Masonic Beliefs & Practices (2)

[grandsecretary]

You are welcome decim.

Genuine Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry was appropriated by the Hanoverian dynasty in 1813 during a period of national crisis, in a move designed to ensure that henceforth the Fraternity would be unable to articulate an independent response to the political situation of the day.

Free Masonrie at York was ancient, Anglo-Saxon, Jacobite and Tory. Freemasonry in London was entirely new, Hanoverian and Whig.

Freemasonry was institutionalised by the same process of patronage that the Hanoverians used to such effect elsewhere in the Kingdom, and by the Hanoverian dynasty's use of its undoubted influence in Parliament, to pass enabling legislation designed to silence and eliminate opposition of all kinds, including Anglo-Saxon Free Masonrie, The Grand Lodge of All England at York, and its Jacobite Tories and Free Masons.

This is how it was done: The Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act (1794) culminating in The Combination Acts of 1799 and 1800.

This legislation included: The Treasonable Practices Act (1795); The Seditious Meetings Act (1795); The Unlawful Oaths Act (1797); The Newspaper Publications Act (1797); The Corresponding Societies Act (1799); and The Unlawful Societies Act (1799).

The Unlawful Societies Act had an amendment attached to it which was used, specifically to outlaw the meetings of The Grand Lodge of All England at York.

Here is the wording:

'...nothing in this act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to prevent the meetings of the Lodge or society of persons which is now held at Free Masons Hall in Great Queen Street in the County of Middlesex, and usually denominated The Grand Lodge of Freemasons of England, or of the Lodge or society of persons usually denominated The Grand Lodge of Masons of England, according to the Old Institution, or of the Lodge or society of persons which is now held at Edinburgh, and usually denominated The Grand Lodge of Free Masons of Scotland, or the meetings of any subordinate lodge or society of persons usually calling themselves Free Masons, the holding whereof shall be sanctioned or approved by any one of the above mentioned lodges or societies...' (SOURCE: Unlawful Societies Act, 1799)

How was it controlled? By having to register all such meetings with the Civil Magistrate:

"The amendment (to the Unlawful Societies Act) envisaged a system whereby the Grand Secretaries would each year deposit with the clerks of the peace a certificate containing details of the time and place of meeting of all approved lodges in the county, together with a declaration that the lodges were approved by the Grand Master. All lodges were to keep a book in which each member was to declare, on joining, 'that he is well affected to the constitution and government of this realm, by King, Lords, and Commons, as by law established'. This book was to be kept open for inspection by local magistrates. The Grand Lodges [sic. specifically excluding The Grand Lodge of All England at York] were thus to be made responsible for policing freemasonry; lodges whose names did not appear on the return made by the Grand Secretaries would be criminal conspiracies." (SOURCE: The Unlawful Societies Act 1799 by The Centre for Research into Freemasonry)

And this is what The Grand Master of one of those Grand Lodges said in the debate in the Houses of Parliament:

"I have pledged myself to His Majesty's ministers that should any set of men attempt to meet as a lodge without sanction, the Grand Master, or Acting Grand Master (whomsoever he might be), would apprise parliament." (SOURCE: statement by Lord Moira, Pro Grand Master, Grand Lodge of London, Acting Grand Master, Grand Lodge of Scotland)

The penalties? Revocation of titles along with sequestration of land, assets and properties; imprisonment; exile; execution.

Never let anybody pretend that The Grand Lodge of All England went underground voluntarily or because of lack of support. It was forced underground and its members exiled to France, Austria, and Italy, because it had too much support.

John Hamill and his United Grand Lodge of England colleague, Robert Gilbert, note that it appears that the Duke of Sussex [sic Prince of the Royal Blood of Hanover] had in fact four main and very clearly expressed intentions " … to assert Grand Lodge’s authority over all the lodges of the two former obediences; to standardise; to complete the de-Christianisation of the Craft and Royal Arch; and to maintain the Craft’s superiority over any other Masonic order." (SOURCE: 18. Hamill and Gilbert, (p.9), Hamill J. and Gilbert R.A. (1991). World Freemasonry. London: Aquarian Press

I believe that I have answered your question.

