1717 formation of the first Grand Lodge in London

1646 initiation of Elias Ashmole into Freemasonry in Warrington

1641 initation of Robert Moray into Freemasonry in Edenroth

1599 minutes of the Aitchisons Haven Lodge and St Mary’s Lodge in Edinburgh

1599 William Schaw creates the Statute of 1599, asserting the first, veiled, reference to the existence of esoteric knowledge within the craft of stone masonry (Speculative Masonry). It also reveals that The Mother Lodge of Scotland, Lodge Mother Kilwinning, No.0, was in existence, and active, at that time

1598 William Schaw publishes his Statutes, outlining the duties of all members to the Lodge and to the public. It also imposed penalties for unsatisfactory work and inadequate safety during work. His instructions, to all LODGES (not incorporations), that they must begin to keep written records, meet at specific times, test, annually, members in the “Art of Memory” and enter apprentices in the Lodge records meant that Lodges became fixed, permanent, institutions.

1425 statute of Henry VI of England forbidding the yearly congregation of Masons

1410 Cooke Manuscript

1390 Regius Poem or Halliwell Manuscript

1376 earliest known use of the word Freemason

1356 formation of the London Masons Company; also ordinances governing the Lodge at York Minister
The Craft that evolved into modern Freemasonry emerged in the period between the Black Death, 1348, and the Wars of the Roses, 1453. Before that date there are no trends or events that can be identified as leading definitely towards Freemasonry. It appears to have emerged from the building industry as a whole. Equally, there is no part of England that can claim the honour of originating Freemasonry.

The first recorded use of the word lodge in a Masonic context was in 1278 during the building of a Cistercian Monastery at Vale Royal near Chester.
Initially the lodge was no more than a rude hut in which the masons worked and possibly took their midday meal. At other sites they may also have slept in the lodge. By 1352 there were elaborate rules governing the behaviour of the mason connected with the lodge at York Minster. These regulations are described as the “ancient customs of the masons” (consuetudines antiquae quibus cementarii).
The Master and Deputy Master were required to swear an oath that the ancient customs would be adhered to. Fifty years later all masons were required to swear the same oath. We are not aware of anything esoteric about these customs; they mainly concerned rates of pay, hours of work, holidays etc.

However, given the medieval obsession with mysticism it is unlikely that their customs were wholly mundane. A pen drawing by Matthew Paris, circa 1250, purports to show Henry II in conference with his masons. The men building a wall are shown using a level.

The mason actually being addressed by the King is holding a large square and compass almost as if to demonstrate his importance, the implication being that he is the Master Mason. There is a similar carving in Worcester Cathedral, circa 1224, which shows the architect clutching a pair of dividers and, apparently, discussing the plans with a monk. These may suggest the beginnings of the ceremonial significance which is now given to the square and compass.

The earliest occurrence of the word Freemason was in London in 1376. Four men were chosen to represent the city’s builders on the Common Council of Trades, this was the first time they had been represented. They were originally listed as Freemasons although the word is then crossed out and replaced with Mason. The possible reason for this error is significant. Much of the building in the South of England was done with a material called Freestone. This is a form of limestone which is soft and easily worked when freshly quarried but afterwards hardens and becomes very durable. And the men who worked it were of course, called Freestone Masons. There seems to be no evidence to link the prefix free- with freedom. The balance of probability seems to suggest that Freemason is indeed a contraction of Freestone Mason.

John Wycliffe, writing about 1383, used the terms “men of sutel craft, as fre masons and others” he also refers to “fraternytes or gildis”. Then Henry Yevele, a master builder who died in 1400 may have been described as a Freemason on his tombstone. On the other hand the word Freemason appears in neither the Regius or the Cooke Manuscripts.

At this distance in time there can be no certainty but the evidence does strongly support the suggestion the Freemasonry could have developed from Guilds and Lodges of the medieval masons. This does not mean that other movements or bodies of ideas or organizations did not also contribute significantly to survival and growth the Freemasonry. Indeed it seems very probable an organization that has survived five hundred years must have been prepared to absorb and use any ideas that could contribute to its strength and growth.

