# Philalethes Society Self Destructing



## Squire Bentley (May 10, 2011)

http://www.freemasoninformation.com/2011/05/philalethes-society-self-destructing/


By the way is this Society still banned in the state of Texas?

                                                                Frederic L. Milliken


----------



## tomasball (May 10, 2011)

Ugly stuff.  Yes, the Philalethes is still banned in Texas.


----------



## Bro.BruceBenjamin (May 10, 2011)

Hmm need more time to study this topic.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 10, 2011)

tomasball said:


> Ugly stuff.  Yes, the Philalethes is still banned in Texas.



And can anyone here (or care to) cite the reason the Philalethes was banned in Texas? (Would the Phylaxis be included too)? I have to ask for a (the) like reason...  

I love these masonic type wikileak sites, they seem to take great pride in this kind of yellow journalism; a certain schadenfreude if you will. I have to wonder if anyone has bothered to find out the root cause of this schism? As I have known these fellows for quite some while and seeing both sides of this battle I’m sure that these newly pruned trees will bear greater fruit than before. Saying that it was an ugly mess is just gossip (although there are certain individuals that wished it to be declared as such). I’m sure that the changes were due and that freemasonry will be the better for it.

Sort of like the GLoT ought to recind their ban on the Philalethes Society... If they are smart!


----------



## Bill Lins (May 11, 2011)

Traveling Man said:


> And can anyone here (or care to) cite the reason the Philalethes was banned in Texas?



Yes. Nelson King decided that GLoT wasn't moving quickly enough to give recognition to Prince Hall Masonry, so he decided to pick a fight with then Grand Master Harrison. By doing so, he not only caused the delay of recognition of PH Masonry by GLoT for a number of years and gave those of us who were trying to accomplish it a bad case of heartburn, but he also managed to get membership in the Philalethes Society banned by the GLoT. We all had to drop our memberships or face Masonic charges. I'm saddened but not surprised that Philalethes is dying- it WAS a great organization.



Traveling Man said:


> (Would the Phylaxis be included too)?



No.



Traveling Man said:


> Sort of like the GLoT ought to recind their ban on the Philalethes Society... If they are smart!


 
Philalethes would have to submit a request to GLoT & it sounds like they're too busy with other issues. Quite frankly, with what is currently going on with them, I doubt they'd have any success here. King having retired is about the only thing that might help them in Texas. It's a shame, but the board knew, even back then, that King was a loose cannon & was causing problems. Since they didn't act back then, they're paying the price now.


----------



## tomasball (May 11, 2011)

To put a fine point on it, the Philalethes Society was not so much banned, as removed from the approved list.  In Texas it is not permissable to start or join an organization that predicate their membership on being a mason, unless that organization is approved by a vote of Grand Lodge.  In the case of the Philalethes Society, that approval was removed.  The Phylaxis Society has never sought to be approved by the Grand Loge of Texas.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 11, 2011)

If I recall correctly the original incident came to fruition through a Masonic author from the Phylaxis Society attempting to give a speech in regards to the legitimacy of Prince Hall Masons to the Dallas chapter of The Philalethes Society. The Grand Master of Texas ordered him not to let the Prince Hall Mason speak.  So the Philalethes Chapter President closed the meeting and all went home.  Shortly thereafter the Philalethes Society was banned from the state of Texas and to this day it remains banned.

As to whether Brother King was loose cannon remains to be seen:


As Brother Allen E. Roberts states in “The Seekers of truth”:

The Philalethes Society Seekers of Truth:

Petty tyranny gave birth to The Philalethes Society," I wrote in 1988. "Some Masonic leaders," I continued, 'dressed in a little brief authority,' had attempted to inhibit the spread of truth. They had attacked, in many cases successfully, the publishing of the written word. They had endeavored to warp the minds of the greatest intellects in Freemasonry."


