and I don't understand why WV took that step either with Ohio or the other GLs with whom they've suspended amity.

 

[Winter]

Unfortunately you cannot ignore the PHA issue in this situation and others like it.

 

[removed12612]

The withdrawl of fraternal relations from what I have read a "jurisdictional" issue over the suspended former GM of WV.....the PHA issue had nothing to do with the issue between WV and OH.....

 

[Winter]

My bad, I may have been thinking of another recent decision to pull recognition. Now I gotta go read up on OH and WV.

 

[Casey]

Unfortunately you cannot ignore the PHA issue in this situation and others like it.

Well, I shall restate, then. Ignoring the overall debate over Prince Hall itself and just taking what happened as what happened.

Fireman, exactly what jurisdictional issue would this be? I can't find anything saying a suspended member cannot petition elsewhere as a profane, which is what was done here.

 

[removed12612]

The GL of WV felt that the suspended Brother was still ( for the lack of a better word) "property" of the GL of WV and they felt OH should not have accepted him...

***DISCLAIMER*** Not fact nor any accusations....just they way I had someone explain it to me...

 

[Casey]

The GL of WV felt that the suspended Brother was still ( for the lack of a better word) "property" of the GL of WV and they felt OH should not have accepted him...

***DISCLAIMER*** Not fact nor any accusations....just they way I had someone explain it to me...

I understand their point, but putting it in a sports analogy...

Bro. Haas was put on waivers by the GL of WV. He's no longer theirs, they have no claim to him. Any other Grand Lodge can "pick him up", so to speak. At least that's how I see it.

 

[Gary]

I understand their point, but putting it in a sports analogy...

Bro. Haas was put on waivers by the GL of WV. He's no longer theirs, they have no claim to him. Any other Grand Lodge can "pick him up", so to speak. At least that's how I see it.

Since you are using analogies,

Wouldn't that be the equivalent of dating your best friends ex-girl friend? Yeah, you could do it, but it would create hard feelings in most cases. Bro. Haas is effectively tainted goods (politically speaking).

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Casey]

Hard feelings, sure, but that kind of harshness? Not with friends I have.

 

[Gary]

You have to understand the dynamics in play. GL's are like governments. It's political. If you expect other governments to play nice in the proverbial sand box, you don't invite them to rifle through your dirty laundry.

 

[removed12612]

Under the GL of OH, it is not an issue what WV or any other GL has done as long as he is meets the criteria for being a Mason in OH..... I dont believe OH did it to thumb their nose at WV.... it is just a matter of masonic rules for OH.....

As far as OH masons going to WV.... I think it would be a very uncomfortable situation but I have not read or heard of any edict saying so....OH has not suspended its fraternal relations with WV.....

NOW for my analogy: Why call "dibs" on something or someone you dont want?

 

[removed12612]

You have to understand the dynamics in play. GL's are like governments. It's political. If you expect other governments to play nice in the proverbial sand box, you don't invite them to rifle through your dirty laundry.

Its a matter of sovereignty ...... neither side should tell the other what to do...if you dont agree....sever relations as have been done....

 

[edwmax]

As some may have read, the GL of West Virginia suspended amity and fraternal relations with the GL of Ohio last spring. Now, the questions are two-fold.

One, I understand that I, being an Ohio Mason, could not travel to WV and be received Masonically. However, what of the reverse? I presume a WV Mason could travel here, but I'm not sure.

Two, and this may be a bit of a thorny situation, why was there suspension of amity in the first place? I get that Bro. Haas was expelled from WV due to his stance on Prince Hall, but there's nothing saying that expulsion from one GL automatically prevents another GL from accepting them. ....

Technically that should! ... Recognition of one GL by another is by mutual agreement and set forth in writing of which both GLs sign. I'm sure one of the points practically all 'Recondition Agreements' is that of suspended/expelled Masons. ... The GL of Ohio thumbed their nose at the GL of WV when they accepted Bro. Haas. ... I'm not getting into the right or wrong of Bro Haas's situation, (apparently the GL of Ohio did) but that is the blunt truth of the Ohio vs WV issue.