Freemasonry has thus also been said to be a direct descendant of the “Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and the Temple of Solomon” (the Knights Templar); an offshoot of the ancient Mystery schools; an administrative arm of the Priory of Zion; the Roman Collegia; the Comacine masters; intellectual descendants of Noah; to have existed at the time of King Athelstan of England, in the very late 10th century C.E. - Athelstan is said by some to have been converted to Christianity in York, and to have issued the first Charter to the Masonic Lodges there; and to have many other various and sundry origins. These theories are noted in numerous different texts, and the following are but examples pulled from a sea of books:

In “A History of Freemasonry” by H.L. Haywood and James E. Craig, pub. circa 1927

In “Born in Blood” By John Robinson, pub. 1989

In “The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail” by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln, pub. 1982

As the Middle Ages gave way to the Modern Age, the need for secrecy subsided, and Freemasons began to openly declare their association with the fraternity, which began to organize itself more formally.

In 1717, four Lodges, which met at the “Apple-Tree Tavern, the Crown Ale-House near Drury Lane, the Goose and Gridiron in St. Paul’s Churchyard, and the Rummer and Grapes Tavern in Westminster” in London, England (as recounted in (2)) combined together and formed the first public Grand Lodge, the Premier Grand Lodge of England (PGLE). The years following saw Grand Lodges open throughout Europe, as the new Freemasonry spread rapidly.

How much of this was the spreading of Freemasonry itself, and how much was the public organization of pre-existing secret lodges, is not possible to say with certainty.
The PGLE in the beginning did not have the current three degrees, but only the first two.
The third degree appeared, so far as we know, around 1725.

The Two Great Schisms of Freemasonry (1753 and 1877)

The PGLE (Premier Grand Lodge of England), along with those jurisdictions with which it was in amity, later came to be known colloquially as the “Moderns”, to distinguish them from a newer, rival group of Freemasonry, known colloquially as the “Antients”. The Antients broke away and formed their own Grand Lodge in 1753, prompted by the PGLE’s making changes to the secret modes of recognition.

The differences between the two groups ran deeper than just that, however. The “Antients” were based in York, and claimed that their version of the Freemasonic Ritual (which included an additional fourth degree, the “Royal Arch”, with Christian elements) was truer to ancient tradition. From the point of view of the Moderns (actually the older group, in spite of the name), the Antients were trying to Christianize a fraternity that had always been non-Christian and religiously non-dogmatic.
From the Antient point of view, on the other hand, the fraternity had been a Christian organization during the Middle Ages, and the Moderns had de-Christianized it.

In fact, both groups changed Masonry in the eighteenth century by adding new degrees, so neither can claim to be thoroughly ancient in practice. Tensions between the two groups were very high at times. Benjamin Franklin was a “Modern” and a deist, for instance, but by the time he died, his Lodge had gone “Antient”, and would no longer recognize him as one of their own, declining even to give him a Masonic funeral (see “Revolutionary Brotherhood”, by Steven C. Bullock, UNC Press, Chapel Hill, 1996)

The schism was healed in the years following 1813, when the competing Grand Lodges were amalgamated, by virtue of a delicately worded compromise which left English Masonry clearly not Christian, returned the modes of recognition to their pre-1753 form, kept Freemasonry per se as consisting of three degrees only, but which was ambiguously worded so as to allow the Moderns to think of the Antient Royal Arch degree as an optional higher degree, while still allowing the Antients to view it as the completion of the third degree

Because both the Antients and the Moderns had “daughter” Lodges throughout the world, and because many of those Lodges still exist, there is a great deal of variability in the Ritual used today, even between UGLE-recognized jurisdictions.

Most Lodges conduct their Work in accordance with an agreed-upon single “Rite,” such as the “York Rite” which is popular in the United States, or the “Canadian Rite” which is, in some ways, a concordance between the Rites used by the “Antients” and “Moderns”.

The second great schism in Freemasonry occurred in the years following 1877, when the GOdF started accepting atheists unreservedly.
This on-going schism is in many ways a re-emergence of the same basic conflict that created the split between the Antients and Moderns: the religious requirements, if any, for being a Freemason.

While the issue of atheism is probably the greatest single factor in the split with the GOdF, the English also point to the French recognition of women’s Masonry and co-Masonry, as well as the tendency of French Masons to be more willing to discuss religion and politics in Lodge. While the French curtail such discussion, they do not ban it as outright as do the English. The schism between the two branches has occasionally been breached for short periods of time, especially during the First World War when American

Masons overseas wanted to be able to visit French Lodges.

Concerning religious requirements, the oldest constitution of Freemasonry that of Anderson, 1723, says only that a Mason “will never be a stupid Atheist nor an irreligious Libertine” if he “rightly understands the Art”. The only religion required was “that Religion in which all Men agree, leaving their particular Opinions to themselves”. In 1815, the newly amalgamated UGLE changed Anderson’s constitutions to include more orthodox overtones: “Let a man’s religion or mode of worship be what it may, he is not excluded from the Order, provided he believes in the glorious Architect of heaven and earth, and practices the sacred duties of morality.” The English enforce this with a requirement for belief in a Supreme Being, and in his revealed will. While these requirements can still be interpreted in a non-theistic manner, they made it more difficult for unorthodox believers to enter the fraternity.

In 1849, the GOdF followed the English lead by adopting the “Supreme Being” requirement, but there was increasing pressure in Latin countries to openly admit atheists. There was an attempt at a compromise in 1875, by allowing the alternative phrase “Creative Principle”, which was less theistic-sounding than “Supreme Being”, but this was ultimately not enough for the GOdF, and in 1877 they went back to having no religious entrance requirements, making the original Anderson document of 1723 their official constitution. They also created a modified ritual that made no direct verbal reference to the G.A.O.T.U. although, as a symbol, it was arguably still present. This new Rite did not replace the older ones, but was added as an alternative. European jurisdictions in general tend not to restrict themselves to a single Rite, like most North American jurisdictions, but offer a menu of Rites, from which their Lodges can choose

The first Freemasons lodge opened in what would become the United States of America

on July 30, 1733.

Since immemorial time, China has always been a mystery in the eyes of Westerners. This is especially so with regard to Freemasonry. Masonic scholars are already rare anywhere in the world and Masonic scholars in China are virtually non-existent.

This paper traces how Freemasonry was introduced into Imperial China by various Constitutions in the Quig Dynasty, how it developed at the time and how it survived two World Wars and the political changes in China.

It is fascinating to see how the Grand Lodge of China was constituted in Shanghai, and then moved to Taiwan, how Freemasonry developed in Macau, how Freemasonry flourished in Hong Kong and finally how Hong Kong has become not only the Masonic hub of the Far East, but also the Masonic pillar in the People’s Republic of China under the “One Country Two Systems” principle.

Since immemorial time, China has always been a mystery in the eyes of Westerners. This is especially so with regard to Freemasonry. Masonic scholars are already rare anywhere in the world and Masonic scholars in China are virtually non-existent.

This paper traces how Freemasonry was introduced into Imperial China by various Constitutions in the Quig Dynasty, how it developed at the time and how it survived two World Wars and the political changes in China.

It is fascinating to see how the Grand Lodge of China was constituted in Shanghai, and then moved to Taiwan, how Freemasonry developed in Macau, how Freemasonry flourished in Hong Kong and finally how Hong Kong has become not only the Masonic hub of the Far East, but also the Masonic pillar in the People’s Republic of China under the “One Country Two Systems” principle.

The disintegration of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc of countries, the reunification of East and West Germany and the opening up for former communist countries, including People’s Republic of China, has led to a re-establishment of Freemasonry is no longer a secret of these countries, thereby leading the people of these countries from complete darkness into full Masonic light.

More people from China are traveling abroad for education, business and leisure and more foreigners, including Hong Kong Masons, are traveling to China for similar reasons.
This, coupled with the open policy advocated by the Masonic Authorities, means that Freemasonry is no longer a secret and the urge to re-establish Freemasonry in Mainland China is accordingly felt by those people still in darkness.

Co-operation between Masonic Constitutions and the Central Government in the People’s Republic of China will help us to arrive at a mutually acceptable superstructure. The bright morning star that is the Pearl of the Orient, Hong Kong, can be used as a springboard and bridgehead to finally allow Masonic light to shine once more in the Chinese Mainland. This is the obvious challenge ahead for all Masons.