[decim]

Indeed you have & some. Thanks again.

This information & previous posts have clarified a few points for me in my Clan & Family tree research, which date back to 8th century & later married in the Stewart line.

All this 'new' information (to me), reveals an aspect of our history I was unaware of.

Originally Posted by grandsecretary

I believe that I have answered your question.

[kadosh]

The Masonic Lodge and Roman Confraternity - by Richard Martin Young (Grand Chancellor of the Grand Lodge of All England) http://www.freemasonspress.info/inde...es/Page489.htm - Excerpt:

"Roman collegia were lawful associations concerned with a wide range of activities including craft, trade, social, and funerary interests. There were also associations focusing upon religious, social, political and business affairs. Few members were actually required in any one collegium, the general rule being that a minimum of three members were necessary to fulfil that particular requirement, although the college of consuls was comprised of only the two serving consuls. Vitally, the collegia were organized and provided for under law. As a result of their obligations, they could be seen as state institutions. The legal status of the collegia is relevant when considering the continuing desire within Freemasonry to establish an antecedent history which provides a legal or constitutional basis for its foundation. The Masonic authors of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were not hopeless romantics seeking to create a mythic past for Freemasonry when they sought to bring to the attention of the public the role of King Athelstan in Freemasonry. They recognized the traditionally religious and constitutional nature of confraternities, and the tokens by which they can be recognized The collegia opificum, or trade guilds were as subject to the jus divinum, or divine law, the law relating to and governing the relationship between the activities of those guilds and the deities to which they were subordinate, as were the quattuor amplissima collegia, those four powerful and august religious associations of Roman priests. The presence of an overtly religious dimension in the activities of these ancient associations has a counterpart within the traditions of regular Freemasonry."

[kadosh]

The earliest known record of a Masonic initiation anywhere is that of John Boswell, Laird of Auchenleck, who was initiated in the Lodge of Edinburgh according to the lodge minutes of 8 June 1600. That lodge was Operative and Boswell appears to be an example of one of the earliest Speculative initiations and adds weight to a case for the Transition Theory of Freemasonry, at least in Scotland. The earliest records of an initiation in England include Sir Robert Moray in 1641 and Elias Ashmole in 1646. Abroad, the first native-born American to be made a Mason was probably Jonathan Belcher, in 1704, who was then the Governor of Massachusetts.

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by kadosh

The earliest known record of a Masonic initiation anywhere is that of John Boswell, Laird of Auchenleck, who was initiated in the Lodge of Edinburgh according to the lodge minutes of 8 June 1600. That lodge was Operative and Boswell appears to be an example of one of the earliest Speculative initiations and adds weight to a case for the Transition Theory of Freemasonry, at least in Scotland. The earliest records of an initiation in England include Sir Robert Moray in 1641 and Elias Ashmole in 1646. Abroad, the first native-born American to be made a Mason was probably Jonathan Belcher, in 1704, who was then the Governor of Massachusetts.

The earliest known lodge MINUTES is NOT the earliest known record, is it?

Adam’s line lineal
son, descending down
the 7th age of Adam before
Noah’s flood, there was a man that
was named Lamech the
which had 2 wives, the
one hight Adah, and another
Zillah; by the first wife, that
hight Adah, he begat 2 sons
that one hight Jabal, and the other
hight Jubal. The elder son,
Jabal, he was the first man
that ever found geometry and
Masonry, and he made houses,
and [is] named in the Bible
"Pater habitancium in tento-
ris atque pastorum," that is to
say, father of men dwelling
in tents, that is, dwelling
houses. And he was Cain’s
master mason, and governor
of all his works, when
he made the city of Enock,
that was the first city;
That was the first city that
ever was made, and that made
Cain, Adam’s son, and
gave to his own son Enock,
and gave the city the name
of his son, and called it
Enock. And now it is
called Ephraim, and there was
[the] science of Geometry, and ma-
sonry, first occupied, and
contrenid, for a science and
for a craft, and so we may
say that it was [the] cause and foun-
dation of all crafts, and
sciences, and also this man,
Jaball, was called "pater
pastorum."

