"Masonic Jurisprudence is not the invention of new laws, or the procuring of their enactment, but the knowledge of the ancient usages of the Craft, and of the Landmarks and Laws of the Institution. Our laws are in many cases the usages of the Craft for many years, and it is only by a careful study of our history, policy and customs, that knowledge of these laws is obtained."
So tell me, how does the Jurisprudence Committee voting on whether on not they think a piece of legislation should or should not be enacted by the Craft fit into the above definition?
It seems to me that a Jurisprudence Committee should, through " a careful study of our history, policy and customs," determine whether or not a law should be enacted and then explain why or why not in context of those parameters. They should also see that any said legislation fits into the Code with all other legislation already enacted and in force. If they are not in conformity with the Code then changes should be suggested, either to the current Code or the legislation being proposed.
And I don't think that this committee should be composed of only Past Grand Heads of the bodies either. What expertise do you gain because you have served as a Grand High Priest or a Grand Master? It makes me wonder. Any thoughts? j
No comments:
Post a Comment