A Cairo loge meets in the 1940s under portrait of King Farouk
below: freemason certificate (courtesy Omar Hamed Zaki)

Last month in Jordan a prestigious lineup of Western leaders led by President Clinton and three former US presidents paid their last respects to King Hussein. While all kinds of deductions as to why they had all turned up were disputed live on national TV from Bangkok to Cape Town, one inference was passed by. The wily king may have also been a Prince of Jerusalem, one of the highest titles conferred by Freemasons.

Whether or not Hussein visited Masonic lodges and took part in their rituals is unknown, yet there are persistent claims in certain circles that he was an honorary Grand Master. Not peculiar for a monarch who spent most of his reign juggling alliances, some of them treacherous. As a Freemason he would have kept excellent company for, besides the Mozarts, Goethes and Garibaldis, most of Europe’s royals and several former American presidents including its incumbent vice-president, are professedly on the Masonic roster.

But wait a minute. Hussein Ibn Talal far from being a Westerner was a descendant of the Prophet. How then could a Moslem notable of his standing become an alleged member of a secret society with origins in the heartland of a 17th century Judeo-Christian Europe?

Adapting the Big Bang theory to Freemasonry, we discover how the French Revolution and subsequent Napoleonic Wars accounted for the dissemination of the ‘Society’ outside its known borders. Which is why by the late 19th century, Masonic lodges were scattered across the Ottoman Empire, from Constantinople where Young Turks were beguiled by the secretive brotherhood, to Greater Syria and Egypt where emerging nationalists aped their European assailant in their inherent opposition to autocratic authority.

In Egypt, Freemasonry imploded into feuding camps: Anglo-Saxon and French, ostensibly reflecting the dual imperialistic control –military and cultural– which had entrenched itself along the Nile Valley.
A favorite Masonic hall south of the Levant was Kawkab al-Shark–Star of the East. Somehow, its propinquity to after-life symbolism conjured up echoes of the cult of Isis and Osiris giving it a distinct character and flavor. Lodges evidencing Ancient Egyptian names included Sphinx, New-Memphis, Pyramids, Cheops and Le Nil. Founded by Jules Cesar Zivy the latter loge was dependent on the Grand Orient of France.
The distinction of first modern Freemason in Egypt goes to General Kleber, the luckless man left behind by Napoleon to govern the “Oriental Empire.

Since that time and up until April 1964, Freemasonry continued uninterruptedly in Egypt. What had started as a secret movement, eventually came out in the open as evidenced by notices in newspapers, the social pages and other forms of printed media.

Historians may assent however, Freemasonry in Egypt came out of the closet during the Orabi Revolt of 1882. That Ahmed Orabi Pasha was himself a member of the Order was never proven, we know however that several of his supporters were.
In his book How We Defended Orabi A.M. Broadley declares that Egypt’s most liberal cleric, Sheik Mohammed Abdou, was himself an avowed Mason.

“Sheikh Abdu was no dangerous fanatic or religious enthusiast, for he belonged to the broadest school of Moslem thought, held a political creed akin to pure republicanism, and was a zealous Master of a Masonic Lodge.” Later in the same paragraph Broadbent states how many of the Deputies in the Egyptian Chamber had hastened to join the craft.

Broadbent gives us an insight on Freemasonry in Egypt during the 1880s when he differentiates between the principles and practice of Freemasonry in England and on the continent in Europe. While the British system embraced nothing more exciting than charity and good-fellow-ship, “foreign Masonry is almost avowedly an appropriate and convenient arena for political discussion, and both political and religious agitation.” Thus, according to Broadbent, “in Egypt the tenets of continental Masonry, with its Republican watchwords of Fraternité, Liberté, Egalité had evidently overshadowed the strong British elements which once prevailed in our numerous lodges.”

Although none of the leaders of Egypt’s National party belonged to the brotherhood, a large number of their subordinates were among its most active and zealous members, according to Broaddent. Part of a budding middle-class, Egyptian nationalists had joined the Society in an attempt to penetrate an impregnable ruling class guarded jealously by Mohammed Ali’s descendants and their Circassian entourage.

