Part II- who, besides a member of your own Lodge, can you NOT examine? Be careful- there are certain conditions involved.
C'mon, guys- aren't there any takers here?
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!
Refusing...
- Thread starter Blake Bowden
- Start date
C'mon, guys- aren't there any takers here?
I have looked throught the law book and can find nothing on this, I still am lookinng for the law that says you cannot ask for a members dues card. I see where 381 leaves it open ending with the term visitor but I do not see anywhere else where it has a diffent procedure for members and various others, now keep in mind I am legally blind when I look in the law book but 20/20 otherwise.
Art 380 says a Texas MM with dues cards and ID does not have to go through the avouchment or examination process which would include the SW being satisfied would it not? If he were not satisified then the Brother would have to be vouched for which the law says that he does not have to be nor examined if he is Texas MM so I am thourghly confused??
I feel like my law book or brain is missing a section!!
Art 380 says a Texas MM with dues cards and ID does not have to go through the avouchment or examination process which would include the SW being satisfied would it not? If he were not satisified then the Brother would have to be vouched for which the law says that he does not have to be nor examined if he is Texas MM so I am thourghly confused??
I feel like my law book or brain is missing a section!!
Last edited:
Art 380 says a Texas MM with dues cards and ID does not have to go through the avouchment or examination process which would include the SW being satisfied would it not? If he were not satisified then the Brother would have to be vouched for which the law says that he does not have to be nor examined if he is Texas MM so I am thourghly confused??
I feel like my law book or brain is missing a section!!
No, you are reading it correctly. The problem is that the Law says one thing while the Committee on Work is saying something else- just another thing which really needs to be clarified @ Grand Lodge. Are we having fun yet?
LRG- you're kinda close but not quite. Anyone else?
J
JEbeling
Guest
well maybe the "Committee on Hope and Change" should read the law .. !
seems like that might solve the problem.. !
seems like that might solve the problem.. !
Wingnut
Premium Member
JBD
Premium Member
Dont confuse the issues with the facts or laws!
+1
Now that's funny right there... :biggrin:
OK. The answer is:
1. The sitting Grand Master.
2. The DDGM when making his official visit(s). As he is representing the GM, he is treated the same.
Now, here's one on Masonic protocol- you won't find it in the Law book:
When pro tem-ing (filling in) for an officer of the Lodge, do you wear:
1. His apron but not his jewel.
2. His jewel but not his apron.
3. Both.
4. Neither.
theme from Jeopardy follows
1. The sitting Grand Master.
2. The DDGM when making his official visit(s). As he is representing the GM, he is treated the same.
Now, here's one on Masonic protocol- you won't find it in the Law book:
When pro tem-ing (filling in) for an officer of the Lodge, do you wear:
1. His apron but not his jewel.
2. His jewel but not his apron.
3. Both.
4. Neither.
theme from Jeopardy follows
JBD
Premium Member
You responding to Wingnut's post directly above yours or what?
I don't think Wingnut's post is referenced in the Law
:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin::biggrin: