Comments on vellum Maximum: Brief Chronology of Early Freemasonry

Brother Secretary,You came into our home and arrog...

2007-12-18T14:02:00.000-08:00

Brother Secretary,

You came into our home and arrogantly mocked an article forwarded by a Brother. Being the owner of the house who don’t appreciate you snooty style, I returned the favor by employing the your word---very same word “ludicrous.” It is “ludicrous” to believe a claim that a group of individuals, not Lodges, “revived” a Grand Lodge that joined a Masonic body, which everyone knows, as “United Grand Lodge of England.”

You came into our home, publicly castigated and even demanded explanation of why I don’t believe your outrageous assertion. This is on top of accusing that our homepage is engaged in “Repeating a falsehood…“ because the 2007 Report of Commission did not mentioned something you would like to see.

Brother Secretary, with serious issues you have to deal with such as communication with the Commission of Recognition and a minor one with UGLE, I find it amazing that you would find time to chitchat with some lowly folks who don’t give a crap about the politics you guys are playing in Grand Lodge level. With your attitude, its not hard to imagine why you “still awaits the courtesy of a reply.” So do us a favor—leave us alone and we wont bother you and the other fellow. Have a nice day too.

RmOlano
Hanford Lodge No. 279
Grand Lodge of CA (F&AM)

The ff is FYI.

Editorial
John Jackson
MQ Magazine
http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-17/p-05.php
Issue 17,
April2007

Irregulars fall out! There has been a split in the so-called Regular Grand Lodge of England. Two of its members have broken away and now claim to be the Grand Lodge of All England, adding that they, and not the United Grand Lodge of England, are the oldest and legitimate authority over the Craft in England, Wales and Districts overseas.
Setting aside the question of how a Grand Lodge can consist of only two people, how can a body which uses myth and twisted history as its authority to meet, claim any sort of legitimacy?
They say they are meeting by authority of the original Constitutions granted by Prince Edwin at the General Assembly of Masons in York in AD 926. Sorry, neither the Constitutions nor Prince Edwin existed and the Assembly never took place.
They further claim to be a revival of the Grand Lodge of All England formed in York in 1705, and therefore older than the premier Grand Lodge, formed in London in 1717.
That an independent Lodge met in York, and there are records for it dating from 1705, is true. It was not, however, a Grand Lodge at that stage. Its records are still preserved in the Masonic Hall at Duncombe Place in York
These clearly show that it had no pretensions to being a Grand Lodge until 1725 when, because of the success of the premier Grand Lodge in London, it decided to call itself a Grand Lodge and adopted 19 Articles to govern the Craft. It went dormant in 1740, was revived in 1761 and petered out in 1791, never to meet again.

My Brother - you brought up the issue of the Commi...

2007-12-18T09:03:00.000-08:00

My Brother - you brought up the issue of the Commission and its recent statement, not this Grand Lodge.

You did so although it had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the issue raised in our original posting which was of genuine public as well as Masonic interest - we may well ask why?

You did so on a public forum and whilst doing so, you personally suggested falsehood and dishonesty on the part of this Grand Lodge.

Repeating a falsehood published by another party is no defence my Brother. It does not absolve you from an obligation to check your facts before compounding the issue. This would have been the brotherly thing to do.

Once again we invite you to communicate directly with us by sending your private email address so that we may supply you with certified copies of the correspondence and the submission so that you may judge for yourself.

Whilst posting, may we also point out that the recent statement of the Commission, purporting to be an integral part of their report for 2007 was in fact added to their website during November 2007, a full 7 full months after the official publication of their 2007 report and 9 months after our submission which still awaits the courtesy of a reply.

This after having previously accepted, "beyond question" the regularity and authenticity of origin of this Grand Lodge and also having invited us to make a submission which they have failed to acknowledge.

Brother, the “entirely false statement” you are ar...

2007-12-17T16:25:00.000-08:00

Brother, the “entirely false statement” you are arguing is a direct quote from the copyrighted report of the Commission which they made available on-line through their website. Obviously, you are in disagreement, so it would be productive to your cause to highlight your point with the Commission and discuss the credibility issue. It is beyond my interest to know the logistics and politics between your Grand Lodge and the Commission so I will not burden you with confirmation or copy of letters of self-proclaimed importance. The tone of your invitation for me and “your Conference and Commission, to comply with usual Masonic courtesies in the future” has message that we acted not in a way you “carry out (your) duties in a responsible manner.” I find this remark aggressive, aloof, and conceited. Again, as I mention to one of organizers of UGLA, if you could tone down your rhetoric, maybe you will find ears that are more sympathetic to your cause.