Transition theory is a nonsense no matter how hard you try. As Richard Young so amply illustrated in his article, even the Roman Collegia had an essential religious dimension.

This is supported by Gilles Nullens:

"The early history of Freemasonry is linked to the history of the trade groups, Roman Collegia, brotherhoods and corporations. The trades started to organise themselves in the thirteenth century. The first mention of Freemasonry is to be found in an English document of 1376, and again in 1396 in a document of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Freemasonry was never exclusively operative. Religious and initiatory aspects always went alongside the concrete, professional transmission of technical skills and the defence of the interest of members, as we know them today as trade unions. The organisations also helped the members in distress, provided charity, and looked after the good behaviour of the initiates. This dual nature of the movement became more visible with the admission of "accepted", non-operative members. As a result the lodges became meeting points for the trade people and men of culture. The decrease in the number of big building sites, such as those for new cathedrals, and the Renaissance, led to the decline of the brotherhoods, leaving more room for the speculative Masons in the Lodges." (SOURCE: An Outsiders View of Freemasonry, Annex 2 by Gilles C H Nullens)

Linked to the history of the trade groups. NEVER exclusively operative. Never is a very strong word.

[kadosh]

A History of British Freemasonry 1425-2000 - by Dr. Andrew Prescott - http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/prescott16.html

[kadosh]

Freemasonry is an esoteric society only in that certain aspects are private. Freemasons state that Masonry is not, in the 21st century, a secret society but a "society with secrets". Some Freemasons describe Freemasonry as a "confidential" society in contrast to a secret society. Most modern Freemasons regard the traditional concern over secrecy as a demonstration of their ability to keep a promise and a concern over the privacy of their own affairs. Lodge meetings, like meetings of many other social and professional associations, are private occasions open only to members. The private aspects of modern Freemasonry deal with the modes of recognition amongst members and elements within the ritual.

[kadosh]

http://www.freemasonrytoday.com/publ...ons-legacy.jpg

Lord Northampton's Legacy - http://www.freemasonrytoday.com/46/p09.php - " 'Why,’ I asked Lord Northampton, ‘in the twenty-first century, should anyone become a Freemason?’
‘The idea of “becoming a Freemason” is something of a misnomer. I think that you are born a Freemason. There is something within you which leads you to want to develop in an integrated way, to seek self-development to become a better person. And part of this search involves considering the major questions about life and death. You should join Freemasonry if you are looking for moral and spiritual values in a world which is predominantly focussed upon material concerns.’ "

[stevepenny]

Originally Posted by grandsecretary

Freemasonry was institutionalised by the same process of patronage that the Hanoverians used to such effect elsewhere in the Kingdom, and by the Hanoverian dynasty's use of its undoubted influence in Parliament, to pass enabling legislation designed to silence and eliminate opposition of all kinds, including Anglo-Saxon Free Masonrie, The Grand Lodge of All England at York, and its Jacobite Tories and Free Masons.

This is how it was done: The Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act (1794) culminating in The Combination Acts of 1799 and 1800.

This legislation included: The Treasonable Practices Act (1795); The Seditious Meetings Act (1795); The Unlawful Oaths Act (1797); The Newspaper Publications Act (1797); The Corresponding Societies Act (1799); and The Unlawful Societies Act (1799).

Peter,

I see you are attempting to portray the destruction of the GLAE as the principle thrust of these changes. Choosing, for example, your last act, that of the Unlawful Societies; perhaps you could provide a balanced perspective as to the reason behind it, and why GLAE was not included.

The Unlawful Societies Act had an amendment attached to it which was used, specifically to outlaw the meetings of The Grand Lodge of All England at York.