----------



## Beathard (May 11, 2011)

I believe the Grand Master did the correct at the time. The presentation of Masonic papers at a Masonic event is communication. Neither PH nor blue lodge grand lodge allows this communication. The fault was in the invitation in the first place. I don't agree with the current standpoint on visitation, but the Grand Master must enforce current Masonic law.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 11, 2011)

And I believe that without pressure from like organizations that Texas would still refuse recognition.  
A Masonic event? There are other groups that are letting Co Masons and non-masons present papers, this under the same roof as the CGMNA, are these not Masonic events? I believe the word is called hypocrisy?


----------



## tomasball (May 11, 2011)

Beathard said:


> I believe the Grand Master did the correct at the time. The presentation of Masonic papers at a Masonic event is communication. Neither PH nor blue lodge grand lodge allows this communication. The fault was in the invitation in the first place. I don't agree with the current standpoint on visitation, but the Grand Master must enforce current Masonic law.



As I recall, the issue that was presented to the Grand Lodge, (whether there were other motivations in the main players or not) was that the Philalethes Society allowed a member of the MWPHGL of Texas to join the society. (this all took place when that body was not recognized by the Grand Lodge of Texas. )


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (May 11, 2011)

Beathard said:


> I believe the Grand Master did the correct at the time. *The presentation of Masonic papers at a Masonic event is communication. Neither PH nor blue lodge grand lodge allows this communication.*


 
Please cite your references to support this statement.


----------



## Beathard (May 11, 2011)

Squire Bentley said:
			
		

> http://www.freemasoninformation.com/2011/05/philalethes-society-self-destructing/


The original document has internal links for additional data on the meeting.   Are you asking me cite the non communication statement?  It's in the masters obligation.


----------



## Beathard (May 11, 2011)

Traveling Man mentioned other events where comasonry and other Masonic type entities presented lectures or papers. He asked about the hypocrisy of it?  I do not know of one Grand Masters Conference or any other approved gathering in Texas that has had a clandestine presentation. Also, does the OES, SR, YR, Shrine, Grotto or Texas Lodge of Research allow PH masons?  Do any of the PH appended bodies allow blue lodge members to join? Isn't it the same thing?  I believe Texas Law is consistent. That does not mean it shouldn't be changed!


----------



## Bill Lins (May 11, 2011)

Traveling Man said:


> And I believe that without pressure from like organizations that Texas would still refuse recognition.


 
I can assure you that, having been personally involved, your belief is incorrect. The pressure GLoT has faced regarding this issue has been internal, not external.


----------



## Beathard (May 11, 2011)

Bill, are you the major pain in GL's backside or the general pain?  8)


----------



## Bill Lins (May 11, 2011)

Depends on who you ask!  :wink:


----------



## Beathard (May 11, 2011)

Lol


----------



## Traveling Man (May 12, 2011)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> I can assure you that, having been personally involved, your belief is incorrect. The pressure GLoT has faced regarding this issue has been internal, not external.


 
I don't doubt that one bit. However we still wouldn't be where we are without outside influences, it's just too easy to let things stay as they are, is it not?


----------



## Bill Lins (May 12, 2011)

"Outside influences" tend to create resistance to change and are, thus, counterproductive.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (May 13, 2011)

Beathard said:


> The original document has internal links for additional data on the meeting.   Are you asking me cite the non communication statement?  It's in the masters obligation.



No. Please support your curious definition of "Masonic Communication". 
If you look, I believe that you will find that delivering a paper on this or that Masonic topic does, in no way, qualify as such. The obligation refers to certain things we do in a tyled lodge. Nothing more.


----------



## tomasball (May 13, 2011)

After all, the Texas Lodge of Research hears the papers presented to it in front of a mixed crowd.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 13, 2011)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> "Outside influences" tend to create resistance to change and are, thus, counterproductive.



I see... Like using peace and harmony as a tool for refusal to change or; the changing of Masonry in any way...

But back to the subject matter title; I see from the latest copy of the magazine (on loan from my brother; who is not in this banned jurisdiction lest we read anything that might be innovative) that nothing could be further from the truth. Very good articles, an even greatly improved appearance, very modern subject matter... We should all self destruct in such a manner. VBG


----------



## Beathard (May 14, 2011)

JohnnyFlotsam said:
			
		

> No. Please support your curious definition of "Masonic Communication".


