|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 5, 2008 11:24:58 GMT 10
The Lausanne Congress[Link Only - Article by William Almeida de Carvalho, Pietre Stones Review of Freemasonry - Linked Above]
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 28, 2009 18:00:35 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by corab on Mar 10, 2011 6:08:13 GMT 10
Thanks for posting this, Tamrin. I have always found it somewhat bemusing that there appears to be so little awareness of this landmark Congress and the events that occurred beforehand, during and afterwards. It is interesting to see that the divisive actions took place before the Congress took even place. Most people who do have an awareness of the Congress know that the Scottish Representative, Mackersey, left before the end of the Congress and gave an inaccurate report of the incomplete proceedings up to the point of his departure (a discussion focussing on the preference of Theism ('Supreme Being') over Deism ('Creative Principle'). However, as the Bernheim articles demonstrate, the wheels had been set in motion long before the Congress even commenced, and, tying them in with the Buta article, there were political motives over, among others, Hawaii (also referred to as the Sandwich Isles). www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/bernheim_convent01.htmlwww.freemasons-freemasonry.com/bernheim_convent02.htmlwww.freemasons-freemasonry.com/bernheim_convent03.htmlwww.freemasons-freemasonry.com/masonic_foreign_recognitions.htmlIt is interesting to read in Bernheim's first article the comments of the Grand Commander of the English Supreme Council, Henry Beaumont Leeson:- "It has been my privilege to collect and preserve the disjecta membra of the Ancient Rite scattered in this and other countries, all of which attest the ancient Christian basis of the Order. On that basis alone could our Council consent to join in any revision of the Rituals, [...] It is no mission of Masonry to introduce a new religious Pantheism, nor yet to supersede or intrude on the holier and higher aspirations after God, which belong to that inner Sanctuary where man must individually commune with his Creator and settle the responsibilities of conscience." followed by Albert Pike's response:- "I quote these sentences to show the necessity for a General Congress of the Supreme Councils, in order to settle, if not the formulas and language of the Ceremonial and Ritual, at least the general and fundamental principles of the Rite. I do not agree with Ill Bro Leeson, that the ancient basis of the Order was a Christian one. If that were so, Prussian Masonry would have been right in excluding Jews from admission to its Lodges. If it were so, it would be a fraud to claim that Masonry is universal. In that case how could there be Lodges of Hebrews and Mohammedans? And in regard to the Ancient and Accepted Rite, if it had a Christian basis, how did it chance that most of those who had possession of it in this country from 1763 to 1800 were Hebrews? I think that perhaps the Rose Croix was originally a Christian degree, though even that is doubtful." In short -- the Lausanne Congress, and particularly all that went before it, is IMHO worthy of much exploration, study and discussion. With h.g.w.,
|
|
|
Post by lanoo on Mar 10, 2011 13:02:32 GMT 10
Thank you Bro. Cora for these details. It seems a great opportunity was lost in the politics of this congress.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 10, 2011 20:47:27 GMT 10
Perhaps it is time for another Congress.
|
|
|
Post by corab on Mar 11, 2011 0:57:04 GMT 10
That's an interesting and worthwhile thought, Tamrin.
What might stand in the way of success this time, and how could failure be prevented?
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 11, 2011 5:31:46 GMT 10
I'd say a lack of trust might be the main barrier, with a lack of honesty being a corollary. We would need to approach such a Congress in good faith, recognising a common cause and learning from the errors of the past: For instance, avoid disingenuously "using God as a weapon" in our arguments and being forthright but civil with any genuine concerns, such as notions of territorial exclusivity.
The representatives of the different Supreme Councils would need to put aside issues of Grand Lodge regularity and recognition, where applicable, and deal respectfully with each other as worthy equals.
In Jurisdictions in amity with mine, we would first need to prepare the Brethren by education as to how how the Rite need not be, as is commonly believed, exclusively Christian in its qualifications or ritual.
|
|
|
Post by Smithee on Mar 11, 2011 17:17:07 GMT 10
The representatives of the different Supreme Councils would need to put aside issues of Grand Lodge regularity and recognition, where applicable, and deal respectfully with each other as worthy equals. Where applicable the Supreme Councils operate under the sufferance of the Grand Lodges. If they go out too far on a limb by disregarding regularity and recognition, the GLs may prohibit their members from becoming or remaining members of the A&AR.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 11, 2011 19:29:45 GMT 10
So some ground work first needs doing. Perhaps a Congress of Grand Lodges and other Craft Obediences.
|
|