This is a completely fabrication. I look forward to your 'balanced' reply.

[kweli]

Originally Posted by kadosh

OK. This is what you are referring to. The Masons' Loft in York Minster http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~arch40/MLframe.htm

A tour of up to 1hr 30mins which visits both the impressive structure of the Chapter House’s timber roof void and the fascinating Masons' loft above the vestibule. http://www.yorkminster.org/visiting/...minster-tours/

I'd love to have a tour around there - - York Minster is an awesome building. Cheers for the info.

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by kadosh

Freemasonry is an esoteric society only in that certain aspects are private. Freemasons state that Masonry is not, in the 21st century, a secret society but a "society with secrets". Some Freemasons describe Freemasonry as a "confidential" society in contrast to a secret society. Most modern Freemasons regard the traditional concern over secrecy as a demonstration of their ability to keep a promise and a concern over the privacy of their own affairs. Lodge meetings, like meetings of many other social and professional associations, are private occasions open only to members. The private aspects of modern Freemasonry deal with the modes of recognition amongst members and elements within the ritual.

Exactly - it means absolutely nothing; anyone can join so long as he has a cheque book; the modes of recognition and your rituals, all of them, are available at the press of an enter key.

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by kadosh

http://www.freemasonrytoday.com/publ...ons-legacy.jpg

Lord Northampton's Legacy - http://www.freemasonrytoday.com/46/p09.php - " 'Why,’ I asked Lord Northampton, ‘in the twenty-first century, should anyone become a Freemason?’
‘The idea of “becoming a Freemason” is something of a misnomer. I think that you are born a Freemason. There is something within you which leads you to want to develop in an integrated way, to seek self-development to become a better person. And part of this search involves considering the major questions about life and death. You should join Freemasonry if you are looking for moral and spiritual values in a world which is predominantly focussed upon material concerns.’ "

Political correctness par excellence. What does this mean - really? Self development? Free Masonrie teaches you the right way, it doesn't wait for you to self-develop. What happens if you decide to self-develop into a mass murderer?

What utter tosh. No wonder he failed.

Born a Freemason? Well let's forget the initiation ceremonies then shall we? Let's just have a party while we all are self-developing! Presumably men are born in total ignorance, but as "natural" Freemasons simply because they have a penis, but women are born in similar ignorance but they cannot be freemasons because they have vaginas? Good grief!

He's an idiot, and I had the pleasure of telling him so.

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by kweli

I'd love to have a tour around there - - York Minster is an awesome building. Cheers for the info.

You are welcome. If you have problem organising it, call me and I will assist you. My number is on our website.

[kweli]

Originally Posted by grandsecretary

You are welcome. If you have problem organising it, call me and I will assist you. My number is on our website.

Cheers, that's very kind of you.

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by stevepenny

Peter,

I see you are attempting to portray the destruction of the GLAE as the principle thrust of these changes. Choosing, for example, your last act, that of the Unlawful Societies; perhaps you could provide a balanced perspective as to the reason behind it, and why GLAE was not included.



This is a completely fabrication. I look forward to your 'balanced' reply.

No Steve, not an attempt at anything. It sets out, simply and briefly, the succinct historical detail of what actually happened in 1813.

Firstly the Grand Lodge of All England was not "destroyed" it went underground, and into exile in France, Italy and Austria.

Perhaps you would please explain why you consider that my posting was a fabrication? Merely saying so, is really not enough.

The Grand Lodge of All England was not included for the reasons very clearly stated. ALL of the sources that I quoted are first class independent primary sources.

The Unlawful Societies Act, 1799; "The Unlawful Societies Act 1799", an academic paper published by The Centre for Research into Freemasonry; The statement by Lord Moira, Pro Grand Master, Grand Lodge of London, Acting Grand Master, Grand Lodge of Scotland as recorded by Hansard; Hamill J. and Gilbert R.A. (1991). World Freemasonry. London: Aquarian Press.