Consequently, when the Khedive’s men arrested the sartujar (head of traders guild) of Sharkia charging him with conspiring against the state and supporting Ahmed Orabi Pasha’s “insurgency” with money and the like, it was a Freemason barrister from London who took up his defense.

Nevertheless, the British-led kangaroo court in Cairo declared Orabi and his Freemason supporters guilty as charged–they had dared ask for the substitution of khedivial absolutism with a more representative government.

While Orabi was exiled to the crown colony of Ceylon, the sartujar and other Orabi sympathizers were sentenced to imprisonment and fines ranging from LE 1,000 to LE 5,000. The situation turned on the British several decades later with the arrival of Mohammed Farid and Saad Zagloul. Self-declared Freemasons they respectively headed the National and Wafd parties which called for popular uprisings against Egypt’s Anglo-Saxon occupiers.

With time, inter and intra-Freemasonry rivalries increased in proportion to the numbers of halls and lodges that surfaced all over Egypt. Scottish, French, Italian and English halls operated side by side with the National Grand Lodge of Egypt. There was even talk of a Masonic cemetery in Old Cairo to be shared with freethinkers and intellectuals.

Besides the British Craft and Marks Masons, the most important Halls within Masonic circles in Cairo were the Grecia and Bulwer lodges overlooking Midan Ismail (today, Midan Tahrir).
The Egyptian Gazette dated 9 January 1903, states that “the new Masonic Hall [used by both lodges] comprises a commodious and handsome lodge-room capable of seating 100 brethren; a large assembly room; committee secretaries’ and robbing rooms; as well as a refreshment room opening on to a spacious terrace whence a magnificent view is obtained on the new building of the Museum of Antiquities, Kasr-al-Nil barracks, the Nile and the open country beyond with the pyramids in the far distance.” Both these lodges reported to the Grand Lodge of England

al-Ahram 4 July 1938; freemason benefit in Old Cairo

At the time there were about Egyptian 54 lodges operating in Um al-Dunya. Later, between 1940 and 1957 we find 18 Masonic halls listed in Cairo, 33 in Alexandria, 10 in Port Said, 2 in Mansourah, 2 in Ismailia and one each in Fayoum, Mehala al-Kobra and Minieh (numbers fluctuated slightly during the interim yeas). Throughout that period, the largest and most important Masonic Hall was located at No. 1 Toussoun Street in Alexandria.

Ignoring its working class origins, modern Freemasonry sought to attract the privileged elite. And since faith did not really matter, Anglicans, Catholics, Jews and Moslems from the power elite rubbed shoulders in Lodges and Halls across the Middle East. After all, one of the Society’s basic ideas was the rejection of dogma.

But the society’s secretive character rendered it an easy target for defamation and accusation. History abounds with situations where Church and State took turns at vilifying the elitist brotherhood often rendering it more surreptitious than it already was.

If Freemasonry burst its banks during the French Revolution, when an entire nation revolted against church and state, it met with a devastating crisis during WW2 when Europe’s traditional societies all but crumbled and when thousands of Freemasons ended their lives in German concentration camps. Other wars and revolutions, from Italy to Latin America, alternately pushed Freemasonry into the forefront of national and international events.

As attacks against Freemasonry multiplied in 19th century Europe, one race was repeatedly singled for a favorite target. Living as a minority almost everywhere, Jews perceived the Society as a way to achieve equality–with time they became the torchbearers of Freemasonry.
And since much of the Masonic symbols, rituals and erudition were linked to Jewish mystic, the accusations cropped up whenever an economic crisis loomed or when the purported Judeo-Christian alliance fell out of favor

The Vatican, which saw any brotherhood other than its own (eg. the Knights of Columbus) as a major threat, was at the vanguard of anti-Freemason movements fanning the flames of the ‘conspiracy’ controversy whenever possible. But since Christendom had little influence in a predominantly Moslem Ottoman Empire, the expansion of Freemasonry among its cosmopolitan elite went on unhindered.

“In a characteristically tolerant Egypt, Freemasonry grew more out of fashion than conviction. It was more public than secret” comments Karim Wissa, an Egyptian diplomat who submitted a paper on local Freemasonry at Oxford. Like many of his brood and generation, Wissa can attest to at least one great-grandfather having been a District Grand Master.

