The 2009 Resolutions

Discussion in 'General Freemasonry Discussion' started by Blake Bowden, Nov 8, 2009.

  1. Blake Bowden

    Blake Bowden Administrator Staff Member

    5,681
    992
    113
    Here are the 2009 Resolutions. Let the discussion begin...

    1. Amend Arts. 218 & 219 so that bylaw changes are to be filed with GL by October 1 and not require changes to a Lodge's By-Laws approved by a previous Committee on By-Laws. (Louis Stephens).

    2. Adds to Art. 225a to recognize the National Association of Masonic Scouters. (Rex Lewis)

    3. Adds to Art. 225a to recognize the National Association of Masonic Scouters. (PGM Brian R. Dodson).

    4. Amend Form 23a to permit Past Presidents to be regular members of a Masters, Wardens, and Secretaries Associations. (Jerry L. Jones)

    5. Amend Art. 276 (a) to permit a newly elected Worshipful Master's proficiency to be determined to the satisfaction of his Lodge and not by the Committee on Work or a District Instructor. (PGM Bob Waters).

    6. Amend Art. 32(b) to permit a restored Lodge to change its original chartered name after 36 months. (Floyd Trammell).

    7. Amend Art. 32(b) to permit a restored Lodge to change its original chartered name with approval of GL & the By-Laws Committee. (Cliff Cameron)

    8. Amend Article 135 to require the Committee on Work to issue lifetime certificates to 25-year holders of B and C certificates. (Louis Stephens).

    9. Amend Art. 397 so that only the King James Version of the Holy Bible may be placed upon the Altar during the conferral of degrees. (Thornton Lodge #486)

    10. Amends Art. 6a to allow Statements of Availability to contain a record of other related Masonic activities and a recitation pertaining to family, business or profession, civic activities and military service. (W. Vernon Burke)

    11. To require any Master Mason to report any compensation received from the Grand Lodge or any associated body while holding any appointive or elective position on any committee, board, foundation, or associated body for consulting, legal, accounting, or other professional services of any kind and require the GL Finance Committee to report it at the Grand Annual Communication. (Harold Collum)

    12. Amend Art. 129 to require the Committee on Work to review, coordinate, adapt, and recommend a cipher/code book conforming to the Texas work to Texas Masons. (William E. Patrick)

    13. Amend Art. 163 (5) to permit a Lodge to not pay the $25 fee to the Texas Masonic Charities Foundation for the Master Masons' Degree, but to retain the monies for itself. (John Wallace)

    14. To repeal Art. 163 (d) and close the Grand Lodge Insurance Reserve Fund, issuing refunds to the Lodges that contributed to the Fund. (David Dibrell & others)

    15. Amend Art. 318a to permit an Endowed Member to add to the value of his endowment in increments of $100 or multiples thereof. (W. Vernon Burke)

    16. Amend Art. 318a to permit an Endowed Member to take back his Endowed Membership (and its original payment) if no distribution is made on the investment. (Clyde Caldwell)

    17. Amend the Constitution to prohibit the adoption of any resolution, etc. in an ex post facto or retroactive manner, and to hold null and void any current applications made in such a manner. (Cliff Cameron)

    18. Amend the Constitution to decrease the MH & S Board to five members and remove it from the "supervision & control of the Grand Lodge"; to delete the Grand Master & DGM from the Board, and to negate the GSW & GJW from serving as interim members. (Russell C. Brown & Robert Glasgow)

    19. Amend the Constitution to eliminate voting "by Lodges & members" & proxies; to make sitting Masters & Wardens "members of the Grand Lodge"; and to give each attending member, including Past Masters, one vote apiece. (Lawrence Winkle)

    20. Amend the Constitution to require a written ballot for fixing the time for the Annual Communication; to eliminate voting "by Lodges & members"; to give each attending Past Master, WM, and Warden one vote each and one vote to a proxy if the WM and Wardens are all absent; and to provide that no member can have more than two votes. (PGM Leonard Harvey)
     
  2. Blake Bowden

    Blake Bowden Administrator Staff Member

    5,681
    992
    113
    1. I support
    2. I don't know enough about the "National Association of Masonic Scouters" therefore I would vote no.
    3. Same as 2
    4. I support
    5. I do not support
    6. I do not support
    7. I do not support
    8. I support
    9. I do not support
    10. Don't care either way
    11. I support
    12. Don't care either way
    13. I support
    14. I support
    15. I support
    16. I do not support
    17. What? Isn't that the purpose of a resolution? When in doubt vote no..lol
    18. Don't care either way
    19. I initially supported it but now I do not
    20. I do not support
     
  3. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,320
    1,111
    183
    Strap in & hang on, kids! ;)

    #'s 2 & 3- I am not familiar with the NAMS but (a) I think we should support Scouting and (b) I know PGM Dodson & respect his judgment- if he sez it's OK, that's good enough for me.