Why do you disagree? Which independent, reliable, first class, primary sources can you bring to the party?

[stevepenny]

Originally Posted by grandsecretary

No Steve, not an attempt at anything. It sets out, simply and briefly, the succinct historical detail of what actually happened in 1813.

Peter, the following explains the basis of the act and sheds light on a few salient facts:

In April 1799, the M.P. for Southwark, the wealthy banker and evangelical philanthropist Henry Thornton, wrote to William Wickham in the Home Office giving details of a secret society meetin in Wandsworth at which attendees had to swear a secret oath. Thornton was convinced that this 'secret society' was a cell of the subversive organisation known as the United Englishmen. Although the Government knew of such as organisation it was believed that the society was paying people to join.

Given the political landscape at that time, with talk of a French invasion, Pitt's Government had little option but to put into place legislation to forestall a threat of revolution. The act, or to give it its full name "An act for the more effectual suppression of societies established for seditious and treasonable purposes; and for the better preventing treasonable and seditious practices', would remain a thorn in the side of Freemasonry until its repeal in 1967.

Many other 'illegal'organisations were present in England at the time the act was enacted; The United Irishman, established in 1791 with an aim to create a unified Ireland, The London Corresponding Society, whose leaders were charged with treason in 1794 (they got off with a slap on the wrists), and of course an early incarnation of the Irish Republican Movement.

On 19 April 1799, the House of Commons debated the act and Pitt announced the measures that his Government intended to propose. The suspension of Habeas Corpus would continue as it allowed the Government to move prisoners around the country at will (a sort of old fashioned Extraordinary Rendition). Pitt is quoted (Hansard) as saying "we must proceed still farther, now that we are engaged in a most important struggle with the restless and fatal spirit of Jacobinism, assuming new shapes, and concealing its malignant and destructive designs under new forms and new practices. In order to oppose it with effect, we must also from time to time adopt new modes, and assume new shapes'. Not only should the societies mentioned by name in the secret committee's report, the L.C.S., the United Irish, the United Britons, the United Scotsmen and the United Englishmen, be suppressed, but all societies of this type should be made unlawful.

He goes on to say "These marks are, wicked and illegal engagements of mutual fidelity and secrecy by which the members are bound; the secrecy of electing the members; the secret government and conduct of the affairs of the society; secret appointments unknown to the bulk of the members; presidents and committees, which, veiling themselves from the general mass and knowledge of the members, plot and conduct the treason - I propose that all societies which administer such oaths shall be declared unlawful confederacies...'

He went on to propose that all meetings that charged an admission fee should require a licence from a Justice of the Peace. And if you think that is bad it also required that all publications now had to bear the name and address of the printer, and that all printing presses were to be recorded on an official register.

The Bill, which recived its first reading in the House of Commons on 22 April outlawed the London Corresponding Spciety, the United Englishmen, United Scotsmen, United Irishmen and United Britons by name. It also defined the following as unlawfull 'every society, the members whereof shall...be required or admitted to take any oath or engagement...' Societies were required to admit members 'by open declaration at a public meeting of such society'.

Both English Grand Lodges and the Scottish Grand Lodge had to take decisive action in order to prevent being outlawed and petitioned Pitt for an audience which was granted on May 2nd in Downing Street. Present at that meeting were Lord Moira, Acting Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England, and Duke of Atholl, Grand Master of the Ancients' Grand Lodge and Past Grand Master Mason of Scotland. The minutes of the meeting are recorded in the minute book of the Hall Commitee of UGLE.

Dispensation was granted that a clause would be added to the act before the second reading to the effect that it would not effect any Society, "...provided that the name of the society could be prevented from being made use of as a cover by evilly disposed persons for seditious purposes".

Pitt was assured that Freemasonry did not present a issue and he inserted the clause as stated in the bill at the second readng. The new bill received royal assent on 12 July. One of the down sides to all this was that none of the Grand Lodges were able to raise any new lodges hence having to re-use old defunct lodge numbers.

