-
Articles/Ads
Article IS THE POPE A FREEMASON? Page 1 of 1 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 1 Article Untitled Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Is The Pope A Freemason?
IS THE POPE A FREEMASON ?
We have received a letter from Constanstinop le of date professedly Nov . 25 th last past , wh ich we print , ' ' verbatim et literatim , " in
another column . We are much obliged to our Constantinopolitan correspondent for forwarding a photograph of the Pope , with a Masonic sash , & c . But two questions inevitably arise ,
which require , in our opinion , a clear answer . X . —What is the name of the photographer at Constantinople by whom this carte de visite has been issued . His name on the card sent is
completely erased . II . —Whence did he obtain the photograph ? Is it orig inal or made to order ? Our correspondent tells us he has had it ten years .
We observe that the motto now runs , " Ex communicavi meos fratres mea culpa , " words unlikely we think , to be used j [ by the Pope , but they can be construed . The previous motto ,
excommunicate , & c ., was almostuntranslateable . We presume that this photograph is identical with or taken from the alleged " Soussingeas " p hotogram , but we confess that at present we do not attach m Jch value to it , in the controversy .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even as approving o tbeopinions expressed by ourcorrcspondcnls , but we wish , in la spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary imits—free discussion . —ED . ]
MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In our Book of Constitutions , page 18 is as follows : — , 1 . " Every brother regularly elected and installed as Master of a lodge under the
Constitution of the Grand Lodge of England , who has executed that oflice for one year , shall , so ong as he continues a subscribing member of any lodge , rank as Past Master , and be a member of the Grand Lodge . Subscription as a member of any lodge is sufficient to preserve
his rank and rights as a Past Master ; but having for twelve months ceased to subscribe to any lodge , * " he shall no longer continue a member of the Grand Lodge - ' nor can he regain that privilege until again installed Master of a lodge . " The oldest P . M . of a country lodge ceased being a subscribing member to any lodge for
two years , when he again became a subscribing member to his lodge . I shall be glad to know if he can still rank as the senior P . M . of the lodge ? As I read the above paragraph , the only privilege he loses is that " he shall no longer continue a member of the Grand Lodge . " What think you ? Very fraternally yours , M . S .
To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I am induced to submit the following question for your consideration ; as your valuable journal is now becoming familiar to the Craft in these colonies , your opinion would be useful for
future guidance . Whether such a case has actually occurred or not , we need not stay to enquire , but we will suppose , viz . : A lodge at its regular meeting in August elects a brother as W . M . for the ensuing year at the regular meeting in September , the minutes of the previous meeting ( including the election of Master ) are read and
confirmed , but the installation cannot be proceeded with , the brother , so elected being absent . The lodge acting under advice from superior authority at once take the necessary steps to alter their bye-laws , so as to make the election of W . M . next year fall a month later , or ( they say ) the present election will be invalid , as the
Ar00902
W . M . not being installed to-night , will not have filled the office twelve months , which is necessary to constitute him as P . M . Is this reasoning correct ? I think not . I argue that from the moment his election was confirmed , such brother is , de facto , the W . M . of the lodge , from
which time he dates his term of office , notwithstanding he is not present for installation . Clause r . " Of the Masters and Wardens of Lodges " provides " that no Master elect shall assume the Master ' s chair until he shall have been regularly installed , though he may in the interim rule the
lodge ; " this evidently means , he may act as W . M . in ruling the lodge , and generally transact its business , previous to installation , although not having assumed the chair he cannot make , pass , or raise . Therefore the date of installation cannot invalidate the date of election , and
consequently it is not -necessary to alter the bye-laws on that account . But the question arises ; Does it affect the qualification of his Wardens ? I think not , as the appointment of these officers is the prerogative of the W . M ., it is [ not for the lodge to question
when he appointed them , if after they are invested they serve to the satisfaction of the W . M ., the qualification is sufficiently legal . Again , it is suggested that the aforesaid W . M . is not empowered by the constitution to open and close the lodge . I need not further intrude my
opinion on the matter , but would respectfully request for the benefit of myself and several of the Craft , that you will kindly give us yours . I remain , yours fraternally , W . H . Dunedin , New Zealand , ' Sept . 28 , 1874 .
BRO . WIGGINTON AND THE VERNON BIBLE .
Dear Bro . Kenning . As my main object in calling attention to the Vernon Bible , was to bring the matter before the Vernon Lodge , I shall be happy to hear from Bro . Wigginton , or the W-M- of the Vernon Lodge , , 560 , on the subject . I am , yours most fraternally ,
A . F . A . WOODI-ORD . 10 , Upper Porchester-st ., Hyde Park Square , London . W . C , December 7 th
1874-To the Editor of Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , I have with some surprise read your letter headed " Masonic Bibliography , " in the Freemason of Nov . 28 th .