The following came from the short article I wrote regarding the inconsistency of Commission of Recognition.

“Few observations regarding The Commission on Information for Recognition (CIR) of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons of North America (CGMMNA). Notwithstanding the identity issue whether its IGLPI or UGLP, the Commission found the recently formed Grand Lodge not meeting the standard while the Grand Lodge of Cyprus does, despite of the glaring violation of their “strictly observed” standard of recognition. The presence of another operating District Grand Lodge from another jurisdiction whether it may be from “Mother Grand Lodge of the World—UGLE” or some “lesser” known Grand Lodge/Orient shows the holes of this idea. Taking the Prince Hall Grand Lodges recognition issue, this Commission finds it agreeable to have two Grand Lodges within a state or country as long as both agree to share the jurisdiction. It is ALSO the opinion of this Commission that a Grand Lodge can be established as “regular” even the there were no sharing agreement with existing Grand Lodge as in the case with Grand Lodge of Cyprus and UGLE. Likewise, it is the opinion of this confused writer that if it looks, walk, and sounds like a duck-- it must be a duck. It should not matter whatever is the color of the feather, white, black or brown.”

Standard of Recognition. http://rmolano.blogspot.com/2007/11/standard-of-recognition.html

Brother, we will gladly supply you with the wri...

2007-12-17T14:35:00.000-08:00

Brother, we will gladly supply you with the written confirmation from the current Secretary and Treasurer of The Commission on Information for Recognition that both our regularity and our authenticity of origin are in his words, not ours, "beyond question".

Please email us on grandsecretary@btinternet.com and a copy will be sent to you by return.

We can also inform you, officially, that the Commission has in its possession a very detailed submission from this Grand Lodge in respect of the regularity and authenticity of origin of the Grand Lodge of All England at York, sent under the seals of Prince Edwin at York, 926AD.

The Commission invited us so to do. We sent it by DHL couriers many months ago. DHL has been kind enough to provide us with a signature of delivery.

Therefore, the entirely false statement, repeated by you, that this has not been supplied, is highly misleading and does no credit to yourself, the Conference, or the Commission.

Whilst in The United States of America recently (November 2007) on Masonic business, we sent a registered letter to the Chairman of the Conference asking him to investigate this recent "statement" and to explain why the Commission had taken a unilateral decision to make public information concerning private and confidential business matters still outstanding between our two Masonic bodies.

They have done so on open public forums, as you have done, when there are proper Masonic channels that should be used.

This letter was also sent registered mail and we have a signature of delivery. We await the courtesy of his reply.

We carry out our duties in a responsible manner my Brother and we invite you now, and your Conference and Commission, to comply with the usual Masonic courtesies in the future.

In the meantime, we sincerely wish a very Happy Christmas to you Brother, and to your Brethren in your Grand Lodges.

Ludicrous is a word that could be also used in all...

2007-12-09T09:38:00.000-08:00

Ludicrous is a word that could be also used in alleging the concurrence of the Conference of Grand Masters of North America that the Grand Lodge of All England at York’s authenticity of origin is “beyond question.” The following paragraph were from the 2007 Commission of Information for Recognition Report:

“The Commission cannot validate the claimed legitimacy of origin of the Grand Lodge of All England, since no documentation has been presented that this Grand Lodge was reinstated or reconstituted in 2005 by a recognized Masonic authority. In addition, it cannot claim exclusive territorial jurisdiction since a pact or treaty does not exist to share the jurisdiction with the United Grand Lodge of England. It is therefore the opinion of the Commission that the Grand Lodge of All England does not meet the standards for recognition.”

Copyright © 2004 - 2006 | Terms of Use
The Commission on Information for Recognition
The Conference of Grand Masters of Masons of North America
Secretary: curtis@recognitioncommission.org

Though the this writer is inclined to read more about the inequity of so-called Hanoverian Concept of Recognition relative to the command and control of Grand Lodges, as I mentioned before to one of the founders of United Grand Lodge of America that if they could tone down their rhetoric—maybe they will find more sympathetic ears.

F/
RmOlano
York Rite of CA

The suggestion that organised Freemasonry began in...

2007-12-07T08:14:00.000-08:00

The suggestion that organised Freemasonry began in the back room of a London Ale-house in 1717 is quite ludicrous.

Those who genuinely wish to extend their researches into Freemasonry and its origins may wish to take a look at website www.grandlodgeofallengland.org

Peter Clatworthy
Grand Secretary
Grand Lodge of All England