Saturday, May 17, 2008

Grand Master John Slifko

It is with great pleasure that we announce the election of the new Grand Master of the Grand Orient of the United States. Most Worshipful Brother John Slifko of Lodge Intrepid. Brother John is a fine Mason and a scholar par excellence.

Euclid Lodge #3 sends our congratulations and support to the new Grand Master.

.......more news to follow in a relatively short time.

Brandt Smith
VM Euclid Lodge #3


mgpierce said...

Congratulations indeed.

Ignatius J. Reilly said...

Is it true you are also the new Grand Secretary of the Grand Orient of the United States of America?

John Galt said...

For the time being, yes. Don't attach too much significance to the title though. It simply means that I am one of the paper pushers.

The Palmetto Bug said...

Do you people have no guilt? Do you have no respect for the obligations? There should be no congratulations extended here.

Shame, shame.

mgpierce said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Galt said...

What is there to be ashamed of?

mgpierce said...

No shame here, my friend. Certainly no guilt.

Only freedom. And it is sweet.

I am a Mason, no matter which grand lodge I donate my money to. No man can take that from me.

My obligation was/is to God. And yes, I would support an athiest Mason. In fact, I already do.

Whichever club recited from the book at my raising is ultimately irrelevant.

Anonymous said...

I am a mason with true and due reverence to my brothers, my lodge, my grand lodge. I undertook my obligation to mean that and only that. Beyond that is hearsay and dishonor to the lodge you left to join the one you now are agreed upon. You can argue your points till the cows come home if you will, but I do not call you brother masons. Your obligation was not only to god but your fellow brothers in your given lodge. Dont mistake that! Every brother who stood around you while you took your obligation promised the same. If you believe that you only promised god, then I guess your fingers were crossed while you recited the obligation. You were raised a Master Mason of your Lodge within the Grand Lodge of what ever state you reside and yes it is RELEVANT which Lodge you were a member of for your raising!

Anonymous said...

Do yourselves a favor. Forget about this group. They refuse to listen to reason. Their minds are made up and they will not change until they grow up and realize how childish their actions. Obligations obviously mean nothing to them. Mr. Smith I understand is soon to be wed. I hope his vows (obligation) aren't taken as lightly. That would be an insult to God and his wife. He did not leave his Blue Lodge before becoming involved in this group and hence in the proper manner and I have no respect for that! He is unfortunately a "marked man". On the other hand, I have great respect for Mr. Melton who left his Blue Lodge in the proper manner and with honor. He left before his involvement with this group. I am sure after a period of trial and maturity he will realize how childish his actions, and return to his former Blue Lodge.I am confident that he would be received with open arms. Both of these people left their Lodges and other groups because things didn't change fast enough to suit them. But things in Blue Lodge have changed considerably since their departure. Patience is a Virtue!

DMason said...

Yes, the undercurrent of discontent is now gone and the other 350 members have harmony once again.

I don't believe any of these folks will ever be received again with open arms, however. Trust me, the door has been closed.

Obligations apparently mean little to them . . .

John Galt said...

I would caution you to take my soon to be wife's name out of your mouth. There is no reason to bring such an honorable and decent woman into this. I would ask your indulgence as a gentleman to not bring her up again, particularly since you don't identify yourself. BTW, did you receive an invitation?

Regarding me leaving that lodge, well let's just leave it at that. It would not be appropriate to air those issues publically.

Sorry Brothers, that is just the way it is. I am out of your way and I wish you all the best in your harmony. I am sure that all will work out as intended.

If I may suggest, perhaps you should ask me why rather than engaging in speculation. You have my number, call me.


mgpierce said...

If we are childish and you don't consider us Masons, then why don't you move on to bigger and better things?

We should be a non-issue to you, don't you agree?

Or is it that our departure is the most interesting thing that has recently happened in your lodges?

Isn't it peculiar that all the "change" in your lodges happened immediately after we left? If there was as much effort put into Masonry as there was to grand lodge damage control, I never would have sought true Masonry elsewhere.

But, alas, now we have found it.

I would say good luck to you on your travels, anonymous, but I'm sure you won't need it.

Not much happening on your path.

Now hurry back to memorizing your lines.

mgpierce said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

You are forgotten.

ignatius j. reilly said...

It's possible that some of the animosity coming from the brothers of your old blue lodge and those that are following the traditional Grand Lodge system is that even though you say that you just want to be left alone to practice masonry the way you want, you still pepper your posts with comments that keep picking at the wound. Is it really surprising that some traditional masons would take offense when you say things like you had to find "true" masonry elsewhere, or when you refer to the traditional system as "Anglo-Saxon/American Masonry" (on another blog), or when you end your post with a little dig by saying "now hurry back to memorizing your lines"? Contempt can be obvious or subtle and I think what the brothers are picking up on is your attempt to veil your contempt for the system you just left with hollow declarations of good will. Granted, I have yet to see one of the dissenters' (those who left the blue lodge) blogs start the argument (my traditionalist brothers are always the ones that seem to kick the hornet nest first), but your responses can perpetuate it longer than is effective to get your point across. By expressing your contempt, whether through expressed words or implied through the tone of your posts, you'll most likely keep getting the negative posts I truly believe you would like to see fade away. Just my two cents which is worth about half what it was worth yesterday.

