BroBook
Premium Member
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!
Has this occurred?
- Thread starter Cblack
- Start date
BroBook
Premium Member
I think I just realized what was implied
"You want to pay bills over there and come here and eat"
BroBook
My Freemasonry HD
brother josh
Registered User
I have as one of the arguments on the Prince Hall side. Doesn't make much sense though.
dfreybur
Premium Member
There is a mechanism in place. When I first moved to Texas I visited lodges in both jurisdictions before petitioning a lodge in one of them. The MWPHAGLofTX has a rule limiting number of visits. Visit more than some number of times and you're expected to petition. They allow "associate membership" so it's not a requirement to demit your other lodge memberships but you would have to start paying dues. I heard two different limits on the number of visits but that's something that would become well known in the details should it start happening regularly. As to money during visits there is the charity bucket that gets passed around so it's not free to visit.
I've been told that the GLofTX has a similar limit on the books but it rarely gets enforced. I pay for meals after I've visited once, usually even on my first visit.
Thanks for the info. I was not aware of that.
The GLoTX rule is somewhat different. It states that an unaffiliated Mason (one who does not belong to any Lodge) may only visit a particular Lodge 3 times without submitting a petition for affiliation. It is to prevent a "Brother" from enjoying the hospitality of a Lodge without contributing toward its upkeep. There are other restrictions on unaffiliated Masons, as shown below:
Art. 373. (410). Non-Affiliates: Privileges Allowed and Denied.
An unaffiliated Mason, holding a dimit or its equivalent granted by a regular Lodge or the authorized Grand Secretary of this or any other Grand Jurisdiction with which we are in fraternal relations, may:
1. Visit a Lodge as provided in Art. 382.
2. Sign a petition for a new Lodge Under Dispensation (Art. 184), or for a new chartered Lodge (Art. 205) or affiliate with any Lodge in this State; provided that such unaffiliate, in any case, is domiciled in this Grand Jurisdiction.
3. March in a Funeral or other Masonic Procession or appear Masonically clothed at a Masonic funeral, when properly accredited and permitted by the Worshipful Master, upon satisfactorily accounting for his non-affiliation.
He shall not:
1. Preside over or fill any station or place in any Lodge.
2. Confer, or otherwise participate in conferring any degree.
3. Vote by ballot or otherwise on any matter coming before any Lodge, or lodge any protest whatever.
4. Address the Lodge or speak upon any matter before it, unless invited thereto by the Master presiding.
5. Participate in any official capacity, or in any organization or body whose membership is limited to Master Masons.
Unaffiliated Masons are amenable to Masonic Law and subject to Masonic discipline. (See Art. 495.)
Art. 382. (418). Non-Affiliates.
A non-affiliated Mason may not visit any Lodge in this jurisdiction more than three times unless he shall petition a Lodge for membership. If his petition is rejected he may be allowed to visit Lodges for one year thereafter, when he should again petition.
BroBook
Premium Member
otherstar
Registered User
I was an unaffiliated Mason for 9 years and when I decided to return to the Craft, my Lodge told me that meant I could only sit in a tiled meeting, but that I was free to visit the lodge, have dinner, etc., and get to know the brothers before I petitioned. As a matter of fact, my Lodge does this with all prospective members, and encourages all EAs and FCs to come to the Lodge whenever there is a degree or a stated meeting (even if they are ineligible to attend the tiled portion of the meeting because they are of the wrong degree).
dfreybur
Premium Member
I suspect this is because GLofTX and most other what I'll call "George Washington" GLs have traditions to allow multiple affiliation. Some are single affiliation jurisdictions but it appears to me most aren't. I hold California and Illinois affiliation and am due for vote in Texas this month so clearly all three of those states allow it. I've met plenty of brothers holding dues cards from many other states as well.
In comparison it appears to me that many (most?) PHA GLs have single affiliation traditions to some degree. MWPHAGLofTX allows "associate membership" to get around such a tradition. They allow multiple affiliation but impose some detailed restrictions on a brother who is a member of more than one lodge.