. 

Johnny, we got into this before. You pick one little statement and attack it with a passion. I'm not going to play your game, but in this case I will tell you the source. Me. I stated an opinion.  One that you disagree with, which is fine with me. 

What I was attempting to say was an organization that was attempting to become recognized in Texas and requires Masonic affiliation as a requirement for member was allowing a clandestine mason present in Texas and in front of the Grand Master. 

In my opinion, so don't ask for a source, this could be seem as a slap in the face to  the Grand Lodge. This type of outside pressure can create discontent. It can set back the goal of visitation by years. If you don't believe me look at this thread.  And this site has masons that are not old set in their ways guys. If we are going to have a heated discussion, the others are going to clam up and vote no. 

The statement was made that we as masons in Texas were a living hipocracy since we allow co-masons, etc. to present papers. I do not know that any have in Texas. If they have they should have been treated the same. (My opinion - no source.)

I believe, no source, that the intent of the law is to prevent us and clandestine masons of any type to communicate (read that in my statement as to talk about the inner workings of masonry as would be done in a research paper). Until there is a change in Grand Lodge law, this should apply to all appended bodies operating within the Texas Grand Lodge jurisdiction or they should receive the same unapproved status (opinion - thus no source). 

If we don't like the non visitation rules, a resolution needs to written to change the law. BTW the deadline for resolutions is tomorrow.


----------



## JohnnyFlotsam (May 15, 2011)

Beathard said:


> I believe, no source, that the intent of the law is to prevent us and clandestine masons of any type to communicate (read that in my statement as to talk about the inner workings of masonry as would be done in a research paper). Until there is a change in Grand Lodge law, this should apply to all appended bodies operating within the Texas Grand Lodge jurisdiction or they should receive the same unapproved status (opinion - thus no source).


 
I'll leave it to those more familiar with the laws of the GL of TX to confirm, or refute, but I am inclined to agree with your assessment of such laws' intent, thus reinforcing yet again the notion that Texas Masonry is out of step with pretty much the rest of the world. The obligation I took is, but for inconsequential differences in the wording, the same as that taken by Masons in TX. That obligation does not prevent me from discussing Masonry with _anyone_. It _does _prevent me from divulging certain details with anyone not a regular Mason from a recognized jurisdiction. The rest of the Masonic world, recognizing this fact, has no problem discussing Freemasonry, even it's "inner workings" (save those few details) and understands that a "Masonic Communication" refers to a tyled Lodge meeting (stated, special, Grand, etc.). They furthermore have long since recognized that there are no secrets other than those which can not be transcribed and that their time is better spent sharing the pursuit of those, rather than petty squabbling about race, gender, "regularity", or any of a thousand inconsequential differences that can be used to set "us" apart from "them". Sure, I keep my obligation, but again, the list of things it actually restricts is short and does not prevent me from sharing the rest of what Freemasonry has to offer with those similarly inclined. To suggest, or to mandate, otherwise is naive, at best.

It has been suggested in this thread that needed change is actually slowed in the jurisdiction of the GL of TX when outside pressure is involved. I will not argue with that, but I will point out that what this actually means is that "doing the right thing" is not something that a majority of Texas Masons (those that vote at Grand Lodge, at least) are willing to do until they can convince themselves that it was their own idea.


----------



## Benton (May 15, 2011)

JohnnyFlotsam said:


> but I will point out that what this actually means is that "doing the right thing" is not something that a majority of Texas Masons (those that vote at Grand Lodge, at least) are willing to do until they can convince themselves that it was their own idea.



That's human nature, though. We desire free will so strongly, that when something feels forced upon us, we dislike it, even if in other circumstances we would have chosen it of our own volition. I know I do this, and stupidly I usually only catch it in retrospect. And I think if 99% of people are honest with themselves, they do it as well. It's simply one of our flawed human short comings we should acknowledge and try to overcome as best we can.