    #6- I prefer #7. Why shouldn't a Lodge be able to change its name if its members so desire? By requiring the approval of the Grand West, anyone who has a valid objection can be heard before a vote is had.

    #8- I believe we need to provide an incentive to go all the way for an "A" cert. Why reward someone for learning just part of the work?

    #10- I don't think we can have too much information about those who want to be our leaders.

    #12- What we currently have ain't broken & this is not supported by the CoW- why mess with it?

    #17- While I am against "ex post facto" laws for the same reasons our Founding Fathers were, I'm not sure it applies in this instance. Sounds to me like they're saying "We were planning to do this & hadn't gotten around to it, & then they made it illegal." Well, gee!

    #18- While IANAL, I know & respect Bro's. Brown & Glasgow, who are L's. If they are for it, so am I.

    #20- not sure there's really a problem here, but if there is, I'd prefer this solution to #19.

    As always, YMMV- let the games begin! ;)
     
  4. luftx

    luftx Premium Member

    90
    1
    0
    Ok, forgive me 'cause I don't understand some of these resolutions, so if an explanation is possible, I'd appreciate it, if none shows up, that's ok too, no hard feelings.

    1. Works for me!

    2. Same as #3

    3. If it works for PGM Dodson, works for me, we should support scouting.

    4. works for me, but what is the Masters, Wardens, and Secretaries Associations?

    5. nope, nope, nope!

    6. nope!

    7. Works, why shouldn't they?

    8. nope

    9. #### NO!

    10. don't know that I care either way..

    11. that's a keeper!

    12. Yes!

    13. hmm, want to say yes, want to say know, which way would be the best to lean?

    14. What is the Grand Lodge Insurance Reserve Fund?

    15. Sure, why not?

    16. Hmm, can see both sides of this? Another one to be educated on..

    17. huh?

    18. Education required..

    19. Hmmm, I'd vote against, but more education is required..

    20. nope, right?

    Robert

    PS - I know I'm an idiot, don't need to be told or reminded! :25:
     
  5. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,320
    1,111
    183
    Not a problem. Unlike our political parties, we WANT our voters to know what they're voting on!

    Some Masonic Districts have MWSA's which are made up of the Masters, Wardens, & Secretaries of the Lodges in their Districts. We don't have one in my District, so I don't know what they do, other than being away from home yet another night every month! ;)

    A couple of years ago, this Article was proposed & approved for historical reasons.

    From what I'm told, the TMCF has plenty of money- in fact, some were complaining that the Lodges weren't asking for it. No question many of our Lodges need financial help. 25 bucks is 25 bucks.

    Years ago, the Grand Lodge set up a program for Lodges to buy property & casualty insurance through the Grand Lodge. At that time, they set up a fund that participating Lodges contributed 15% of their premiums to, with the idea that eventually Grand Lodge could self-insure, rather than having to pay premiums to an outside company. As it has been determined that they probably will never be able to achieve this goal, it is proposed that the Fund be closed & the contributions be refunded to the participating Lodges.

    It's not the fault of the Lodges that the endowment isn't throwing off interest at this time. The idea of the endowment was to provide funding to the Lodge after the Brother making the endowment passed on. Sooner or later, the economy will recover & the Lodges will again derive the benefits envisioned by those who created & funded the endowment IF we leave it alone.

    This kinda refers to #7 above. The proposing Lodge got their charter restored & planned to change their name in the future. Before they got around to doing so, the law was adopted preventing a name change by Lodges which had their charters restored. Adopting #7 would cure the problem.

    The lawyers tell me that this is necessary to shield us from liability. I ain't no lawyer, but I know & trust those proposing the resolution.

    Some think that we have a problem with the manner in which we vote at Grand Lodge. Although I disagree, I think that #20 would be a better solution than #19. Of course, YMMV. ;)
     
  6. luftx

    luftx Premium Member

    90
    1
    0
    Thanks Bill, I appreciate it, helped quite a bit, but the only problem I have with #20 is that if one of the wardens or the master can't make it (like I probably won't be able to this year, the lodge loses the vote), hmm, have to ponder more on this one.

    When these are voted on at GL, are they voted on in order (ie., #1 vote, #2 vote, #3 vote, etc.)?
     
