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 Son MC belt bbelt buckle

jvarnell

Premium Member
Here's the exact wording of the edict:


I had to look it up because honestly I glossed over it. I'm not a motorcycle kind of guy.

So, all that being said, here's my 2 cents: If this thread is a simple question of whether or not you should wear it in Texas, then the answer would be "Not right now, under current edicts." If this thread is a debate of the edict, then, from what I've read, it's dumb edict. Given, I wasn't there for the discussion, but if they really did have a problem with it because of a patch in Florida, then I think they made the wrong decision.

I think there are a few places where the grand lodge could stand to look at things with fresh eyes (like outlawing a part of the wages of a Fellowcraft in our lodges, or our waiting for the MWPHGLoTx to make the change for visitation). I think I would add this to the list of things that need to be reconsidered.


I'm sorry you are in this position. I understand that buckle carries a great deal of meaning for you, and I hope you are able to freely wear it one day. To echo what Bro. Freyburger said, I think the best way to go about making that happen is to make a change at the Grand Lodge.

Thank you for the kind words and understanding why I brought it up again so the discussion could happen. As someone that is 54 and only been a MM for a couple of years I don't ever want to go against any edict but I don't know how to go about asking for it to be rewriten to say that the WS are not a excepted org. in Texas and to be aware of the optice of all outward apperances even though it is not the outer but the internal.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
eXillmatic,
I really like your signature where did you get it and would I be violating copy rights it I had a patch made from it?
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
Here's the exact wording of the edict ...

A question about this - Was it ratified by a vote from the floor during an Annual Communication? Such questions of recognition usually do get voted on. I've been present for many such votes the times I've attended GL in my other jurisdictions. Widow's Sons was approved without discussion in Illinois during one of the years I attended there.

If it did not go to a vote on the floor, it's my understanding that a sitting GM can issue edicts and that those edicts are in effect during his tenure. To become permanent they have to be ratified by a vote from the floor to be included in the rules. It is not unusual for GMs to assert some or all of the edicts of their predecessors so there can be rolling edicts of a sort.

If the edict did go to the floor and it was approved should it still be called an edict? It would be a part of the permanent record.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
A question about this - Was it ratified by a vote from the floor during an Annual Communication? Such questions of recognition usually do get voted on. I've been present for many such votes the times I've attended GL in my other jurisdictions. Widow's Sons was approved without discussion in Illinois during one of the years I attended there.

If it did not go to a vote on the floor, it's my understanding that a sitting GM can issue edicts and that those edicts are in effect during his tenure. To become permanent they have to be ratified by a vote from the floor to be included in the rules. It is not unusual for GMs to assert some or all of the edicts of their predecessors so there can be rolling edicts of a sort.

If the edict did go to the floor and it was approved should it still be called an edict? It would be a part of the permanent record.

How can I see if it went to the floor or which record of the GL should I look at. Bill Lins how can I figure this out?
 

JD Price

Registered User
Quick response to this, 2007 a resolution was proposed to recognize WS it passed then a brother from the Houston area got and said he had voted for but now wanted to have it reexamined, he and his group opposed the recogntion and proceed to outline his reasons (patch with Widow), they wanting the northern version of patch, the resolution was then voted down. Later there was a WS chapter in East Texas who was still wearing patches etc so the GM then issued his edict prohibiting Texas masons from belonging or displaying any WS patches, pins etc.
simple case of poltics some group not getting their way.
 

rfuller

Premium Member
A question about this - Was it ratified by a vote from the floor during an Annual Communication? Such questions of recognition usually do get voted on. I've been present for many such votes the times I've attended GL in my other jurisdictions. Widow's Sons was approved without discussion in Illinois during one of the years I attended there.If it did not go to a vote on the floor, it's my understanding that a sitting GM can issue edicts and that those edicts are in effect during his tenure. To become permanent they have to be ratified by a vote from the floor to be included in the rules. It is not unusual for GMs to assert some or all of the edicts of their predecessors so there can be rolling edicts of a sort.If the edict did go to the floor and it was approved should it still be called an edict? It would be a part of the permanent record.
JD already gave a better explination, but I wanted to include the full text of the edict as well:
January 6, 2011

To the Masons of Texas:


Grand Master’s Edict


I have been advised that some Texas Masons presently belong to an organization operating under the name of “Widows Sons Masonic Motorcycle Riders Association”. At the 2007 Grand Annual Communication this organization was denied recognition as an organization to which Texas Masons could belong.


Texas Masons are not permitted to belong to, or be identified with, the organization known as “Widows Sons Masonic Motorcycle Riders Association” unless and until such organization is recognized by the Grand Lodge of Texas, and to do so constitutes a Masonic Disciplinary Violation. This Edict is effective immediately. Acts contrary to this edict will result in Masonic Disciplinary action against the violator.