The bible you therein describe belonged to the " Vernon" Lodge , No . 819 , Dudley , and the MS . note signed " E . P . " is in my handwriting . Thc lodge was removed to Stourport some years ago , its present No . 590 .
I have called the attention of the Stourport brethren to the letter , and it is for them to explain how the bible left their possession . It was bought for lodge use in 1856 , on the
removal of the lodge from Bromsgrove ; its orig inal name was the " Clive" Lodge . Yours fraternally , EDWIN POOLE , P . M . 819 .
THE ORDER OF THE TEMPLE . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Some time ago you published in your paper the Memorial ofthe Knights Templar in the province of Lancashire to the Great Prior , praying a revision of thc statutes of the Order , on
certain points on which great dissatisfaction is widely felt . That memorial was open to objection on certain points of form ( which it is not necessary here to refer to further ) , and has since , as I have been informed , met its fate , whether on that ground or for more substantial reasons I
know ot . The Province of Worcestershire has adopted a form of memorial ( of which I send you a copy herewith ) , which I ask you to publish in your next issue , for the information of those Priories and Preceptories , the members of
which like ourselves feel the need of a revision of the statutes on the points therein referred to . I am firmly convinced that it is not by the isolated efforts of one or two Priories and , Preceptories here and there that the desired alterations
in the present statutes can be expected or hoped for , but only by the wide and united action of all who think as we do and know * and feel the injury to the Order and the dissatisfaction which prevails consequent on the present state of things . It cannot reasonably be expected that Grand
Conclave will be moved to take this revision into consideration and do what is necessary in it at the instance of a few Sir Knts ., whom they may imagine to be a few discontented disturbers , ( such as may be found in most large bodies of men ) whose opinions are not shared in b y any
large or important section . But on the other hand if it is made patent to the High powers that the dissatisfaction is not confined to one or two Priories , but is generally diffused over the whole body , and that the evils complained of are strongly and widely felt and growing more and
more pressing and serious m their elliicts , on . the prosperity of the Order , it may be hoped that our representations may be considered and relief be granted . Let then every Priory and Preceptory , at the earliest opportunity , take this state of
things into consideration , and join in urging upon Grand Conclave ( whether by a memorial in this form or in any other which may better represent their views ) , attention to their representations and consideration to their complaints . Yours fraternally , ' J . C . I . L .
Nov . 27 th , 18 74 . To H . R . H . the Prince of Wales , K . G ., & c , & c . kc , the Most Eminent Grand Master of the Order of The Temple , in Council . The memorial of the Province of Worcestershire of the said Order , Sheweth ,
1 . That the Memorialists have had experience of the progress of the Order in the Provinces and of its causes ot success and depression , and are enabled to judge of the effect which recent legislation has had and will have upon all branches of the Institution outside the Metropolitan
boundaries of the Convent General and the Great Priory . They view with much regret many of the alterations contained in the new Statutes , believing that the changes will not tend to the advantage of the Order , are contrary to its traditions and distasteful to a large proportion of its Members .
2 . lhat they believe the Order to be essentially * ' Masonic , " and they object to the elimination of that prefix as tending to the destruction of the only reason which the Order has ever had , or ever can have , for its modern existence . An
attempt was made in Scotland , in 1844 , to effect a separation from its Masonic foundation ; but as a consequence the Order became nearl y extinguished , and at its revival , in 1856 , the injudicious step had to be retraced .
3 . That they believe the association of the title of the Order of Malta with the Masonic Order of thc Temple arose from a confusion of names , and that no Masonic Maltese Order has , or ever had , existence as a fact ; a view which was affirmed by the late Grand Conclave of England in 185 , 3 , from which year , until 1862 ,
thc Masonic Order of thc Temple alone had existence . That by the new Statutes the Orders are declared to be " United , " and the Jewels of the present Temple Order comprise tho "Union "; yet the Maltese Order is made a separate encumbrance and separate insignia are inconsistently entailed , notwithstanding the combination referred to .
4 . That these and other changes effected b y the new Statutes are prejudicial to the extension and popularity of the Order ; but none is producing a more insidious effect than the cnactmen that " no status analogous to that heretofore designated as Past Rank shall be recognized , nor
allowed , nor any insignia thereof borne . " That as the appointments to office are made during pleasure there is no inducement ( if such appointments are not frequently changed ) to any other Sir Knights than those in office , to attend Provincial Meetings , and as a necessary consequence
their interest is much decreased and will become still less . It is alread y found that they are disinclined to pay fees of office , and to expend time and incur the cost of journies in thc fulfilment of duties from which they ultimately retire with no recognition of the services they have performed the Provincial Priories are thus not only
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Is The Pope A Freemason?
