Post Exclusive or Not Exclusive

Rudy Olano

Lincoln Lodge No. 34 (Phil)

Hanford Lodge No. 279 (CA)

29Jan06

Since this is not a one-to-one email like WB Frank sent me while ago, I will respond and send this out just like what have you done--- through yahoogroup. “may we met by on level…” so brothers can “act by the plumb” and finally, “part upon the square.”

The article I titled “Exclusive or Not Exclusive” quoted the concluding remarks of the PM response to the author as “a brother response to Not 4 Everybody.” No name, past position, nor lodge location and a direct quote from e-mail’s concluding remarks. The only people who knew the identity of the responder is the people he himself cc’d to.

I am not aware that I can not post my opinions written for AMD or obligated to respond at all. The Exclusive or Not Exclusive article was sent to this forum/group and you all read that article I posted in MY personal website where I store most of my writings not AMD’s. I agree on visitors conduct and etiquette within the Lodge however, this forum is NOT a Lodge.

The article was written as expression of an opinion. About a set standard determined by brothers long before many of us joined. Some of us do not agree on some portions but nevertheless complied with it. As I wrote on the original article, the word “exclusive” can be also be limited, restricted due to the existing rules and regulations. If a Past Master judged my opinion as a negative due to “sensitivity from previous local experiences,” well then that is his own opinion. Let us agree to disagree. However, the suggestion for me to “take(n) more time to learn about him and us as Brothers before expressing opinions, and less time being “preachy,” is not conducive to individual freedom to form an opinion and I find it an appalling judgment of my character. Worshipful Brother, I don’t need anyone permission to form my own opinion. My view expressed in my article is NOT directed to you, to other PM or your Lodge. You are absolutely right I don’t know you or any member of your Lodge but that doesn’t mean I can not make comments “for the benefit of…and Freemasonry, in general.”

It is presumptuous, if I may use the word, to assume that my article about “exclusivity” is directed toward specific Lodge since a single Lodge does not represent the entire Fraternity.

Worshipful Brother Sir, I was just told to seat in the northeast corner and to watch and “learn more” before starting to be “too judgmental or controversial.” I humbly offer to return your observation; you have not also took your time to know me before assuming I am a newly initiated EA or an impostor as implied in your statement of “age-old problem.” Masonic visitation is not a right but a privilege, owing your “You do no(t) have that benefit here,” I will make sure not to disturb the “peace and harmony” of your group by staying away and will ensure to relay that message to all my Brothers within the reach of my Cabletow. Its been awhile I recited the Fellow Craft Charge, “..not to palliate nor aggravate....” so I understand that most of us(including myself) are still rough ashlars struggling to achieve the perfection which some had already attained.

Thank you very much for an eye opening experience and I will then spend my time in a place where one could express their opinion freely as guaranteed by US Constitution---Mason or non “exclusive” mason alike. If you would like to engage in a friendly discussion and voice your opinion about the subject in a world-wide audience, follow the link:

http://lnx.freemasons-freemasonry.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=223