My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

GL of Louisiana withdraws recognition of GEKT

Keith C

Registered User
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.

My understanding is "Sort of."

Except in PA, where the York Rite bodies are under direct control of the GM, Appendant Bodies are indeed independent. However, the GM of the jurisdiction has the authority to allow or prevent MMs under their jurisdiction from joining and attending Appendant Bodies. So, except in PA, the Grand Chapter, Grand Council and Grand Commandry do not need any "approvals" from any Grand Lodge, they can be devoided of membership by decision of the GM.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
My understanding is "Sort of."

Except in PA, where the York Rite bodies are under direct control of the GM, Appendant Bodies are indeed independent. However, the GM of the jurisdiction has the authority to allow or prevent MMs under their jurisdiction from joining and attending Appendant Bodies. So, except in PA, the Grand Chapter, Grand Council and Grand Commandry do not need any "approvals" from any Grand Lodge, they can be devoided of membership by decision of the GM.
In some GLs, appendant bodies do need specific GM approval, and even GM approval of the bylaws.
 

texanmason

Registered User
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.

Many appendant bodies are sovereign - however, there's the issue of regularity & stepping on toes. The Scottish Rite and CBCS, for example, have their own Craft degrees, but have agreed to not confer them in favor of being recognized by the various State & National grand lodges.
 

LK600

Premium Member
Many appendant bodies are sovereign - however, there's the issue of regularity & stepping on toes. The Scottish Rite and CBCS, for example, have their own Craft degrees, but have agreed to not confer them in favor of being recognized by the various State & National grand lodges.

Maybe it's the terminology I'm getting hung up on. So, (depending on place) an appendant body is sovereign, but only if the GL in that area allows it to be (via allowing it's members to join or not)? Seems confusing. :)
 

Companion Joe

Premium Member
I used the term sovereign to mean not subservient to GLs. In my state, our Grand Chapter and Grand Council are actually chartered by our GL because we pulled out of the General Grand. Those charters could be yanked by the GM, but those bodies have their own duly elected grand heads, conduct their own business, control their own finances, etc. As long as the bodies aren't doing something in violation of the state Masonic code, they are independent.

The big problem with situations like La. and Ark. is that a lot of people suffer because a few people can't get along and do what they are supposed to do.
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
So, except in PA, the Grand Chapter, Grand Council and Grand Commandry do not need any "approvals" from any Grand Lodge, they can be devoided of membership by decision of the GM.
That is indeed the way it is here in Kentucky and, I assume, all states in the U.S.
Maybe it's the terminology I'm getting hung up on. So, (depending on place) an appendant body is sovereign, but only if the GL in that area allows it to be (via allowing it's members to join or not)? Seems confusing.
Yep, but that is the way that it is.
 

Bloke

Premium Member
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.
Appendant Bodies will vary, some being under control of or linked to a Craft GL others being Sovereign, but being appendant, they all have one thing in common - you need to be a Freemason to be a member, and if you cease to be a Freemason, you no longer qualify for the appendant body. That's part of the reason they are "appendant" bodies, even if Sovereign, the qualifications to join are ultimately controlled by the Craft. If not, they sit outside Freemasonry and are not appendant.
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
hey all have one thing in common - you need to be a Freemason to be a member, and if you cease to be a Freemason, you no longer qualify for the appendant body.
Right. Here even if you are a life member of an appendant body if you are suspended or expelled from your Blue Lodge you are suspended from the appendant body for non-affiliation.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
Right. Here even if you are a life member of an appendant body if you are suspended or expelled from your Blue Lodge you are suspended from the appendant body for non-affiliation.
Shrine reserves the right to determine if the loss of the prerequisite was for a Shrine offense.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
Shrine reserves the right to determine if the loss of the prerequisite was for a Shrine offense.
Example: loss of membership in GL AR for purportedly owning a liquor store. Owning a liquor store is not a Shrine offense. The Shriner was allowed to keep his Shrine membership.
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
Example: loss of membership in GL AR for purportedly owning a liquor store. Owning a liquor store is not a Shrine offense. The Shriner was allowed to keep his Shrine membership.
Got it. I assume that the Shrine in AR does not require Blue Lodge membership in order to join.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
And how is that working out for the Shrine in AR ? Not well methinks
I don’t have numbers. I will defer to our AR resident on the list, who is now a MO Mason, I understand.
Masonry itself is in a difficult position in AR because of disruption in the GL. KS has withdrawn recognition. Members have joined other GLs.
 

Companion Joe

Premium Member
I'm not a member of the Shrine, but the whole deal in Ark. has always been a bit of puzzlement to me and certainly a black eye for Masonry. The Shrine has never been directly Masonic. A requirement for membership is being a Master Mason. Fair enough, but it doesn't operate under the umbrella of Freemasonry the same way York Rite and Scottish Rite bodies do. When the GL of Ark. declared its MMs could not be a member of the Shrine, I honestly don't see it any difference than the GL saying its membership couldn't belong to the Moose, Elks, Rotary, Lions, or Kiwanis.
 
Top