A more serious problem arose in 1939, when it was pointed out that only lodges founded before 12 July 1799 were entitled to exemption under the act. The United Grand Lodge of England tried to bring about a private members bill to create a general exemption; however, the Government believed that the act was effective against the IRA and Fascist organisations and refused to grant the exemption. However, the Attorney General agreed not to prosecute any freemasons' lodges under the terms of the act

The Grand Lodge of All England was not included for the reasons very clearly stated. ALL of the sources that I quoted are first class independent primary sources.

Perhaps I missed it but I dont recall an explanation as to why they were excluded, if indeed they were.

Why do you disagree? Which independent, reliable, first class, primary sources can you bring to the party?

I am quoting Hansard and the Library of the Law Society which are excellent Primary Sources.

[nihil]

are masons satanists cults

"The goat on the frontispiece carries the sign of the pentagram on the forehead, with one point at the top, a symbol of light, his two hands forming the sign of hermetism, the one pointing up to the white moon of Chesed, the other pointing down to the black one of Geburah. This sign expresses the perfect harmony of mercy with justice. His one arm is female, the other male like the ones of the androgyn of Khunrath, the attributes of which we had to unite with those of our goat because he is one and the same symbol. The flame of intelligence shining between his horns is the magic light of the universal balance, the image of the soul elevated above matter, as the flame, whilst being tied to matter, shines above it. The ugly beast's head expresses the horror of the sinner, whose materially acting, solely reponsible part has to bear the punishment exclusively; because the soul is insensitive according to its nature and can only suffer when it materializes. The rod standing instead of genitals symbolizes eternal life, the body covered with scales the water, the semi- circle above it the atmosphere, the feathers following above the volatile. Humanity is represented by the two breasts and the androgyn arms of this sphinx of the occult sciences."

- E.Levi about his insane depiction of Baphomet.

[stewart edwards]

Originally Posted by grandsecretary

anyone can join so long as he has a cheque book;

Except me

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by stevepenny

Peter, the following explains the basis of the act and sheds light on a few salient facts:

In April 1799, the M.P. for Southwark, the wealthy banker and evangelical philanthropist Henry Thornton, wrote to William Wickham in the Home Office giving details of a secret society meetin in Wandsworth at which attendees had to swear a secret oath. Thornton was convinced that this 'secret society' was a cell of the subversive organisation known as the United Englishmen. Although the Government knew of such as organisation it was believed that the society was paying people to join.

Given the political landscape at that time, with talk of a French invasion, Pitt's Government had little option but to put into place legislation to forestall a threat of revolution. The act, or to give it its full name "An act for the more effectual suppression of societies established for seditious and treasonable purposes; and for the better preventing treasonable and seditious practices', would remain a thorn in the side of Freemasonry until its repeal in 1967.

Many other 'illegal'organisations were present in England at the time the act was enacted; The United Irishman, established in 1791 with an aim to create a unified Ireland, The London Corresponding Society, whose leaders were charged with treason in 1794 (they got off with a slap on the wrists), and of course an early incarnation of the Irish Republican Movement.

On 19 April 1799, the House of Commons debated the act and Pitt announced the measures that his Government intended to propose. The suspension of Habeas Corpus would continue as it allowed the Government to move prisoners around the country at will (a sort of old fashioned Extraordinary Rendition). Pitt is quoted (Hansard) as saying "we must proceed still farther, now that we are engaged in a most important struggle with the restless and fatal spirit of Jacobinism, assuming new shapes, and concealing its malignant and destructive designs under new forms and new practices. In order to oppose it with effect, we must also from time to time adopt new modes, and assume new shapes'. Not only should the societies mentioned by name in the secret committee's report, the L.C.S., the United Irish, the United Britons, the United Scotsmen and the United Englishmen, be suppressed, but all societies of this type should be made unlawful.