John Galt said...

I understand and appreciate your thoughts on this matter. I would like to invite you on a tour of past blog posts. Particularly I would like to draw your attention to the off topic responses. The most recent example of course is my post about Most Worshipful Brother John Slifko. It was about John Slifko, someway or another it became about me. You will see this phenomenon in a number of threads.

Another example would be your initial post under this blog posting. The post, if you remember was about the election of a new Grand Master. Your response was inquire about my role in the Grand Orient of the United States. It was off topic but I responded.

If we are truly forgotten then by all means forget us.

If we are not forgotten then meet us on the level so to speak or not at all.


ignatius j. reilly said...

Point taken, but I didn't feel my initial post on this thread was off topic at all. You started the thread by congratulating John Slifko on becoming the new Grand Master of GOUSA. I simply asked for confirmation that you were the new Grand Secretary, another Grand Officer in the Grand Orient (I'm assuming you both took your new offices at the same time). You don't think these topics are related? My question may not have dealt specifically with John Slifko, but I think it was related enough to remain on topic. But you are free to disagree.

And to clarify, I wasn't using the word "you" in my most recent post to refer to you specifically, but rather all the brothers that dissented from their respective blue lodges, joined Euclid Lodge or some other GOUSA lodge, and are posting on your blog threads. You would, of course, be included as part of that group and not the whole.

I don't know if most of the posts are concerning you specifically or not. I just know mine aren't unless I address you by name.

mgpierce said...


I take full responsibility for the words I have written, and they are solely my thoughts on the subject, not Galt's, nor anyone else's.

And you are correct in saying that my words are sharp in the wounds of our attackers. Yes, I do realize that I have occasionally been sucked into this game and feel lesser for it.

As for true Masonry, I realize that Masonry comes in many forms. What is "true" Masonry? I guess that is a personal question that we each have to answer for ourselves, and if we are true to ourselves, then it may result in a difficult decision. It would have been nice if we could have made that decision without being attacked.

This blog was a way to communicate amongst ourselves, but in no way did we ever entertain the thought that we wouldn't be attacked.

But there isn't a password to enter our discussion. You have been invited into our house and allowed to speak your peace.

Is it wrong to request a little respect in our own house? I don't believe so.

Even the "anonymous" speakers have been allowed to speak. At least you picked the name of a very famous hot dog seller to differentiate yourself. :)

I am guilty of responding harshly to certain rude and unruly guests. I will take your words to heart and act accordingly.

Thank you for your opinions on the matter.


sec昴宿六 2 said...

For those who bash The Grand Orient of The United States of America --go ahead for we will not respond in kind. We respect all Masons who were made first in their hearts. For that is what really matters, not the cardboard card in ones wallet.

ignatius j. reilly said...

We all look for truth where we can find it. If we don't find it on one path we look down another. It may be that my brothers who ridicule you only know one path and have a difficult time understanding there may be alternate routes to what we all seek. Some will see you as lost. Only you will ever know if they are right or mistaken. Travel well. If you arrive before me, keep a light on. I will try to do the same for you.

John Galt said...

Thank you Brother. We are all trying.


Anonymous said...

What would really be a great idea would be for the GOUSA to elect all officers who do not have lodges. That way, we might actually see some proactivity. I would hate to see this go from being a great idea to being simply a club for the smug or a cult of personality.


Tony said...

Why would you want a proactive Grand Orient?
How would a grand officer who isn't affiliated with a lodge know what is best for a lodge? Shouldn't a grand officer be involved at the lodge level so he knows what is going on "on the ground" and how his decisions affect things at the lodge level?

2 BOWL CAIN said...

The reason we refer to your branch of masonry as "anglo/american" masonry is because the world and the masonic community are awakening to the fact that there is more than one form of masonry.
America has been isolated thinking the America/Anglo system was the only game in town. So when discussing different types of masonic practices and philosophy, a reference point is needed.

So, America/Anglo is relegated to the stifling, control minded Grand Lodge system of a social club where occasionally a few like minded guys get together and attempt to make the Lodge a place of Learing and Enlightenment.
Now that masons and non masons are able to experience and talk about different forms of masonry, a label is needed for your form of masonry.

