New York Senate Bill J01814

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/20/26
• Refer: 3/20/26
• Report Pass: 3/24/26
• Passed: 3/24/26

Caption

Honoring St. Cecile Lodge No. 568, Free and Accepted Masons, Grand Lodge of New York, upon the extraordinary occasion of its 160th Anniversary on March 22, 2026

Summary

This resolution honors St. Cecile Lodge No. 568, Free and Accepted Masons, Grand Lodge of New York, on the occasion of its 160th anniversary, to be celebrated on March 22, 2026. It recounts the lodge’s founding in 1865 by twelve musicians who sought a daylight lodge to accommodate their professional schedules, and highlights the lodge’s distinctive role in Freemasonry as a home for artists and entertainers. The resolution also emphasizes the lodge’s long history of brotherhood, cultural influence, and community service, noting its association with notable members such as Harry Houdini, Al Jolson, Bobby Hackett, and Louis B. Mayer. It recognizes the leadership of Worshipful Master Lance Green and praises the lodge’s continued adherence to the Masonic principles of Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth.

Impact

This is a ceremonial, non-substantive resolution and does not amend state law, create new legal obligations, or affect statutory rights or duties. Its practical effect is to formally commend St. Cecile Lodge No. 568 and direct that an engrossed copy of the resolution be transmitted to the lodge as an expression of legislative esteem.

Sentiment

The tone of the resolution is wholly positive and celebratory. Because the bill is an honorary measure, there is no recorded opposition, vote controversy, or committee debate in the provided materials. The language reflects strong admiration for the lodge’s longevity, artistic heritage, and civic contributions.

Contention

No notable points of contention appear in the bill text or the provided legislative history. The measure is a straightforward recognition resolution, and the available record includes no committee transcripts, no votes, and no indication of disagreement among legislators. Any discussion would likely center only on the appropriateness of honoring the lodge’s historical and cultural significance, but no opposition is documented here.