He goes on to say "These marks are, wicked and illegal engagements of mutual fidelity and secrecy by which the members are bound; the secrecy of electing the members; the secret government and conduct of the affairs of the society; secret appointments unknown to the bulk of the members; presidents and committees, which, veiling themselves from the general mass and knowledge of the members, plot and conduct the treason - I propose that all societies which administer such oaths shall be declared unlawful confederacies...'

He went on to propose that all meetings that charged an admission fee should require a licence from a Justice of the Peace. And if you think that is bad it also required that all publications now had to bear the name and address of the printer, and that all printing presses were to be recorded on an official register.

The Bill, which recived its first reading in the House of Commons on 22 April outlawed the London Corresponding Spciety, the United Englishmen, United Scotsmen, United Irishmen and United Britons by name. It also defined the following as unlawfull 'every society, the members whereof shall...be required or admitted to take any oath or engagement...' Societies were required to admit members 'by open declaration at a public meeting of such society'.

Both English Grand Lodges and the Scottish Grand Lodge had to take decisive action in order to prevent being outlawed and petitioned Pitt for an audience which was granted on May 2nd in Downing Street. Present at that meeting were Lord Moira, Acting Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England, and Duke of Atholl, Grand Master of the Ancients' Grand Lodge and Past Grand Master Mason of Scotland. The minutes of the meeting are recorded in the minute book of the Hall Commitee of UGLE.

Dispensation was granted that a clause would be added to the act before the second reading to the effect that it would not effect any Society, "...provided that the name of the society could be prevented from being made use of as a cover by evilly disposed persons for seditious purposes".

Pitt was assured that Freemasonry did not present a issue and he inserted the clause as stated in the bill at the second readng. The new bill received royal assent on 12 July. One of the down sides to all this was that none of the Grand Lodges were able to raise any new lodges hence having to re-use old defunct lodge numbers.

A more serious problem arose in 1939, when it was pointed out that only lodges founded before 12 July 1799 were entitled to exemption under the act. The United Grand Lodge of England tried to bring about a private members bill to create a general exemption; however, the Government believed that the act was effective against the IRA and Fascist organisations and refused to grant the exemption. However, the Attorney General agreed not to prosecute any freemasons' lodges under the terms of the act



Perhaps I missed it but I dont recall an explanation as to why they were excluded, if indeed they were.



I am quoting Hansard and the Library of the Law Society which are excellent Primary Sources.

Steve, I know the Act intimately, believe me. Richard Young (our Grand Chancellor) is a practicing solicitor and a University Lecturer in International Constitutional Law. My Brother-in-Law sits on the Company Law Committee of The Law Society. I am very well advised on these sorts of issues, and others, I can assure you.

On top of this I was involved in national politics for many years, stood for Parliament, and was an adviser to the Prime Minister between 1979 and 1984. I know how Parliament works and what goes on behind the scenes.

Please read the posting in detail, especially the amendment which was exploited by Lord Moira on behalf of his masters.

By 1813 the degree of control exerted by Hanover had been extended in order to exploit the amendment even further. The Duke of Sussex’s determination, post ratification of the Articles of Union between the Moderns London Grand Lodge and the Antients Grand Lodge, represents a typically Hanoverian approach to Freemasonry, control, patronage and influence. Such ambitions are very much in the Hanoverian tradition, and represent one aspect of the power of influence. Another lasting effect of the use of patronage and influence, one which divides Freemason from Freemason, is the doctrine of "Recognition". This bogus doctrine has its genesis in the exemption granted to “approved” lodges from the draconian effects of The Unlawful Societies Act, 1799.

You may not know about this document, 1813/1814.

http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.co...t.html#compact Scroll down and read the Compact itself, and the added comments.

This is a primary source and it sets out the true history, and the actual dates of The Compact of Union. It followed on from the amendment. This document was kept quiet until quite recently.

[grandsecretary]

Originally Posted by stewart edwards

Except me

I still can't understand what happened there Stewart. It seems to me that you would have settled in very nicely. How far did you get with your application?

Surely they told you why they turned you down? Their loss.