God bless free will.
God bless American masons for detesting american men for exercising their free

God bless for our forefathers who broke their obligations to britian for our freedoms today.(but american freemasons do not like masons acting free. they want obligated robots who will not act on the free will, and use obligation as an attempt to control another human being)

and it is UNAMERICAN to try and draw lines in the sand with this recognition BS.

Why the hell does a social club need jurisdictional rules of division, recognition rules brought upon by little states fiefdoms of control.

ignatius j. reilly said...

I understand that using labels helps differentiate "us" from "them" or "you" from "me" or however you want to divide the world, but it is unfortunate you feel the need to continue to use a label for the system you left that you know will be received negatively. It just seems contradictory to what I'm hearing GOUSA is trying to do. Is it that difficult to see that tagging "Anglo" to your label contains culturalist, if not racist, venom? Regardless of what your own background is, it sounds more petty than descriptive. It doesn't make sense that someone who claims to be interested in exploring truth and enlightenment could be that obtuse. I would think that referring to us simply as "American Grand Lodge Masonry" would differentiate you effectively, be as decriptive, and be less alienating. I thought GOUSA was interested in working in harmony with the other systems if possible. Chances of that might be better down the road with a little more diplomatic rhetoric.

John Galt said...

The term "Anglo-American Masonry" or "Anglo-Saxon Masonry" is not meant, nor should it be received as, an insult. It is descriptive only. Much like the term "Continental Masonry" is descriptive and not derogatory. Don't read more into it than is there. "American Grand Lodge Masonry" is quite a mouthful don't you agree?


ignatius j. reilly said...

You're missing my point. I understand "Anglo/American Masonry" is meant to be descriptive. I'm just saying that it is an insensative and confrontational description. Using is does only one of two things for your cause. It either shows that you are ignorant of the affect words have on people or that you don't care about it. Neither is very flattering and seems out of step with what I thought you gentlemen were trying to accomplish. And please don't be so condescending by telling me not to read into it more than is there. That's a hollow deflection. You're intention in using the term is not the issue. How the term is interpreted by those who read it IS the issue. The fact the you don't believe it should be received as an insult means nothing. You really don't think you have any say on how it should be received, do you? That's like saying you can control how a catcher catches a ball you throw at him. Are you one of those people that believe they can't throw a bad pitch? It may be no big deal to the members of GOUSA to use the term, but I suspect the members of "American Grand Lodge Masonry" might not see it as innocuous. If you really don't see the underlying connotations of using the term then you have a longer way to go on that road to enlightenment than I originally thought. That's unfortunate. And for the record, "American Grand Lodge Masonry" and "Anglo-American Masonry" contain exactly the same number of syllables and should fill the mouth about the same. Don't YOU agree?

John Galt said...

Not being condescending at all. It is descriptive and I am not going to walk on eggshells about it.

Perhaps I am looking at this in wrong way. Could you explain to me how this is insensitive or confrontational?


2 BOWL CAIN said...

What type of masonry should it be called when a percentage of the group refuses "recognition" of PHA?

Shoe fits.....

GOUSA is not concerned about regular/recognition garbage...
It has only been the "anglo's" that have created divisive groups, schools, gov't and laws!

Anglo's have a history of trying to exclude anyone that does not conform to their ways or look the same.

Same thing that has taken place in the long history of Anglo American freemasonry, divise alngo saxon elitist white only environment.

The men of Halcyon were called Ni*%@r Lovers for initiating men of color.
This is in cleveland in 2000!

Any masonic organization that still calls its own brother N-word Lovers and recognizes racist Grand Lodges should be referred to as "Anglo".
Sorry the shoe fits

ignatius j. reilly said...

PHA, 2 Bowl Cain? Don't you mean Afro-American Affiliation? If you're going to rely on cultural or racial epithets, let's be consistant, shall we? And based on the tone of your response, Cain, I think you've proven my point that you're using "Anglo" in a derrogatory manner. You practically admit the fact. Just read your own post and tell me there is no venom intended in the term. But the fact that you're blatant about it is actually a refreshing example of sincerity. At least you are honest about where you are coming from. But Galt...what can I say? No one is asking or expecting you to walk on eggshells. I'm not even asking you to stop using the term. I never have asked that of you. Check any of my previous posts. All I am saying is that even if you do not intend the use of "Anglo" to be derrogatory, it is. Why should it come to a surprise that a descriptive term that condenses a diverse and complex system down to terms of cultural or physical specificity could be offensive to members of that system? It belittles what they identify themselves with. Belittling someone is offensive. I'm just asking you to be honest about it. If you gentleman are the explorers of truth you contend you are, then maybe you need to explore the truth in yourselves first and admit that you're using the term for more than just its descriptive value. You're uncompromising insistance that your use of the term is nothing more than descriptive is interesting and may be emblematic of possible issues that you had with the the old system in the first place. That's not a dig, it's an observation. I'm not the enemy, gentleman. Any posts I've made in the past that were critical have been above the belt and reasonable. I'm not against GOUSA. I'm just pointing something out that may be an obstacle if GOUSA truly wants to work in harmony with other masonic affiliations. Did this post explain why the term is insensative or confrontational, Galt? Because if not, I'll be happy to try again. Good luck in your endeavors.