 

[removed12612]

Technically that should! ... Recognition of one GL by another is by mutual agreement and set forth in writing of which both GLs sign. I'm sure one of the points practically all 'Recondition Agreements' is that of suspended/expelled Masons. ... The GL of Ohio thumbed their nose at the GL of WV when they accepted Bro. Haas. ... I'm not getting into the right or wrong of Bro Haas's situation, (apparently the GL of Ohio did) but that is the blunt truth of the Ohio vs WV issue.

It certainly is a perspective but saying OH "thumbed their nose" at WV as truth or fact is passing judgement and a bit presumptuous isnt it?

 

[Ashlar2006]

I was going to post something similar Edwmax , but refrained .

The Grand Lodge of Ohio accepted an expelled Mason (right or wrong , I am not taking a side) from the Grand Lodge of WV . If it was any one of us who were expelled for what ever the reason and petitioned another jurisdiction , they would have not touched us with a ten foot pole .

 

[removed12612]

I was going to post something similar Edwmax , but refrained .

The Grand Lodge of Ohio accepted an expelled Mason (right or wrong , I am not taking a side) from the Grand Lodge of WV . If it was any one of us who were expelled for what ever the reason and petitioned another jurisdiction , they would have not touched us with a ten foot pole .

Not FACT..... that is an "assumption"..... by saying they did something out of malice is taking a side..... by saying OH was wrong is taking a side....the GM of OH made his decision that Brother Haas met the requirements to be a Mason in OH..... Would you allow him to visit your Lodge? Do you not consider him a Brother?....IF OH was so wrong, wouldnt other GLs make a stand against them???

 

[Gary]

Not FACT..... that is an "assumption"..... by saying they did something out of malice is taking a side..... by saying OH was wrong is taking a side....the GM of OH made his decision that Brother Haas met the requirements to be a Mason in OH..... Would you allow him to visit your Lodge? Do you not consider him a Brother?....IF OH was so wrong, wouldnt other GLs make a stand against them???

I don't think it's a matter of the Bro. in question, but rather if a particular GL would allow such a visit.

Again, this isn't so much about the brother, as it is about the GL's political posturing. Right or wrong, that seems to be the sum of it.

I stand by my previous comment. If you don't want to get dirty, stay out of the the dirty laundry pile.

 

[removed12612]

Would the GLs' that allow the Brother to visit be taking a stand on one side of the story? If the issue isnt about the Brother.... then there really isnt an issue..... OH acted within their laws.....there a jurisdictions that allow things that would be a masonic offense here.... but that doesnt mean we are posturing against their rules.....

But... if one feels Oh acted improperly, would you consider the person in question a Brother....or would you consider him expelled?

 

[Ashlar2006]

Not FACT..... that is an "assumption"..... by saying they did something out of malice is taking a side..... by saying OH was wrong is taking a side....the GM of OH made his decision that Brother Haas met the requirements to be a Mason in OH..... Would you allow him to visit your Lodge? Do you not consider him a Brother?....IF OH was so wrong, wouldnt other GLs make a stand against them???

Who is taking a side . Where did I say Ohio did something wrong ? This is merely how it looks from the outside to some . But if he meets their requirements , then so be it , he meets their requirements .

He is more than welcome to sit in lodge with me as he is in good standing with Ohio all the rest is between Ohio and WV . Where do you get I would not welcome him into my lodge ?

Simmer down , I can care less what they do and their little cat fight , it is all silly to me .

 

[Gary]

Who are we to judge if the GL of OH acted improperly? That's exactly where the problem lies. Pick a side? Either way you lose and there is friction.

Those that choose not to accept this man as a brother, aren't necessarily taking sides, they are being neutral and not getting involved.

Besides, when this all started, how exactly did the exchange of this Brother take place? did he run to the other jurisdiction and get promptly accepted? or was there some sort of communication between the two GL's?