“There were two kinds of Freemasons in Egypt in those days” says Wissa, “those like my landowning ancestors who adhered to the traditionalist English Freemasonry, and others who because of their fervent nationalism, joined the liberal French lodges headed in Egypt by Azhar luminaries Gamal al-Din al-Afghani and his disciple Mohammed Abdou. Interestingly, both men tended to address their companions as ‘ikhawan al saffa wa khullan al wafa’(sincere brethren and faithful companions).
” [Note: this form of greeting emanated from a distinct school of thought linked to Islamic enlightenment going back to the Abbassid dynasty].

From Khedive Ismail to King Fouad, Egypt’s monarchs accepted an honorary Grand Mastership. Yet none of Egypt’s monarchs were physically initiated into the National Grand Orient of Egypt and their attendance was restricted to official portraits hanging on the walls of Masonic lodges and halls.
Other District Grand Masters included British High Commissioners (ambassadors) as well as several Sirdars–British commanders of the Egyptian army.

When Farouk ascended the throne, Freemasonry in Egypt was fast becoming “guilty by association,” accused of entertaining strong Zionist affiliations (this accusation was subsequently refuted in a study conducted by a team of diplomats attached to the office of Foreign Affairs minister Dr. Mahmoud Fawzi). In the minds of traditionalists, the physical similarities between Masonic halls and B’nai B’rith lodges –a Judeo-Zionist organization fashioned upon the Masonic model- were far too obvious for anyone not to confound the two. And because they were seen as hand in glove it is doubtful the young king ever supported the Society as such.

Once WW2 came to an end, B’nai B’rith lodges in Cairo and Alexandria were summarily closed down
“Hadn’t the analogous B’nai B’rith done everything in its power to turn Palestine into an exclusive homeland for the Jewish Diaspora?” exclaimed the growing number of Masonic detractors.
Which is why following the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, it was open season for opponents of Freemasonry to pursue their claims that Masonic halls were subversive and dangerous, bent on undermining Arab nationalism and patriotism.
This was almost a replay of the Vatican’s anti-Freemasonry whisper campaigns propagated by in the middle of the last century and early this one

Anti-Freemason articles cropped up in the post-1948 Arab World “proving” the connection between Zionism and Freemasonry. In Egypt, arguments leveled against Freemasonry were selectively derived from fin de siècle freemasons George Zaidan and Shaheen Makarius. Both writers had commended contemporary businessmen and entrepreneurs, many of them Jewish, for their active role in reviving Egypt’s capitalistic economy. Six decades later their statements were salaciously re-interpreted so that the businessmen and entrepreneurs of the past were portrayed as eager tools of a Judeo-Zionist collusion bent on dominating the regional economy

As the predominant conspiracy hypothesis takes credence in the Near East, the legality of Freemasonry is questioned and subsequently tabled on the Arab League’s agenda. Jumping on the bandwagon books and articles on the subject began to surface. In a 660-page volume entitled “Freemasonry In The Arab World” Hussein Omar Hamada dedicates much of his book juggling Masonic conspiracy theories

With the post-1952 exodus of Egypt’s haute khawagerie, lodges and Masonic temples had already lost many of their more affluent members. Some freemasons, whether out of fear or self-interest simply stopped turning up at the meetings so that even the all-Egyptian Star of the East had a hard time supporting itself.
On 4 April 1964, the Masonic Temple on Alexandria’s Toussoun Street was shut down by order of the Ministry of Social Affairs. The reason: “Associations with undeclared agendas were incompatible with rules covering non profit organizations.”

Sufficiently disturbing evidence for the State to be concerned about Freemasonry’s political goals would turn up the following year in Damascus when master spy Eli Cohen was apprehended. Having eluded Syrian intelligence for many years posing as an Arab, it was discovered that Eli had been a freemason in Egypt where he was born.
Yet despite the 1964 decree declaring the demise of Freemasonry in Egypt, loud cries of “not so” can still be heard. And if one were to concede to Abou Islam Ahmed Abdallah book “Freemasonry In Our Region” 1985), Freemasonry is alive and well in the guise of Rotary Clubs and other like-minded associations. “Having accomplished their earlier mission to establish a Jewish state, Masonic conspirators now intend to undermine Islam using charity work and community outreach as their tools” says Abdallah in his opening chapter. He then consecrates a substantial portion of his elusive writing equating the “new Masonic cancer” with Rotary and Lions organizations and with Jehovah’s Witness, Freedom Now, Solar Tradition, New Age and several other “fringe” organizations.

