-
Articles/Ads
Article THE QUESTION OF GRAND LODGE JURISDICTION. Page 1 of 3 Article THE QUESTION OF GRAND LODGE JURISDICTION. Page 1 of 3 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Question Of Grand Lodge Jurisdiction.
THE QUESTION OF GRAND LODGE JURISDICTION .
WE have received from the Grand Lodgo of Quebec two documents or pamphlets on the vexed question of Masonic jurisdiction , which has latterly intervened between the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Quebec , and destroyed for the time being the friendly relations formerly existing between them . We , of necessity , regret that any
disturbance of that harmony which undoubtedly should prevail between two Grand Lodges has occurred . But this is a difficult and somewhat peculiar case—one which , from the very nature of things , is not likely to recur often . At the same time , the three Grand Lodges of the United
Kingdom , which can boast , each of them , of numerous daughter-Lodges established throughout the British Colonies , have an exceptional interest in this particular difference that has arisen . If , at any future time , it should happen that the Lodges in one of these Colonies were desirous of
erecting a Grand Lodge of tbeir own , we in this country should be as interested in the progress of events as when , to give an instance , the proposal for erecting an independent Grand Lodge of Canada was mooted some quarter of a century since , and there is probably little doubt we should
adopt a similar course , if we thought it desirable in the interests of the Craft universal to recognise the new Grand Body . Thus there are good reasons for devoting a brief space to the question at issue between Quebec and Scotland . The dispute is substantially this . When the Grand Lodge
ot oanaaa was established , it obtained recognition from the Grand Lodge of Scotland conditionall y that any of the Lodges holding warrants from the latter should , if they were so minded , continue in allegiance to it . The Grand Lodge of Quebec was subsequently established as an
independent Masonic body . In time it was recognised as such by the Grand Lodge of Scotland , but for reasons which are best known to the authorities of the latter , without any proviso as to its Lord Elgin , No . 348 , Montreal , retaining , if it chose , its allegiance . Since then the Grand Lodee of
Quebec has endeavoured to force Lodge Elgin to surrender its Scotch warrant , and become an integral part of itself . Grand Lodge of Scotland has not only resented this attempted interference with its sovereignty , but has gone considerabl y further , and acting in an unfortunate spirit of retaliation
, nas not only withdrawn its recognition of Quebec as an independent Masonic power , but has likewise issued warrants for the erection of new daughter Lodges . As regards England the case is somewhat different . England conditionall y recognised the Grand Lodges of
Canada and Quebec , and there are three Lodges within the jurisdiction of the latter , which have elected to retain their allegiance to the Grand Lodge which granted their warrants . Quebec , however , requires these as well as the •t-lgin Lodge of Scotland to come into its fold , thereby
severing those relations with England which for this garter of a century they have preferred to maintain . It will be seen from this brief resume of the case that , as we nave said already , the complications are many and great , and as a matter of course havo led to very general discussion
among the Grand Lodges of tbe North American VA-mtmen fc , the majorit y of which seem inclined to endorse tne action of Quebec rather than that of Scotland . We
"agnt not to be surprised at this when we bear in mind jnat questions of jurisdiction are more likely to arise among f numerous Grand Lod ges in the United States than aere , and are sure to evoke an amount of jealous interest
The Question Of Grand Lodge Jurisdiction.