IS THE POPE A FREEMASON ?
We have received a letter from Constanstinop le of date professedly Nov . 25 th last past , wh ich we print , ' ' verbatim et literatim , " in
another column . We are much obliged to our Constantinopolitan correspondent for forwarding a photograph of the Pope , with a Masonic sash , & c . But two questions inevitably arise ,
which require , in our opinion , a clear answer . X . —What is the name of the photographer at Constantinople by whom this carte de visite has been issued . His name on the card sent is
completely erased . II . —Whence did he obtain the photograph ? Is it orig inal or made to order ? Our correspondent tells us he has had it ten years .
We observe that the motto now runs , " Ex communicavi meos fratres mea culpa , " words unlikely we think , to be used j [ by the Pope , but they can be construed . The previous motto ,
excommunicate , & c ., was almostuntranslateable . We presume that this photograph is identical with or taken from the alleged " Soussingeas " p hotogram , but we confess that at present we do not attach m Jch value to it , in the controversy .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even as approving o tbeopinions expressed by ourcorrcspondcnls , but we wish , in la spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary imits—free discussion . —ED . ]
MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In our Book of Constitutions , page 18 is as follows : — , 1 . " Every brother regularly elected and installed as Master of a lodge under the
Constitution of the Grand Lodge of England , who has executed that oflice for one year , shall , so ong as he continues a subscribing member of any lodge , rank as Past Master , and be a member of the Grand Lodge . Subscription as a member of any lodge is sufficient to preserve
his rank and rights as a Past Master ; but having for twelve months ceased to subscribe to any lodge , * " he shall no longer continue a member of the Grand Lodge - ' nor can he regain that privilege until again installed Master of a lodge . " The oldest P . M . of a country lodge ceased being a subscribing member to any lodge for
two years , when he again became a subscribing member to his lodge . I shall be glad to know if he can still rank as the senior P . M . of the lodge ? As I read the above paragraph , the only privilege he loses is that " he shall no longer continue a member of the Grand Lodge . " What think you ? Very fraternally yours , M . S .
To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I am induced to submit the following question for your consideration ; as your valuable journal is now becoming familiar to the Craft in these colonies , your opinion would be useful for
future guidance . Whether such a case has actually occurred or not , we need not stay to enquire , but we will suppose , viz . : A lodge at its regular meeting in August elects a brother as W . M . for the ensuing year at the regular meeting in September , the minutes of the previous meeting ( including the election of Master ) are read and
confirmed , but the installation cannot be proceeded with , the brother , so elected being absent . The lodge acting under advice from superior authority at once take the necessary steps to alter their bye-laws , so as to make the election of W . M . next year fall a month later , or ( they say ) the present election will be invalid , as the
Ar00902
W . M . not being installed to-night , will not have filled the office twelve months , which is necessary to constitute him as P . M . Is this reasoning correct ? I think not . I argue that from the moment his election was confirmed , such brother is , de facto , the W . M . of the lodge , from
which time he dates his term of office , notwithstanding he is not present for installation . Clause r . " Of the Masters and Wardens of Lodges " provides " that no Master elect shall assume the Master ' s chair until he shall have been regularly installed , though he may in the interim rule the
lodge ; " this evidently means , he may act as W . M . in ruling the lodge , and generally transact its business , previous to installation , although not having assumed the chair he cannot make , pass , or raise . Therefore the date of installation cannot invalidate the date of election , and
consequently it is not -necessary to alter the bye-laws on that account . But the question arises ; Does it affect the qualification of his Wardens ? I think not , as the appointment of these officers is the prerogative of the W . M ., it is [ not for the lodge to question
when he appointed them , if after they are invested they serve to the satisfaction of the W . M ., the qualification is sufficiently legal . Again , it is suggested that the aforesaid W . M . is not empowered by the constitution to open and close the lodge . I need not further intrude my
opinion on the matter , but would respectfully request for the benefit of myself and several of the Craft , that you will kindly give us yours . I remain , yours fraternally , W . H . Dunedin , New Zealand , ' Sept . 28 , 1874 .
BRO . WIGGINTON AND THE VERNON BIBLE .
Dear Bro . Kenning . As my main object in calling attention to the Vernon Bible , was to bring the matter before the Vernon Lodge , I shall be happy to hear from Bro . Wigginton , or the W-M- of the Vernon Lodge , , 560 , on the subject . I am , yours most fraternally ,
A . F . A . WOODI-ORD . 10 , Upper Porchester-st ., Hyde Park Square , London . W . C , December 7 th
1874-To the Editor of Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , I have with some surprise read your letter headed " Masonic Bibliography , " in the Freemason of Nov . 28 th .