----------



## tomasball (May 15, 2011)

According to Mackey's "Lexicon of Freemasory", "communication" means a meeting of a lodge.  That would seem to fit very well into the context where the word appears.


----------



## Bill Lins (May 15, 2011)

Traveling Man,

If you & Johnny Flotsam feel so strongly about this issue, why don't y'all collaborate on a resolution to get the Philalethes Society restored as an organization recognized in Art. 225a to which Texas Masons may belong, & present it at the Grand Annual Communication? That's the way things get changed in GLoT.


----------



## Beathard (May 15, 2011)

And do it quickly. Today is the deadline.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 15, 2011)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> Traveling Man,
> 
> If you & Johnny Flotsam feel so strongly about this issue, why don't y'all collaborate on a resolution to get the Philalethes Society restored as an organization recognized in Art. 225a to which Texas Masons may belong, & present it at the Grand Annual Communication? That's the way things get changed in GLoT.



As far as I'm concerned; never going to happen. If Texas chooses to live in the dark ages, so be it. As I have said before no one should have to kiss up to exist. That's all I'll say about the subject.


----------



## Beathard (May 15, 2011)

Traveling Man said:
			
		

> As far as I'm concerned; never going to happen. If Texas chooses to live in the dark ages, so be it. As I have said before no one should have to kiss up to exist. That's all I'll say about the subject.



Guess we all outta give up then eh?


----------



## Traveling Man (May 15, 2011)

Beathard said:


> Guess we all outta give up then eh?


 you're assuming that anyone needs the permission of TGLoT to exist, not true. Everyone else didn't need their permission either. If that's the way they want it; who am I? Welcome to isolation!


----------



## Beathard (May 15, 2011)

Traveling Man, thank you for enlightening us the backwards beliefs of the GLoTx.  Since you are obviously knowledgable about the inner workings of both TX Blue Lodge and PH Grand Lodge activities, can you enlighten us to the steps the PH grand lodge has made towards visitation?

Several of us on this site have been very active in moving the issue foreword. I for one am starting to second guess my dedication towards fixing the situation mainly due to this thread.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 16, 2011)

Beathard said:


> Traveling Man, thank you for enlightening us the backwards beliefs of the GLoTx.  Since you are obviously knowledgable about the inner workings of both TX Blue Lodge and PH Grand Lodge activities, can you enlighten us to the steps the PH grand lodge has made towards visitation?
> 
> Several of us on this site have been very active in moving the issue foreword. I for one am starting to second guess my dedication towards fixing the situation mainly due to this thread.



Nice try, but I will not rise to the bait. You'll have to consult with all of the other Brethren here that have all of that inner working knowledge.

I have made statements about the oganisation that this thread is about. As far as knowledge regarding the fraternity worldwide this magazine contains very valuable information. As far as the GLoT not acknowledging or banning membership; that's their prerogative. 

Forgive me if I have over stated the idea that this fraternity was about enlightenment.

<End>


----------



## MikeMay (May 16, 2011)

beathard said:


> guess we all outta give up then eh?


 
Nope....not me.


----------



## Bill Lins (May 17, 2011)

Traveling Man said:


> As far as I'm concerned; never going to happen. If Texas chooses to live in the dark ages, so be it. As I have said before no one should have to kiss up to exist. That's all I'll say about the subject.


 
In other words, all you wish to do is piss & moan about it, or use it as an excuse to denigrate the Grand Lodge of Texas, rather than actually do something about it.


----------



## Traveling Man (May 17, 2011)

Bill_Lins77488 said:


> In other words, all you wish to do is piss & moan about it, or use it as an excuse to denigrate the Grand Lodge of Texas, rather than actually do something about it.


 Here we go; let's get back on the topic shall we? You as a moderator should know better than this. No P&M here, I've said my piece. Y'all go beat this to death all you want.


----------



## Blake Bowden (May 17, 2011)

Thread closed

[video=youtube;1gG8tefPfqs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gG8tefPfqs&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/video]


----------