which to us is hardly comprehensible . Let us , however , look a little into tho causes of this particular difference , as much with a view to future guidance as to bring about its satisfactory adjustment . When a new Grand Lodgo is established in a British
colony out of materials existing there , it seems only just and reasonable that those which prefer to remain in allegiance to their respective mother Grand Lodges , should have full liberty to do so . Perfect freedom in a matter of this kind is of the very essence of Freemasonry . If in some
particular colony there are , we will say , a dozen Lodgessome English , others Irish , and others Scotch—and some of them suggest the establishment of a Grand Lodge of their own , we see no just cause or impediment against their doing so , and no reason to suppose that , if tbey persist in
their efforts in that direction , they will ultimately prevail . But if the remaining Lodges say—Wo do not agree with your policy , nor can we , being in the minority , prevent your doing what you wish , but for ourselves we prefer remaining as we are , and shall continue to work under the
Warrants to which we are respectively indebted for our Masonic being , it seems as reasonable to allow them to remain affiliated as previously as to acquiesce in the proposal of the others to erect a Grand Lodge of their own . There ought to be no compulsion whatever in a matter
which is one partly of feeling . If Lodge No . 13 , 500 says , We vote for an independent Grand Lodge of our own , which shall possess absolute authority over the whole of this colony , and the majority of the other Lodges are of the same opinion , there is nothing , as we have said , to prevent
the proposal being carried out , but it would be a distinct act of usurpation on their part if tbey endeavoured lo interfere with Lodges possessing equal , and , it might be , older rights than themselves , and declare—You must and shall go with us , or we shall refuse to recognise your
Masonic status . It were as though a man should make up his mind to marry and set up a house for himself , and then turning to his brothers and sisters , tell them they must in . futnre recognise him as the head of the family , or he should deny them the exercise of those rights and privileges they
had before enjoyed . Thus when the Grand Lodge of Canada came into being , that of Scotland recognised its independence on the condition that any of its Lodges , which preferred retaining the old relations , should be at full liberty to do so , and Canada accepted such qualified
recognition of her independence . Some years later a new Grand Lodge , that of Quebec , was set on foot within the jurisdiction of Canada , and in time its independence was recognised by Canada and other Masonic bodies , among which must be included Scotland ; but in this instance no
condition was laid down , for the very probable reason that it was considered a matter of course the old stipulation would still remain in force . It is a great pity this oversight was committed by the Grand Lodge of Scotland , for a refusal to recognise the old state of things would have
come with , a very bad grace from a Grand Lodge which , under the circumstances of its origin , must always be regarded as a standing menace against the doctrine of the absolute sovereignty of Grand Lodges over the territories in which they have severally been erected . Quebec is a
part of Canada , and there was already a Grand Lodge of Canada in existence . Consequently the erection of the Grand Lodge of Quebec was a violation of the Canadian
jurisdictional rights . What , for instance , would the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania say if the Lodges in three or four contiguous counties in that state established a Grand Lodge of their own ? or what should we say in this
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Question Of Grand Lodge Jurisdiction.
THE QUESTION OF GRAND LODGE JURISDICTION .
WE have received from the Grand Lodgo of Quebec two documents or pamphlets on the vexed question of Masonic jurisdiction , which has latterly intervened between the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Quebec , and destroyed for the time being the friendly relations formerly existing between them . We , of necessity , regret that any
disturbance of that harmony which undoubtedly should prevail between two Grand Lodges has occurred . But this is a difficult and somewhat peculiar case—one which , from the very nature of things , is not likely to recur often . At the same time , the three Grand Lodges of the United
Kingdom , which can boast , each of them , of numerous daughter-Lodges established throughout the British Colonies , have an exceptional interest in this particular difference that has arisen . If , at any future time , it should happen that the Lodges in one of these Colonies were desirous of
erecting a Grand Lodge of tbeir own , we in this country should be as interested in the progress of events as when , to give an instance , the proposal for erecting an independent Grand Lodge of Canada was mooted some quarter of a century since , and there is probably little doubt we should
adopt a similar course , if we thought it desirable in the interests of the Craft universal to recognise the new Grand Body . Thus there are good reasons for devoting a brief space to the question at issue between Quebec and Scotland . The dispute is substantially this . When the Grand Lodge
ot oanaaa was established , it obtained recognition from the Grand Lodge of Scotland conditionall y that any of the Lodges holding warrants from the latter should , if they were so minded , continue in allegiance to it . The Grand Lodge of Quebec was subsequently established as an
independent Masonic body . In time it was recognised as such by the Grand Lodge of Scotland , but for reasons which are best known to the authorities of the latter , without any proviso as to its Lord Elgin , No . 348 , Montreal , retaining , if it chose , its allegiance . Since then the Grand Lodee of
Quebec has endeavoured to force Lodge Elgin to surrender its Scotch warrant , and become an integral part of itself . Grand Lodge of Scotland has not only resented this attempted interference with its sovereignty , but has gone considerabl y further , and acting in an unfortunate spirit of retaliation
, nas not only withdrawn its recognition of Quebec as an independent Masonic power , but has likewise issued warrants for the erection of new daughter Lodges . As regards England the case is somewhat different . England conditionall y recognised the Grand Lodges of
Canada and Quebec , and there are three Lodges within the jurisdiction of the latter , which have elected to retain their allegiance to the Grand Lodge which granted their warrants . Quebec , however , requires these as well as the •t-lgin Lodge of Scotland to come into its fold , thereby
severing those relations with England which for this garter of a century they have preferred to maintain . It will be seen from this brief resume of the case that , as we nave said already , the complications are many and great , and as a matter of course havo led to very general discussion
among the Grand Lodges of tbe North American VA-mtmen fc , the majorit y of which seem inclined to endorse tne action of Quebec rather than that of Scotland . We
"agnt not to be surprised at this when we bear in mind jnat questions of jurisdiction are more likely to arise among f numerous Grand Lod ges in the United States than aere , and are sure to evoke an amount of jealous interest
The Question Of Grand Lodge Jurisdiction.
