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!

Widows Sons

Bill Lins

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
Sons of Arthritis.jpg
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
@pointwithinacircle2

I'm just comparing a biker wearing the S&C to my dirty truck...

So, are you saying that wearing a leather vest makes you feel like something you are not? hmmm... the clothes don't make the man. Yes, obviously when you're wearing your leathers you feel like you wanna ride... but that is who you are.
The leather is to protect you from the road. When I was run over 8/31/13 my vest saved my back and right hand side. It wore through my blue jeans and under ware but not the vest. I also asure you wareing what ever you are wareing doesn't make you a mason.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
Before people started freaking out about numbers and membership decline, flinging the doors wide open to anyone who was willing to join, this would never have been a topic of conversation. Those who believe the second photo is an appropriate representation of Masonry would have never gotten a petition or at least never made it past the investigation committee.
The Widows Son are already Mason's of good standing but just a group that ride.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
If you fear these men or have preconceived notions about their character based on their appearance, that says more about you than it does them.

Meet on the Level: To a Freemason, means just that — all Freemasons are Brothers who meet on the same level, regardless of their social or economic status outside the lodge. Princes, presidents, and captains of business are no better or more important than bus drivers, plumbers, and paper boys when they sit in the lodge together. Masonry does not detract from a man’s accomplishments, nor does it exalt him above his Brothers because of his position outside the lodge.

This is one of our most basic tenants, Freemason 101 stuff.

Again, the same could be argued the other way. Commandry is an excellent example because of its over-the-top regalia. I find it rather silly that men dressed as peacocks are representative of Freemasonry. The Shriners have weird hats and drive tiny cars in parades. How about those Knights Templar who dress up in full medieval garb? Or the Scottish Rite actors who go all out in full gear? This is a fraternity. It's a bunch of grown men who are playing dress up and role playing. Obviously it's much more than that, but the point remains.
Some of us are also called Rolex bikers by the other Bike clubs. The vests are part of the protective gear the patches are to show who we assoeate with. Right now I have what is called a single family patch. I would like to ware something more as a group.
20130202_073223.jpg
Tn-Colors.jpg
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
Thank you for understanding my point, even if we disagree on it's applicability.
So the Grand Lodge says "If you want to be a recognized Masonic Group you can't do X, Y, and Z. And the Widows Sons say "We don't care what you say, we are gonna do X,Y, and Z anyway". This doesn't sound like a clothing is the problem to me.
No the GLoT just said you can not exist and you can not meet with those from other states that are WS. That is why I say the problem is the way the edict was written. If they would have approved one single patch or said there is one patch that is not apropate it would have worked. the 2007 GLoT was written in such a way that we could not even meet to talk about presenting a deferent image with out being kicked out of masonary.
 

pointwithinacircle2

Rapscallion
Premium Member
I am unfamiliar with the Texas legislation. However, I did learn yesterday the the GL of Michigan met recently and declared the WS clandestine in that state. Michigan is one of the two jurisdictions where I maintain membership. The proceedings of the GL are not yet published. I will await the official publication before commenting on their decision.
 

MarkR

Premium Member
So, you are a member of the Grand Lodge of Texas but belong to the Tennessee Grand Chapter of Widows's Sons?
I think the first vest is his. The Tennessee one is just an example of what a Widows Sons vest looks like. I think.
 

Scott Cummings

Registered User
If Masons, raised on good faith, join a club. And then partake in behavior unbecoming a Mason. Why would the GL ban the club, instead of the individual Mason? I can say that some Shiners drink to much. Some Templars are intolerant of all religions. It's an individual problem of a stunted growth Mason. The Widows Sons are not at fault in general. They only hold some individuals that need help finding direction, as do many Lodges and other associated bodies. It is our job to help a brother when in need. If helping them means having them expelled…..so be it. But to ban an entire club for acts of a few, is wrong. I joined the WS. So far everyone is top notch. If, in the future, my impression changes. Then I'm out…..but I would never ban them for it. I would express my concerns, and if not addressed properly by the club membership……. See ya later.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
If Masons, raised on good faith, join a club. And then partake in behavior unbecoming a Mason. Why would the GL ban the club, instead of the individual Mason? I can say that some Shiners drink to much. Some Templars are intolerant of all religions. It's an individual problem of a stunted growth Mason. The Widows Sons are not at fault in general. They only hold some individuals that need help finding direction, as do many Lodges and other associated bodies. It is our job to help a brother when in need. If helping them means having them expelled…..so be it. But to ban an entire club for acts of a few, is wrong. I joined the WS. So far everyone is top notch. If, in the future, my impression changes. Then I'm out…..but I would never ban them for it. I would express my concerns, and if not addressed properly by the club membership……. See ya later.
Because sometimes, the organization represents values not consonant with Freemasonry.
 

