2011 Proposed Grand Lodge Resolutions

Discussion in 'General Freemasonry Discussion' started by owls84, Oct 20, 2011.

  1. owls84

    owls84 Moderator Premium Member

    1,653
    9
    38
    A problem with this is it is hypocritical. Unless I am misunderstanding this, which I am sure I am, the men that spoke to you were holding a candidate to standard they were not holding themselves to. These men were violating GL law by discussing a ballot, how they would vote, or why they voted a certain way. Having said that, I don't think anyone here is saying we need to rehabilitate but rather forgive those who have been rehabilitated. It should be an individual case by case basis and if the investigation committee is not doing their job don't blame the petitioners blame they lazy investigators.

    This is not like a club wanting recognition this is another Grand Jurisdiction requesting it and it must go through the Fraternal Relations committee and be reported on as other jurisdictions are each year. It is not as easy as a resolution to recognize them due to the formalities. In this case there was a one year layover and should be reported this year with the recommendation of the committee. This is so they can work out any logistics if needed.
     
  2. KFerguson84

    KFerguson84 Premium Member

    75
    3
    0
    Isn't that what "taking a good man & making him better" means?[/QUOTE]

    No, that's taking a bad man and making him good. That's not our business. Rehabilitation is a word for taking a person with an extremely bad habit (be it addiction, theft, what have you) and making them a functional member of society. We in masonry want men who are already at the upper echelon of functional society to elevate them into a model of what functional society should strive to be.
     
  3. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    Bro. Kyle, I must disagree. Bro. Brent and I were both speaking of someone who had committed an offense and, through time, had rehabilitated himself. I see no reason that such a person should be denied the right to petition for the Degrees. Remember, he has to be (in Texas) recommended by 5 Masons, 2 of whom must be members of the Lodge petitioned, before the petition can be presented to the Lodge. Those Brethren should know the petitioner well enough to be satisfied of his rehabilitation before recommending him. Then, as stated by other Brethren, the investigating committee can do their job.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2011
  4. Mac

    Mac Moderator Premium Member

    542
    25
    18
    I hope these resolutions aren't indicative of returning to an older system with draconian measures. Looking for ways to get rid of existing members (misdemeanors of moral turpitude?) and going back to one black ball, and opening a Master's Lodge for everything...

    It just feels like we're doing the opposite of evolving.

    In a state where old prejudices are still carried by some of our old-timers (and unfortunately some young brothers as well), I would think it unmasonic to grant that brother the privilege of denying a good man's admission to the fraternity based on nothing besides his religion or skin color. And someone wants to remove the bit about it being an offense to make disparaging remarks about a man's religion or race? That seems like a terrible idea to me personally.

    I can only hope half of these are thrown out, otherwise this will be a very boring Grand Communication in my opinion. A good number of these don't strike me as "positive" resolutions where everyone leaves the room thinking Masonry has been improved. Aside from money, the big concern seems to be on finding reasons to get men out of Masonry or prevent them from getting in.

    The cliche is "evolve, or die." I look forward to observing the evolution of Freemasonry in Texas, but I don't know that this year we will make any major steps in that direction.
     
  5. bullrack33

    bullrack33 Premium Member

    85
    1
    0
    Well said Mac, well said indeed!
     
  6. Traveling Man

    Traveling Man Premium Member

    465
    7
    18
    Trying to roll back time is unacceptable period; those supposed good old days are a thing of the past!!
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2011
  7. Mac

    Mac Moderator Premium Member

    542
    25
    18
    Based on discussion in Lodge on the resolutions, I anticipate this being an interesting annual communication. I wish I could be there, but best of luck staying civil on some pretty hot topics. ;)
     
  8. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,215
    45
    68
    I think that the debate could be pretty lively on some of these issues. We, in Oklahoma, just had our GL communication and it got heated on some of the proposed resolutions and the only two that were really "hot-button" type issues were communicating more than one degree in a day and allowing business to be conducted on the EA or FC degree at the WM's discretion. Good luck to my Texas Brothers on this debate. I hope it does turn out for the betterment of the Fraternity.
     
  9. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    What did y'all decide? (Inquiring minds wish to know!) :wink:
     
  10. Dave in Waco

    Dave in Waco Premium Member

    764
    2
    0
    Greetings Brethren!!
    It's been a busy year for me, but I do still keep an eye here. I do have to comment on Resolution 14: the deletion of Article 505 Paragraph 37. As a Mason I am ashamed to think that another Mason would suggest such a deletion. I think it nothing more them a thinly veiled attempt to allow them to be a racist, a most unmasonic act.

    On a procedural note, I do not think that because of this being acted upon last year can even be addressed at GL this year without a 2/3 majority vote or something like that to discuss it. Judging by the overwelming vote in favor of this resolution last year, I doubt it will be discussed.

    As many of you I have talked know I feel it is sad enough that this resolution was needed in the first place. It's down right appalling that a Mason would suggest taking it off the books after a year.

    In this country, you have the right to be a racist. I suggest people choosing that path of hate join a group founded on those principles instead of trying to defame Freemasonry, an organization rooted in tolerance, with their unwholesome views.
     
