GL of Louisiana withdraws recognition of GEKT

Discussion in 'The York Rite' started by texanmason, Aug 20, 2018.

  1. texanmason

    texanmason Registered User

    52
    34
    18
    Today in "which Grand Lodge goes nuclear this month," the GM of Louisiana withdrew recognition of the Grand Encampment of Knights Templar. KTs are only allowed to continue Templary if they are operating outside of the GEKT.

    https://freemasonsfordummies.blogspot.com/2018/08/gl-of-louisiana-withdraws-recognition.html?m=1

    TL;DR: a Past Grand Master of ̶G̶E̶K̶T̶ the GLoLA (and PGC of the GCKTLA) got expelled from the GLoLA, GEKT did not expel him and recognized him as a ̶M̶E̶G̶M̶ Departmental Commander. GLoLA went nuclear.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
  2. chrmc

    chrmc Registered User

    679
    312
    63
    I agree to a certain extent that LA had a very harsh reaction, but what were they supposed to do? We can all clearly see that GEKT is in the wrong here, so when they go out of they way to recognize the expelled member, let him keep all his titles etc. what's the next step for the Grand Master?

    To a certain extent when you get challenged that clearly in public you have to respond. Especially when it seems the expulsion was justified to begin with (from what I'm reading).

    But yeah, Masonic politics and all that...
     
  3. Matt L

    Matt L Site Benefactor

    473
    501
    143
    It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood. Does anyone know the reason the PGM got expelled? The GE is going against their own Constitution.
     
  4. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,345
    183
    Umm, Past Grand Commander of LA Grand Commandery?
     
  5. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,318
    3,317
    183
    Sad state of affairs.
     
  6. texanmason

    texanmason Registered User

    52
    34
    18
    Oh, I agree, the GLoLA is in the right. This is just kind of the nuclear option, IMO.

    See page 170 of the 2016-2017 GLoLA proceedings for the reason behind his initial suspension.

    http://library.la-mason.com/PastProceedings/2017/2016-2017.pdf

    My apologies, Bro. Glen. I misread the post. DuTreil is both a Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge and a Past Grand Commander of the Grand Commandery. I somehow screwed that up in my head as a "Past Grand Master of the Grand Encampment."

    Error noted & appropriate edits made - thank you for pointing that out!
     
  7. chrmc

    chrmc Registered User

    679
    312
    63
    Thanks for this. I must admit the more I read about this, the more I think we need to applaud the GLoLA. Seems like they've had a crappy situation with a PGM that they've handled as professional, Masonic and transparent as possible. Not often we see that in Masonic politics.

    Seems like they are clearly in the right here and some harsh criticism needs to be aimed at the Grand Encampment.
     
    Warrior1256 likes this.
  8. Keith C

    Keith C Registered User

    825
    959
    93
     
  9. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,345
    183
    PGMs are such a bother.
     
    Bloke, MarkR, Bill Lins and 2 others like this.
  10. Bro. Stewart P.M.

    Bro. Stewart P.M. Lead Moderator Emeritus Staff Member

    2,443
    466
    103
    The irony, both Brethren Du Treil & WB Bilyeu were both a pleasure individuality and together, in person. In fact, if my memory serves correctly, they both are charter members of O.K. Allen Lodge #33 with me.

    Sadly I had to demit a few years back... I simply couldn’t get over to any of the meetings.
     
  11. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,318
    3,317
    183
    Seems like it to me.
     
  12. LK600

    LK600 Premium Member

    654
    710
    113
    Interesting. From what I read, his expulsion is the VERY LEAST of what should or could have happened. I think I have to be on the side of the GLoLA on this.
     
  13. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,318
    3,317
    183
    Same here.
     
  14. Bloke

    Bloke Premium Member

    4,292
    3,027
    133
    I dont think I have read a single comment on this which has not been supportive of GLofL - that doesn't happen very often.

    While we are only reading one side of this expulsion, the reality is even if it was unjust, the excluded looses the right to sit in an appendant Masonic Body.... and the only place to fix that is within the Body of the GL where the expulsion took place, not by welcoming the expelled into your Chapter, Encampment, Shrine, Conclave etc etc
     
    Warrior1256, Bill Lins and bupton52 like this.
  15. Bloke

    Bloke Premium Member

    4,292
    3,027
    133
    I'd take 50 painful PMGs over a painful GM anyday :)
     
  16. chrmc

    chrmc Registered User

    679
    312
    63
    Another interesting thing, which I think brother Cook brought up on another site, is the fact that my having an expelled brother sit in on the sessions, the Grand Encampment most likely made a lot of members break their obligation, as they sat in lodge with a suspended Mason.

    Of course depends on the exact wording of the obligation, whether the session can be considered "a lodge" etc. but still makes you think.

    Must also say that I'm very surprised about the lack of comment in the thread from some of our very regular York Rite guys. Would have thought they would have had some comments...
     
    Bloke and Bill Lins like this.
  17. Companion Joe

    Companion Joe Premium Member

    858
    891
    113
    I'm obviously a regular YR poster, and I have read this thread, but I honestly really don't have a major opinion or feeling on it.
    I don't disagree with the GM having the right to do what he did because YR bodies are Masonic. I also don't like Blue Lodge GMs getting heavy on heads of sovereign bodies. It's all just a peeing contest the fraternity could do without.
     
    Matt L likes this.
  18. Glen Cook

    Glen Cook G A Cook Site Benefactor

    2,910
    3,345
    183
    Truth
     
    Bloke likes this.
  19. LK600

    LK600 Premium Member

    654
    710
    113
    Let me first state I know very little about the appendant bodies beyond the basics, so this is more of a question that an argument. It is my (limited) understanding there is no such thing as a Sovereign body in Masonry outside of the blue lodge(s). All appendant bodies exist at the permission and the pleasure of Blue Lodge, and are to serve the sames needs. Is this incorrect? I have no disagreement with anything specifically that you wrote.
     
    Bloke likes this.
  20. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,318
    3,317
    183
    LOL!!!!
     
    Bloke likes this.

Share My Freemasonry