|
Post by Tamrin on Nov 8, 2008 8:16:26 GMT 10
The charges of masonic involvement in the American and French Revolutions cannot be lightly dismissed and elsewhere they are, as we shall see, well established, although discountenanced by the mainstream. The debatable references to masonic involvement in these and other revolutions, is not a problem in those Obediences or Jurisdictions which allow discussions of politics (albeit, non-partisan). For them, it may be a matter of some pride. In those jurisdictions where such involvement was possible but where such discussions are now prohibited, as in "mainstream" US jurisdictions, one can also finds such pride but tempered with rather contradictory assurances that similar involvement today would be unmasonic. I suggest this schizoid perspective can be traced back to practical, self-debilitating contingencies relating to pressures such as those giving rise to the Unlawful Societies Act of 1799, from which Freemasonry was specifically excluded (having reassured the British establishment that it did not pose a threat), rather than having aught to do with masonic imperatives, as such. Each Jurisdiction may adopt its own rules and recognise whoever they wish: However, I suggest we avoid applying such rules retrospectively to our history and avoid labeling those Obediences or Jurisdictions which have chosen not to to fall-in-line with our cautious policy as therefore being unmasonic.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Nov 8, 2008 8:42:43 GMT 10
While we have yet to understand what role, if any, "freemasonry" played in the conflict and its resolution, the likely antecedents of the premier grand lodge may at least be traced back to the English Civil War:
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Nov 8, 2008 23:30:54 GMT 10
We may be forbidden discussion of politics within a duely opened lodge, but I assure you, no such restriction exists in the dining hall.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Nov 9, 2008 7:34:18 GMT 10
Yet many Brethren get upset by such discussions in any masonic context, as demonstrated by the oft repeated objections ... [edited by Site admin.]
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Nov 9, 2008 16:06:07 GMT 10
Indeed. I was called a "know-it-all..." and a "..." ... by a published Masonic author, whom I have lost all respect for. It seems that opposing ideas are not well recieved by those with closed minds. [edited by Site Admin.]
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Nov 10, 2008 6:06:02 GMT 10
Some Thoughts on the Politics and Beginnings of Ecossais Masonry
(Those years before the formalisation of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite)
by Graeme Love
[Synopsis - in Studies in Masonry, Transactions of the Victorian Lodge of Research No. 218 for the year 1999, p.91]
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Nov 10, 2008 6:13:53 GMT 10
Historiography and Revolutionary Freemasonry
by D. Beagley
[Concluding paragraph - in Studies in Masonry, Transactions of the Victorian Lodge of Research No. 218 for the year 1999, p.73]
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 11, 2009 17:29:24 GMT 10
Exhibition: Freemasonry and the French RevolutionUGLE's Library and Museum of Freemasonry, 1st July-18th December 2009[Excerpt - Pietre-Stones Review of Freemasonry, 20 April 2009 - Linked Above]
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 3, 2009 21:34:12 GMT 10
Where do Politics Start?
[Excerpt - Article by N.G. MacLeod, The Ashlar, Issue 30, pp.43 & 44]
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 26, 2010 7:29:45 GMT 10
|
|