2 BOWL CAIN said...

I do not speak for the GOUSA, I speak for myself.

I do not tread lightly when engaged in discussions.

I speak from MY experiences.

In cleveland ohio, the North, where PHA's were just recently recognized, the elder freemasons of the 22nd masonic district in Ohio, had NO PROBLEMS turning on young men who opened the Temple doors to men of color.

What type of masonry should that be considered?

The same men also called the young men of Halcyon faggots for being single and not having wives yet!

I believe the rumor the elders spread were "boys town" references. See, I was an accepted brother until I took a stand on behalf of the men of Halcyon. As a sitting master of another Lodge, how could I obligate any young men knowing the Leaders and the grand lodge were racists and not on the level when dealing with the young men of halcyon?

Having a great relationship with the PHA's of my area, it was troublesome to know how 13 other Grand Lodges refuse to recognize their PHA counterparts, and since my grand lodge refused to do anything about that wrongness, how can I respect my Grand Lodge?

We also asked our grand lodge to look into the wrongful expulsion of brother peace as well. The grand lodge refused that request. blah blah blah

Since the Light is shining on the fact that your brand of masonry is not the only one now, and that there ARE racist tendencies throughout the fraternity, and big ego title seekers who expell masons without trials(abuse of power), sorry if a "label" has developed.

So, Iggy, I may not be the most harmonious mason on the planet, but I have seen and been apart of the worst humanity has to offer, and it was in YOUR fraternity!

So, do not take what I say as a representation of the whole GO USA, but I say it like I see it, and can be pretty rough about the way I express myself.

Plus, I have no tolerance for blind loyalists who wear rose colored glasses.
Whether masonically, religiously or politically! American is not the place for blind loyalists, britian is!

ignatius j. reilly said...

2 Bowl Cain:
I think I mentioned in a previous post that I respected your honesty and candor. There's no reason for me to mention it again. Your anger and reasons for using the term "Anglo" are duly noted and what I expected. Unfortunately, there are still elements of bigotry and intolerance in "my" fraternity. I'm hoping to have a hand in changing that from within over time. But your email just confirms what I've been arguing all along, that using "Anglo" is intended to be confrontational. Thank you for proving my point. However, I'd like to hear from those who still believe it is a harmless "descriptive" term.

2 BOWL CAIN said...

Nemo me impune lacessit

2 BOWL CAIN said...

you do not even know confrontational yet!

I have yet to begun!

"For he who desires peace, PREPARE FOR WAR"

ignatius j. reilly said...

I'm sure it will be a sight to see. But if you're hoping to confront me on something, I regret to inform you that you might be barking up the wrong tree. I have no issue with you. I agree with much of what you say, and if you want to use "Anglo-American Masonry" as a means of confrontation I have no problem with that either. I'm more concerned with the folks that are sitting back and defending that it is just a term of description and wondering why they cannot see the confrontational character of it. 2 Bowl Cain, we probably have views more similar than you can ever expect, we just have different levels of anger management.

2 BOWL CAIN said...

if you have ever walked in our shoes, there would be no management for your anger.

years of hypocrytical BS,
lies and attempted bullying, only experienced from within the craft, not without.

One brother stated to DDGM, I never had an enemy in life before I joined freemasonry. All because he would not go along with the old guard once an officer.

no my brother,the stuff we've experienced cannot be made up.

there is rancor in me, but not galt.

give it a rest

ignatius j. reilly said...

Give it a rest? Have you been reading anything I've been writing? All I've been doing is trying to get people to be accountable for the words they use. Just as you feel compelled to express your anger at the injustices in the world, I feel compelled to point out hypocricy when I see it regardless of what side of the argument it comes from. I've already admitted there is some hypocricy in the American Grand Lodge System just like there is some hypocricy whenever you get a group of people together. Give it a rest? I would gladly give it a rest if the people I was writing to would respond pursuasively. You've already responded to me and shown me that the use of the term "Anglo-American Masonry" is meant to be confrontational from you. But you yourself said you don't speak for GOUSA. I'm interested in discussing what the folks from GOUSA have to say about it. They say it is purely descriptive. Based on all the evidence to the contrarry, I am not pursuaded by of that excuse. Perhaps you might give it a rest and let someone else respond to my question for a change instead of trying to shout the issue away.

Anonymous said...

Your right, I have come to grips with it. I am not a GOUSA member so none of it really matters to me. Good luck to all of you.