which to us is hardly comprehensible . Let us , however , look a little into tho causes of this particular difference , as much with a view to future guidance as to bring about its satisfactory adjustment . When a new Grand Lodgo is established in a British
colony out of materials existing there , it seems only just and reasonable that those which prefer to remain in allegiance to their respective mother Grand Lodges , should have full liberty to do so . Perfect freedom in a matter of this kind is of the very essence of Freemasonry . If in some
particular colony there are , we will say , a dozen Lodgessome English , others Irish , and others Scotch—and some of them suggest the establishment of a Grand Lodge of their own , we see no just cause or impediment against their doing so , and no reason to suppose that , if tbey persist in
their efforts in that direction , they will ultimately prevail . But if the remaining Lodges say—Wo do not agree with your policy , nor can we , being in the minority , prevent your doing what you wish , but for ourselves we prefer remaining as we are , and shall continue to work under the
Warrants to which we are respectively indebted for our Masonic being , it seems as reasonable to allow them to remain affiliated as previously as to acquiesce in the proposal of the others to erect a Grand Lodge of their own . There ought to be no compulsion whatever in a matter
which is one partly of feeling . If Lodge No . 13 , 500 says , We vote for an independent Grand Lodge of our own , which shall possess absolute authority over the whole of this colony , and the majority of the other Lodges are of the same opinion , there is nothing , as we have said , to prevent
the proposal being carried out , but it would be a distinct act of usurpation on their part if tbey endeavoured lo interfere with Lodges possessing equal , and , it might be , older rights than themselves , and declare—You must and shall go with us , or we shall refuse to recognise your
Masonic status . It were as though a man should make up his mind to marry and set up a house for himself , and then turning to his brothers and sisters , tell them they must in . futnre recognise him as the head of the family , or he should deny them the exercise of those rights and privileges they
had before enjoyed . Thus when the Grand Lodge of Canada came into being , that of Scotland recognised its independence on the condition that any of its Lodges , which preferred retaining the old relations , should be at full liberty to do so , and Canada accepted such qualified
recognition of her independence . Some years later a new Grand Lodge , that of Quebec , was set on foot within the jurisdiction of Canada , and in time its independence was recognised by Canada and other Masonic bodies , among which must be included Scotland ; but in this instance no
condition was laid down , for the very probable reason that it was considered a matter of course the old stipulation would still remain in force . It is a great pity this oversight was committed by the Grand Lodge of Scotland , for a refusal to recognise the old state of things would have
come with , a very bad grace from a Grand Lodge which , under the circumstances of its origin , must always be regarded as a standing menace against the doctrine of the absolute sovereignty of Grand Lodges over the territories in which they have severally been erected . Quebec is a
part of Canada , and there was already a Grand Lodge of Canada in existence . Consequently the erection of the Grand Lodge of Quebec was a violation of the Canadian
jurisdictional rights . What , for instance , would the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania say if the Lodges in three or four contiguous counties in that state established a Grand Lodge of their own ? or what should we say in this