This edict is issued to enforce the 2007 decision of the Grand Lodge of Texas concerning the “Widows Sons Masonic Motorcycle Riders Association”.


Sincerely and fraternally,


T. E. “Gene” Carnes
Grand Master of Masons in Texas
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
JD already gave a better explination, but I wanted to include the full text of the edict as well:
So there was a vote to reconize that did not pass. So they are not cernoized. But the edict only only stands for that GL term? This is like when in cort no real defined T&C's.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
As I research this I see the GM edict like the rules of congress they only stand tilla new GM term? SO since that edict was in 2007 and no new edicts have been isued is it not in effect anymore? The edict is the only thing keeping someone from waring that belt buckle is what I am hearing and if the the words "identified with" are left out of the edict someone could ware that buckle.
 

Bill Lins

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
OK- time for some facts. As stated above, in 2007 a resolution was proposed for GLoTX to recognize the Widows' Sons MC as an organization to which Texas Masons could belong.

The Grand Lodge of Texas, A.F.& A.M., can and does, as do most other regular Grand Lodges, regulate organizations in their jurisdiction which require their members to be Masons.

Art. 225a. Other Organizations, predicating membership on Masonic membership, recognized.
In addition to those organizations recognized in Art. 225, next above, as being entitled to use Lodgerooms and Anterooms of Subordinate Lodges, the Grand Lodge of Texas may recognize and authorize other organizations which predicate membership on Masonic membership.
Recognition and authorization must take place by approval of the Grand Lodge in Grand Communication.

Read the above again, Brethren- Grand Lodge, meaning those of us who meet in Grand Annual Commmunication, consider the proposed resolutions, & vote on them, decide whether or not to recognize such organizations.

In 2007, we heard the resolution & the ensuing discussion and voted in favor of recognition. A Brother subsequently moved reconsideration of the matter, which, while unusual, is properly allowable under GLoTX law. After hearing additional discussion, we reversed our vote.

In 2011 the then Grand Master, having heard that some Brethren had joined the WS in violation of Art. 225a, issued his edict reminding those Brethren that WS was not recognized and that they, thus, could not belong to it. Whether or not one agrees with the fact that the members had refused recognition to the WS, the Grand Master's issuance of the edict was totally & entirely proper.

At the 2011 Grand Annual Communication, the edict was submitted to us for ratification, and received such. At that point it became GL law and remains in effect until such time as WE decide otherwise.

If one wishes for WS to become recognized by GLoTX, he will have to write a resolution proposing such, have it sponsored by either a Past Master or a Texas Lodge, and submit it to the Grand Secretary by May 15th. If the resolution is in proper form & timely submitted, WE will consider it in December.
 

crono782

Premium Member
Sounds about right. GM edicts normally "expire" at the end of the year unless submitted to be ratified then, yes?
 

rfuller

Premium Member
OK- time for some facts. As stated above, in 2007 a resolution was proposed for GLoTX to recognize the Widows' Sons MC as an organization to which Texas Masons could belong.

The Grand Lodge of Texas, A.F.& A.M., can and does, as do most other regular Grand Lodges, regulate organizations in their jurisdiction which require their members to be Masons.

Art. 225a. Other Organizations, predicating membership on Masonic membership, recognized.
In addition to those organizations recognized in Art. 225, next above, as being entitled to use Lodgerooms and Anterooms of Subordinate Lodges, the Grand Lodge of Texas may recognize and authorize other organizations which predicate membership on Masonic membership.
Recognition and authorization must take place by approval of the Grand Lodge in Grand Communication.

Read the above again, Brethren- Grand Lodge, meaning those of us who meet in Grand Annual Commmunication, consider the proposed resolutions, & vote on them, decide whether or not to recognize such organizations.

In 2007, we heard the resolution & the ensuing discussion and voted in favor of recognition. A Brother subsequently moved reconsideration of the matter, which, while unusual, is properly allowable under GLoTX law. After hearing additional discussion, we reversed our vote.

In 2011 the then Grand Master, having heard that some Brethren had joined the WS in violation of Art. 225a, issued his edict reminding those Brethren that WS was not recognized and that they, thus, could not belong to it. Whether or not one agrees with the fact that the members had refused recognition to the WS, the Grand Master's issuance of the edict was totally & entirely proper.

At the 2011 Grand Annual Communication, the edict was submitted to us for ratification, and received such. At that point it became GL law and remains in effect until such time as WE decide otherwise.

