|
lauderdale
|
Posted 18/03/2010 10:56:43
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: 10/07/2011 06:43:06
Posts: 2,136,
Visits: 4,278
|
"I would therefore as allowed by the GL which is a higher authority than any PGL, continue to wear the jewel. Any PM has worked hard and long to earn that, nobody will tell me not to wear mine. "I totally agree Bro Chestnut. Alas there are some PGMs and their cohorts who get above themselves and tell Lodges what they can and cannot do in such matters. What is worse is that for reasons of future Honours etc many meekly go along with such ultra vires actions.
|
|
|
|
|
chestnut
|
Posted 18/03/2010 11:09:33
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: Yesterday @ 13:20:40
Posts: 1,022,
Visits: 5,566
|
lauderdale (18/03/2010)
. What is worse is that for reasons of future Honours etc many meekly go along with such ultra vires actions.
I am afraid that is very true.
Perhaps it is just me, but I find it sad that Brethren who by the fact that they have been a Wm and as such should have at least some understanding of the BoC meekly comply to these 'made up' rules.
My answer to anyone on this is:
A) Show me where that is prohibited in the BoC.
B) Look around at the pictures of our Masonic forefathers, did they comply to that rule?
Things may indeed become custom and practice after a few generations, but that does not make non compliance an offence.
David
|
|
|
|
|
lauderdale
|
Posted 18/03/2010 11:28:51
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: 10/07/2011 06:43:06
Posts: 2,136,
Visits: 4,278
|
Exactly! Some of these prohibitions and ordinances are no more than Spanish Customs when examined and have no authority except "We have always done it that way!" which is no authority at all!
|
|
|
|
|
yorksmason
|
Posted 18/03/2010 22:36:55
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: Yesterday @ 22:28:43
Posts: 195,
Visits: 3,107
|
chestnut (16/03/2010)
yorksmason (16/03/2010)
Not forgetting of course that the IPM may already be a PM or indeed a Grand Officer.
Yes but that is irrelevant as he would wear the collar of his rank i.e. PM and in addition wear the collar as IPM.
There is no such thing as an IPM's collar. If a past master goes through the chair for a second time then he will wear his own collar after leaving the chair. If he has achieved a dark blue collar then that is what he wears as IPM
|
|
|
|
|
Alan Campbell
|
Posted 18/03/2010 22:50:46
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: 04/02/2012 12:02:46
Posts: 1,247,
Visits: 2,228
|
You sort of lost me on that one yorkmason, if there is a difference between an IPM collar and a normal Installed masters collar then the brother who has gone through the chair for a second time should wear his IPM collar, as when he comes out of the chair and his successor has been installed then he is still the immediate past master, irrelevant of how many times he has done it before.As for the PM's jewel, i really get the impression sometimes that UGLE has so many different rules that it is un-recognisable, this is supposed to be a fraternity of brotherly love, truth and charity. Not some convoluted club of rules and by laws that is full of little hitler's full of their own importance telling people what they can and can't wear, when it comes down to it, does it really matter all that much , who really cares, if it's not harming anyone and the jewel belongs to that order.
|
|
|
|
|
lauderdale
|
Posted 18/03/2010 22:55:10
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: 10/07/2011 06:43:06
Posts: 2,136,
Visits: 4,278
|
I agree with you there Bro Alan, and the best PGM I ever met would turn a blind eye on such matters in most cases.
|
|
|
|
|
yorksmason
|
Posted 18/03/2010 23:06:30
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: Yesterday @ 22:28:43
Posts: 195,
Visits: 3,107
|
Alan Campbell (18/03/2010)
You sort of lost me on that one yorkmason, if there is a difference between an IPM collar and a normal Installed masters collar then the brother who has gone through the chair for a second time should wear his IPM collar, as when he comes out of the chair and his successor has been installed then he is still the immediate past master, irrelevant of how many times he has done it before.
Thats the whole point,there is no difference,there cannot be as there is no such thing as an IPM collar.It does not exist. IPM is not an office so does not have a specific collar.The IPM wears whatever collar he is entitled to wear.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith
|
Posted 19/03/2010 05:20:51
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: 29/01/2012 04:48:25
Posts: 411,
Visits: 1,041
|
OK, I am not answerable to UGLE but to GLNZ. THe only time I don't wear my PMs Jewel is when the Lodge is in mourning and no one wears jewels.
Keith
PM. Waimarino 175
Kaimanawa 426
Waikato Lodge of Research 445
Taupo, New Zealand
|
|
|
|
|
chestnut
|
Posted 19/03/2010 07:36:27
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: Yesterday @ 13:20:40
Posts: 1,022,
Visits: 5,566
|
Thats the whole point,there is no difference,there cannot be as there is no such thing as an IPM collar.It does not exist. IPM is not an office so does not have a specific collar.The IPM wears whatever collar he is entitled to wear.
I am afraid that is incorrect. Whilst the IPM is not an Officer of the Lodge, he is still invested with the IPM collar and jewel by the new WM during the Inner Workings. In the WM's absence then the IPM will take the Chair.
The IPM wears the collar and jewel as the IPM of the Lodge he will also wear the collar of his rank, either Provincial or as a PM.
David
|
|
|
|
|
chestnut
|
Posted 19/03/2010 07:40:45
|
|
Group: Forum Member
Last Active: Yesterday @ 13:20:40
Posts: 1,022,
Visits: 5,566
|
Alan Campbell (18/03/2010)
As for the PM's jewel, i really get the impression sometimes that UGLE has so many different rules that it is un-recognisable, this is supposed to be a fraternity of brotherly love, truth and charity. Not some convoluted club of rules and by laws that is full of little hitler's full of their own importance telling people what they can and can't wear, when it comes down to it, does it really matter all that much , who really cares, if it's not harming anyone and the jewel belongs to that order.
Alan like you UGLE have a BoC in addition there are Lodge By laws. Neither of these are in th least bit complicated or difficult to understand with a modicum of intelligence. However these additional 'rules' imposed by those you mention are what create the problems and difficulties. Why should anyone take an arbitory decission to 'ban' something which is allowable under the UGLE in general is beyond me. It is these injunctions which need challenging as they form no part of mainstream FM.
David
|
|
|
|