The bible you therein describe belonged to the " Vernon" Lodge , No . 819 , Dudley , and the MS . note signed " E . P . " is in my handwriting . Thc lodge was removed to Stourport some years ago , its present No . 590 .
I have called the attention of the Stourport brethren to the letter , and it is for them to explain how the bible left their possession . It was bought for lodge use in 1856 , on the
removal of the lodge from Bromsgrove ; its orig inal name was the " Clive" Lodge . Yours fraternally , EDWIN POOLE , P . M . 819 .
THE ORDER OF THE TEMPLE . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Some time ago you published in your paper the Memorial ofthe Knights Templar in the province of Lancashire to the Great Prior , praying a revision of thc statutes of the Order , on
certain points on which great dissatisfaction is widely felt . That memorial was open to objection on certain points of form ( which it is not necessary here to refer to further ) , and has since , as I have been informed , met its fate , whether on that ground or for more substantial reasons I
know ot . The Province of Worcestershire has adopted a form of memorial ( of which I send you a copy herewith ) , which I ask you to publish in your next issue , for the information of those Priories and Preceptories , the members of
which like ourselves feel the need of a revision of the statutes on the points therein referred to . I am firmly convinced that it is not by the isolated efforts of one or two Priories and , Preceptories here and there that the desired alterations
in the present statutes can be expected or hoped for , but only by the wide and united action of all who think as we do and know * and feel the injury to the Order and the dissatisfaction which prevails consequent on the present state of things . It cannot reasonably be expected that Grand
Conclave will be moved to take this revision into consideration and do what is necessary in it at the instance of a few Sir Knts ., whom they may imagine to be a few discontented disturbers , ( such as may be found in most large bodies of men ) whose opinions are not shared in b y any
large or important section . But on the other hand if it is made patent to the High powers that the dissatisfaction is not confined to one or two Priories , but is generally diffused over the whole body , and that the evils complained of are strongly and widely felt and growing more and
more pressing and serious m their elliicts , on . the prosperity of the Order , it may be hoped that our representations may be considered and relief be granted . Let then every Priory and Preceptory , at the earliest opportunity , take this state of
things into consideration , and join in urging upon Grand Conclave ( whether by a memorial in this form or in any other which may better represent their views ) , attention to their representations and consideration to their complaints . Yours fraternally , ' J . C . I . L .
Nov . 27 th , 18 74 . To H . R . H . the Prince of Wales , K . G ., & c , & c . kc , the Most Eminent Grand Master of the Order of The Temple , in Council . The memorial of the Province of Worcestershire of the said Order , Sheweth ,
1 . That the Memorialists have had experience of the progress of the Order in the Provinces and of its causes ot success and depression , and are enabled to judge of the effect which recent legislation has had and will have upon all branches of the Institution outside the Metropolitan
boundaries of the Convent General and the Great Priory . They view with much regret many of the alterations contained in the new Statutes , believing that the changes will not tend to the advantage of the Order , are contrary to its traditions and distasteful to a large proportion of its Members .
2 . lhat they believe the Order to be essentially * ' Masonic , " and they object to the elimination of that prefix as tending to the destruction of the only reason which the Order has ever had , or ever can have , for its modern existence . An
attempt was made in Scotland , in 1844 , to effect a separation from its Masonic foundation ; but as a consequence the Order became nearl y extinguished , and at its revival , in 1856 , the injudicious step had to be retraced .
3 . That they believe the association of the title of the Order of Malta with the Masonic Order of thc Temple arose from a confusion of names , and that no Masonic Maltese Order has , or ever had , existence as a fact ; a view which was affirmed by the late Grand Conclave of England in 185 , 3 , from which year , until 1862 ,
thc Masonic Order of thc Temple alone had existence . That by the new Statutes the Orders are declared to be " United , " and the Jewels of the present Temple Order comprise tho "Union "; yet the Maltese Order is made a separate encumbrance and separate insignia are inconsistently entailed , notwithstanding the combination referred to .
4 . That these and other changes effected b y the new Statutes are prejudicial to the extension and popularity of the Order ; but none is producing a more insidious effect than the cnactmen that " no status analogous to that heretofore designated as Past Rank shall be recognized , nor
allowed , nor any insignia thereof borne . " That as the appointments to office are made during pleasure there is no inducement ( if such appointments are not frequently changed ) to any other Sir Knights than those in office , to attend Provincial Meetings , and as a necessary consequence
their interest is much decreased and will become still less . It is alread y found that they are disinclined to pay fees of office , and to expend time and incur the cost of journies in thc fulfilment of duties from which they ultimately retire with no recognition of the services they have performed the Provincial Priories are thus not only