  7. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,320
    1,111
    183
    Oh, heavens, no- that would be too easy & make sense! The Chair (usually the GM) decides in what order we take up the resolutions. If there's rhyme or reason to it, it plumb evades me!
     
  8. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,320
    1,111
    183
    Got the same problem with #19.
     
  9. luftx

    luftx Premium Member

    90
    1
    0
    Right you are sir!
     
  10. ncm_pkt

    ncm_pkt Registered User

    46
    0
    6
    Number 9 is not Masonic AT ALL!!!! What if said only the quran or torah??? NAAAYYY and thumbs down to that one. I am a Christian but this isn't a church...it's a MASONIC Lodge
     
  11. ncm_pkt

    ncm_pkt Registered User

    46
    0
    6
    and number 13....CHARITY...we should support all the charity, more specially MASONIC CHARITY that we can IMO
     
  12. owls84

    owls84 Moderator Premium Member

    1,653
    9
    38
    This is all I have to say about No. 9:

    I joined a fraternity that taught Brotherly Love. This is not negotiable. You can NOT teach Masonry without teaching this tenet.

    Taken from the Monitor (So It's Legal)

    Brotherly Love By the excerise of Brotherly Love, we are taught to regard the WHOLE HUMAN SPECIES as one FAMILY -the high and low, the rich and poor; who, as created by one Almighty Parent, are to aid, support, and protect each other. On this principle, Masonry UNITES men of every country, sect, and opinion, and concilates true friendship among those who might otherwise have remained at perpetual distance.

    After reading that how could this be allowed to be taught to the newest Mason, that of Entered Apprentice with the Holy Bible the only book of faith allowed on the Holy Alter? This resolution should be a light to shine and show us just how we as Texas Masons have a much bigger problem then expected. In a day and age were the world, and even Masonic Jurisdictions, are embracing diversity we sit and try to distance ourselves from embracing this wonderful lesson that is taught so early in our Masonic Journey. This one tenet and lesson is the LARGEST defining issue that we offer as Masons. This IS the main thing, in my opinion, that has allowed Masonry to grow and be the largest, oldest, and best fraternity in the world. Look at Dan Brown quotes (Masons by author Dan Brown...taken from Scottish Rite Journal - Masons of Texas: A Masonic Discussion Forum for Freemasons). This is what the world looks up to us for.

    I just pray that the people that make this choice to support it, truly understand what they are doing by limiting Texas Masonry to only allowing the Holy Bible on its alter.

    Hypotetical: If this does pass, do other Jurisdictions look at considering us Clandestine by doing so? We will no longer be practicing "Regular" Masonry.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2009
  13. larry

    larry Registered User

    2
    0
    0
    I agree #9 is the worst example of an amendment that I have ever seen!!!
     
  14. rhitland

    rhitland Founding Member Premium Member

    1,417
    9
    58
    Yes in a way we would be irregular whihc would be bad but also makes it almost an impossiability that it will pass. No com. at GL will back this resolution.
     
  15. Sirius

    Sirius Registered User

    580
    8
    0
     
  16. Bill Lins

    Bill Lins Moderating Staff Staff Member

    4,320
    1,111
    183
    Actually, if you'll check the glossary in the back of our Monitor, you'll find that, Masonically, it means "illegal".
     
  17. owls84

    owls84 Moderator Premium Member

    1,653
    9
    38
    When you look up "Clandestine" on the internet, yes it means secret, but as Bill points out in the back of the monitor it says:

    clan-DES-tine (klan-DES-tin) - illegal; a Mason made in a clandestine lodge.
    ir-REG-u-LAR-i-ty - the condition of being disorderly or abnormal

    Both of which I believe would apply.
     
  18. ncm_pkt

    ncm_pkt Registered User

    46
    0
    6
    something isn't right...#9 shouldn't even be on the list...however it got there..isn't masonic...
     
  19. luftx

    luftx Premium Member

    90
    1
    0
    IMHO, it's bigotry, plain and simple! And if it passes, I'll have to re-evaluate my masonic membership. I'm tired of racism and bigotry!
     
  20. JEbeling

    JEbeling Guest

    0
    0
    0
    Before you jump on the R bandwagon.. when this was put into masonary it had nothing to do with the color of a persons skin.. ! it had to do with a lot of strange lodges.. some had women as member.. there were a lot of reasons why regular masonary would not reconize other lodges and had very little to do with race.. !

    And on the other had don't know what all the whinnnnnning is about .. ! went to lodge the other night with a bunch of EA's and one was black and NOBODY pay any attention to his color.. ! any black in the state of Texas can join.. !
     

Share My Freemasonry