pointwithinacircle2

Rapscallion
Premium Member
Brother Scott, In the forum thread linked above is a statement from the GL of MI to the Widows Sons group in Michigan. It outlines the issues that need to be addressed before the situation can be resolved. It contains absolutely no reference to the behavior of any individual or of the group as a whole! The issues under dispute appear to be procedural and effect the sovereignty of the Grand Lodge. I realize that many Masons will still complain about following the edict of their Grand Lodge, but I believe there was a ceremony where they agreed to do so. In short, some men may have to decide if they want to be Masons who are true to their obligation or if they wish to pledge their allegiance elsewhere.
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
What specific values do the Widow's Sons represent that are not consonant with Freemasonry?
As noted previously,


They were not allowed to organize in Utah in 2008, as they had (and still have) a logo with a woman (a widow) posed in what was deemed a lascivious manner, they had a forum section named MILF....
 

pointwithinacircle2

Rapscallion
Premium Member
What specific values do the Widow's Sons represent that are not consonant with Freemasonry?
OK, I'm just going to say it. Disrespect.
It has been my observation he Widows Sons are free to organize anywhere that they are willing to respect the authority of the presiding Grand Lodge.
 

MRichard

Mark A. Ri'chard
Premium Member
I just don't get it. If you want to be in a motorcycle club, join a club. Plenty of masons are in such clubs and they don't need to display the square & compasses. The charity argument doesn't work for me, you should be doing that for your lodge. Not to mention that the 1% gangs do charity work but they still break the law whenever it pleases them. It just doesn't reflect well on the craft.
 

Browncoat

Registered User
As noted previously,

They were not allowed to organize in Utah in 2008, as they had (and still have) a logo with a woman (a widow) posed in what was deemed a lascivious manner, they had a forum section named MILF....
Those are not values.

OK, I'm just going to say it. Disrespect.
It has been my observation he Widows Sons are free to organize anywhere that they are willing to respect the authority of the presiding Grand Lodge.
This is better...at least you're paying attention and have a valid reason, unlike most of the posters in this thread.

I would argue that it's more about autonomy than respect. This isn't the first time a group has had problems with the GL. Michigan, for example, is playing hardball with Widow's Sons in that state, wanting them to change their logo and give the GL ownership of it. Shriners have had similar issues in the past. Just about all of the appendant bodies have had power struggles with GL at some point in their history.
 

pointwithinacircle2

Rapscallion
Premium Member
I would argue that it's more about autonomy than respect.
Autonomy: the quality or state of being self governing. From: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autonomy
Yes Brother, after giving the matter some consideration I believe that your word more accurately describes the situation. The disagreement comes down to who will govern the behavior of the Widows Sons in each jurisdiction, the presiding Grand Lodge or the Widows Sons International. These two organizations appear to have conflicting interests and goals. How would you propose that we decide who has the better claim of authority?
 

LAMason

Premium Member
The Widow’s Sons want to trade on the name and reputation of Freemasonry without accepting the constraints that come with that.

Any organization that wants to be considered officially “Masonic” by requiring its members to be Master Masons in good standing and using symbols that are considered distinctly Craft/Symbolic/Blue Lodge Freemasonry must accept that its recognition as “Masonic” is subject to the Constitution, Bylaws, General Regulations, and Edicts of that Grand Jurisdiction (Rules).

If they do not wish to comply with this all they have to do is remove the symbols and conditions that make them subject to authority of that Grand Jurisdiction. They can then do whatever they want as long as the individual members do not violate the the (Rules) of that Grand Jurisdiction.

As far as other Appendant/Affilliate/Concordant/Masonic Clubs having issues relative to autonomy/Grand Lodge authority , The Shrine is the only one that I know of. There have been instances of conflicts between the Shrine and Grand Lodges in the past. To my knowledge, except in one instance, these have all been resolved. I do not know of any other organizations that have had conflicts with Grand Lodges. If I am wrong please provide some examples with credible sources.
 
Top