If one wishes for WS to become recognized by GLoTX, he will have to write a resolution proposing such, have it sponsored by either a Past Master or a Texas Lodge, and submit it to the Grand Secretary by May 15th. If the resolution is in proper form & timely submitted, WE will consider it in December.

Couple of questions for clarification.

Where you there in 2007 for the discussion?

Follow up, if you were, do you remember the discussion?

I'm purely curious. I could honestly care less if the WS are recognized or not, but I'm just wondering how things happened and what the rationale was.

Another question, are votes at grand lodge typically very one sided, or are there issues where the lodge is pretty evenly divided?

I'd like to point out, this is absolutely curiosity, and I'm genuinely wondering how grand lodge works. For what it's worth, I'm in the middle of the L.I.F.E. program, so right now all I've got to go on is what I've heard our lodge reps mention briefly in passing, and what little I've read in the L.I.F.E. book.
 

rfuller

Premium Member
One other question: As you read the edict, was I correct in concluding that wearing the belt buckle in question would be in violation, or is it more a matter of membership, and less about things like wearing a gifted belt buckle?
 

Bill Lins

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
Couple of questions for clarification.

Where you there in 2007 for the discussion?

Follow up, if you were, do you remember the discussion?

I'm purely curious. I could honestly care less if the WS are recognized or not, but I'm just wondering how things happened and what the rationale was.

Yes- I was there, originally voted for and, upon reconsideration, voted against recognition. The primary issue brought up during reconsideration was the "merry widow" patch shown to us. We did not feel that it presented a proper image of Masonry.


Another question, are votes at grand lodge typically very one sided, or are there issues where the lodge is pretty evenly divided?

Depends on the question. Some issues fly through with hardly any discussion, while some are extremely contentious and are so close that a written ballot must be taken to determine the outcome. It's funny, but many times an issue that doesn't seem contentious becomes such, while issues one would think would be turn out not to be.

I'd like to point out, this is absolutely curiosity, and I'm genuinely wondering how grand lodge works. For what it's worth, I'm in the middle of the L.I.F.E. program, so right now all I've got to go on is what I've heard our lodge reps mention briefly in passing, and what little I've read in the L.I.F.E. book.

I've attended GL for the past 12 years, & I'M still trying to figure out how it works! :wink:
 

rfuller

Premium Member
I've attended GL for the past 12 years, & I'M still trying to figure out how it works! :wink:
Haha. Okay. Well, I've been trying to wrap my head around it all, and trying to be more informed. I just keep running into dead ends. Thanks for your responses.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
On wearing the belt buckle the words that catch my attention are "or to be identified with". I would display the buckle at home not wear it.

I don't know how open it is to interpretation to wear such a buckle. Think of wearing a PM ring - Earn it then wear it. As a non-member I would not be interested in pushing the boundaries. On the other hand I was a Shriner in Illinois well before Arkansas pulled Shrine recognition. Were I in Arkansas I'd be tempted to push the boundaries. Noting that in both cases I disagree with the ruling and also acknowledge the authority of the body granting the ruling.

Another question, are votes at grand lodge typically very one sided, or are there issues where the lodge is pretty evenly divided?

I'd like to point out, this is absolutely curiosity, and I'm genuinely wondering how grand lodge works. For what it's worth, I'm in the middle of the L.I.F.E. program, so right now all I've got to go on is what I've heard our lodge reps mention briefly in passing, and what little I've read in the L.I.F.E. book.

Most communications are open to Master Masons so I encourage you to ask your lodge secretary how to get credentials to attend in December. Any December you can get time to go not just the years you're JW/SW/MW in the line. Attending GL is a wonderful experience. One brother who I walked around in his third degree attended Illinois GL roughly two months later and he loved going.

As to votes, I've seen them fall in a range. Most years most votes are obvious but it seems like most years there is at least one that needs a counted vote. Also different types of votes need different ratios to pass. You'll want to read the law book before going to get an idea of what types need a majority or what degree of super-majority.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
I guess I just need to put the buckle up for now and figure out how to get toware it later. I really don't care if they are in Texas or not it is just the way that edict seem to go against meeting on the level.
 

Brother JC

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
It sounds like a group of like-minded riders need to submit a completely new petition for recognition (with the appropriate patch design) soon. Show GL that you're "MMs first," and that you will be of value to Texas Masonry.
 

brother josh

Registered User
I would keep the buckle it was a gift either way cherish the gift and in time I'm sure tge edict will change when u have reasonable men meeting on the level eventually ignorance is defeated it might just take a little time


Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
It is hard to gather as like minded riders as to discuss the WS petition because the edict is writen so that can't happen. Just like with the belt buckle it has unintended consequences in the way it was writen. If we follow the rule of law the edict will have to be resended before we can have and get to gethers to discuss this.
 
Top