I don't believe that has anything to do with it. If a Brother has multiple affiliations, the law above does not apply. If a Brother had membership in one Lodge only, and demitted from that Lodge (or that Lodge demised), then he would be an unaffiliated Mason & the law would apply.
dfreybur
Premium Member
I'll try to reorganize my thinking on this to explain myself -
If your jurisdiction comes out of a heritage that does multiple affiliation then your rules need to handle the case where a brother is a member of zero lodges. As long as he's a member of one or more lodges his dues are contributing and traveling is a landmark. This reasoning applies even if your jurisdiction has evolved towards single affiliation over the decades. This reasoning tends to not pay attention to what jurisdiction(s) he's a member of. GLofTX comes out of a multiple affiliation tradition so our rules are to handle the zero memberships case.
If your jurisdiction comes out of a heritage that does not allow multiple affiliation then your rules are going to be about handling transfers. They will end up handling short term travel by allowing visits and they will also handle long term travel by transfers. If he's going to be local for a while then his dues should contribute to where he is not where he was. This reasoning applies even if your jurisdiction has evolved towards multiple affiliation over the decades. MWPHAGLofTX comes out of a single affiliation tradition so their rules address locality not at-large membership. They also support associate membership showing they have indeed evolved towards the multiple affiliation model.
To me the rules become a question of "Can you afford to affiliate with our lodge also?" versus "Have you been here long enough to count as a local yet?" while both protecting the local funding.
BroBook
Premium Member
Excuse my feet my brother I was just saying that they will die not that we had to wait to move forward !!! I am ready to help heal myself and masonry!!!
My Freemasonry HD
Aeelorty
Registered User
I argue that racism would exist without being taught. The reason being that it is an outgrowth from the innate heuristics that our minds run on. We naturally form certain negative beliefs about things that are foreign to avoid danger, this leads to in group bias and out group prejudices. prejudices become discrimination and racism.
The way to combat these tendencies is build connections to people and groups that are different than oneself. Applying this to the issue of visitation/ recognition, the GLs should meet regularly over a cup of coffee = )
This post maybe out of place on this thread, I didnt read it before responding to the quoted post. Sorry to derail.
dfreybur
Premium Member
I just looked at my wrist watch to see what time it is. The time right now is still October. So the vote on the floor at MWPHAGLofTX is still a few weeks out. Patience may be one of the first lessons we are taught at the door of lodge but yikes it's a lesson that sinks into my thick skull very slowly. I'm good at serenity but I gradually learn it's not quite the same thing as patience.
Ping to keep the topic fresh. Thanks for informing us! Our prays go with you
MoonlightMadness357
Premium Member
:SNC: Greetings Brothers though recongnition is not an issue here in Maryland, this is a issue that overall troubles me. I am A newly raised Master Mason and I'm active duty Navy so at some point I will Travel, I just wish I could travel freely in masonry without discrimination. I am dedicated to the craft and i want to be actively involved no matter whereI get stationed
On Saturday morning, I was hoping that the Fraternal Relations Committee would report on the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Texas and on the Grand Lodge in France, but apparently the Grand Master did not permit the Committee to make its Report, other than to vote on recognition for the Grand Lodge of Tahiti. The Committee Chairman said that their report included information on the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Texas and on the Grand Lodge in France, but he was not allowed to report on those items.
The Grand Master then congratulated himself for finishing all the Resolutions and Committee Reports by 9:30 AM Saturday, and then turned our Grand Lodge session into a joke-telling marathon for the next 2 1/2 hours, with only the necessary breaks to ballot on Grand Junior Warden, Grand Treasurer, a Home & School Director and a Committee on Work position.
Why wasn't the Fraternal Relations Committee allowed to give its report? What was in the Report that the Grand Jokester didn't want the members to hear?
The Grand Master then congratulated himself for finishing all the Resolutions and Committee Reports by 9:30 AM Saturday, and then turned our Grand Lodge session into a joke-telling marathon for the next 2 1/2 hours, with only the necessary breaks to ballot on Grand Junior Warden, Grand Treasurer, a Home & School Director and a Committee on Work position.
Why wasn't the Fraternal Relations Committee allowed to give its report? What was in the Report that the Grand Jokester didn't want the members to hear?
Bro Darren
Premium Member
This just adds fuel to the conspiracy flame - You know, that the Masons are mere foot soldiers kept out of the loop and that we have no idea what goes on above our own "rank"