  11. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    Actually, it's the other way around. Had the resolution been defeated last year, we would have had to wait 3 years before bringing it up again unless 2/3rds of the Lodges & Members voted to reconsider it.

    Art. 172. Resolutions: Law Changes; Charter Petitions.
    (in part) Unless approved by a two-thirds majority of Lodges and members present, any resolution proposing any change in this Grand Lodge or its Laws or affecting jurisprudence in any way that has been rejected by a vote of this Grand Lodge, the subject matter of such proposal shall not again be considered for a period of three (3) years subsequent to the Grand Annual Communication at which the proposal was considered. (~1999)
     
  12. Dave in Waco

    Dave in Waco Premium Member

    764
    2
    0
    Thanks for the law clarification Bro. Bill. I had not looked it up. Just had gotten in from a 3 hour Stated Meeting. We did something for the second time I have never heard anyone doing before. We called off, and we went and visited another Lodge during our refreshment and then came back to finish our meeting.
     
  13. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,215
    45
    68
    Well it was decided that we could not conduct business meetings on the EA and FC degrees. It was defeated and I was surprised at the number of people against it. My personal take is that if left to the WM why wouldn't it be okay? Most of them are just paying bills anyway so no harm in them being there for that, plus it helps make people feel like they are actually a part of something.

    The other was also defeated, but as a side note the Grand Master put out this message: "Now for the news for those men who may have wanted to join the Fraternity but felt that, especially in these economic conditions they just did not have the time. Usually it takes at least 3 months to become a Master Mason, with materials which must be memorized after each stage of membership. During 2012, it will be possible for a man to petition a Lodge, take the Entered Apprentice Degree there, and then take the second and third degrees in one day with a group. Two such special days are being planned. Information will be sent to the Lodges shortly." I am not happy about this at all. I am glad the "all the way in a day" was defeated but this is not much better.

    As a summary here are the results:

    Resolution #1 - Grand Master cannot issue a dispensation for a Lodge to confer more than two Degrees on an individual in any one calendar day - Failed
    Resolution #2 - A Brother whose application for affiliation to a Lodge has been rejected must wait 1 year before re-applying - Passed
    Resolution #3 - Changes requirement of Lodge from submitting monthly reports to quarterly - Failed
    Resolution #4 - During Annual Communication of Grand Lodge, matters of substance can only be voted on during Saturday session - Passed
    Resolution #5 - Provides alternative editing committee for Grand Lodge Proceedings - Passed
    Resolution #6 - Allows Lodges to conduct business on an EA or FC Degree - Failed
    Resolution #7 - Pulled from Consideration
    Resolution #8 - Pulled from Consideration
    Resolution #9 - Changes composition of Jurisprudence Committee - Failed
    Resolution #10 - Increases compensation for Grand Secretary - Failed
    Resolution #11 - Changes computation and distribution of interest earned on endowed Perpetual Membership fund - Failed
    Resolution #12 - Increases Per Capita from $8.00 to $13.00 - Failed
    Resolution #13 - Changes the policy concerning the handling of vacancies during the filing period for Grand Lodge offices - Passed
     
  14. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,215
    45
    68
    Originally I may have misquoted the 1st resolution. If I did I hope the above cleared it up.
     
  15. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    Now that ought to draw a comment or two!
     
  16. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,344
    1,144
    183
    Now that's cool!
     
  17. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,215
    45
    68
    Yeah you would think it would have. I see no reason why that one didn't pass. It is getting ridiculous to think that a $5 increase would fail when so many others are higher than that.
     
  18. Ashton Lawson

    Ashton Lawson Premium Member

    207
    7
    18
    Your Per Capita increase failed because Masons are willing to routinely pay $100 to take their family of four to dinner and a movie, but complain incessantly that dues of $100 a year will immediately put them in the poorhouse.

    Apparently, brothers on a fixed income would also be left in the cold, and allegedly nobody in one of history's greatest charitable organizations would lift a finger to help them.

    If I had a dollar for every time a Brother lit a cigarette or pulled a chew prior to telling me how hard a dues increase would be on him...but I digress.

    Bollocks.
     
  19. Brent Heilman

    Brent Heilman Premium Member

    1,215
    45
    68
    So true Brother! I do not feel that this was asking too much. Our Lodge dues are $65/year. A five dollar increase is not much at all in the grand scheme of things. We have a few Brothers that are either in a nursing home or assisted living facility and as such are on a very fixed income. In order for them to continue their membership our Lodge waives their dues and either pays their per capita out of general fund or by passing the hat. I am sure that there are other places that might not do something like that. It really irks me when I hear of people complaining how it would affect them. I see it all the time by some of our surrounding Lodges. People are always willing to complain about the state of the Lodge or our Fraternity but a rarely willing to do something about it. As you said I digress also. This is not the thread for that.
     
  20. rhitland

    rhitland Founding Member Premium Member

    1,417
    9
    58
    That speech gave me the goose bumps because he spoke with such conviction as well, a moment at GL I will not soon forget thanks for posting Brother Bill.
     

Share My Freemasonry