Like it always has in the past, theories of sinister plots by ambiguous secret societies and associations still make headlines. So much so that books linking the British Royal family to Masonic Grand Masters and ‘breaking news’ detailing President Francois Miterrand’s secret relations with the Brotherhood have become common literature

For sure, as we enter a new millennium, Masonic handshakes and cranky rituals continue to excite certain elements within our society.

By Samir Raafat

________________________________________
Former Masonic Halls in Cairo: Where were they located?
•    Tiring Building on Attaba Square.
•    Acher Building off Champolion Street (where Townhouse Gallery is located today).
•    Freemasons Hall, Madrassa al-Fransawi Street, Mounira.
•    Building at corner of Antekhana and Mahmoud Bassiouni Streets.

But that we may continue to abide therein in a true and peaceful way, have we, masters and fellows all, of the said craft, congregated in chapters at Spries, at Strasburg, set or not, then shall such master not pull down the set stones, nor in and at Regensburg, in the name and on behalf of ourselves and of all other masters and fellows of our whole common craft above mentioned, renewed and revised these ancient usages, and kindly and affably agreed upon these statues and fraternity; and having by common consent drawn up the same, have also vowed and promised, for ourselves and all our successors, to keep them faithfully, as hereafter stands writ:

a. Firstly: If any of the articles in these statues should prove to be too strict and severe, or others too light and mild, then may those who are of the fraternity, by a majority, modify decrease, or increase such articles, according to the requirements of the time, or country, or circumstance. He resolutions of those who shall meet together in chapters after the manner of this book shall thenceforth be observed, in accordance with the oath taken by every one. ’

b. Item: Whoever of his own free will desires to enter into this fraternity, according to the regulation as hereafter stands writ in this book, shall promise to keep all the points and articles, for then only can he be of our craft. Those shall be masters, who can design and erect such costly edifices and works, for the execution of which they are authorized and privileged, and shall not work with any other craft, unless they choose so to do. Masters as well as fellows must conduct themselves honorably, a nd not infringe upon the rights of others, or they may be punished, according to these statues, on the occasion of every such transgression.

c. Item: Whatever regular works and buildings are now in progress of erection by journey work-namely, Strasburg, Cologne, Vienna, and Passau, and other such works, and also in the Lodges which belong to them, and, according to custom, have been hitherto finished by journey work, such buildings and works as before mentioned shall be continued by journey work, and in no wise by task work; so that nothing be cut short of the work, to the damage of the contract as far as possible.

d. Item: If any craftsman who has had regular work should die, then any craftsman or master, skilled in Masonry, and sufficient and able for work, may aspire to complete said work, so that the lords owning or superintending such building may again be supplied with the requirements of Masonry. So also may any fellow who understands such Masonry.

e. Item: Any master may, in addition to his own work, undertake a work abroad, or a master who has no such work may likewise undertake it, in which case he may give such work or building in good faith, in journey work, and continue it as best he can or may, so that the work and progress be not interrupted, according to the regulations and customs of Masonry. If a master fails to satisfy those persons who committed the work to him, and reliable information be given thereof, then shall the said master be cal led to account by the craft, corrected, and punished, after having been sentenced; but if the lords are not willing so to do, then may he do it as they choose, be it by task or journey work.

f. Item: If any master, who has had such a work or building, die, and another master comes and finds such stone-work, be the stone work any wise cast away the hewn and unset stones, without previous counsel and agreement with other craftsmen, so that the owners and other honorable persons, who caused such edifice to be builded, be not put to unjust expense, and that also the master who left such work not be defamed. But if the owners choose to have such work removed, then he may have it done, provided he seeks no undue advantage thereby.

g. Item: Neither shall the master, not those who have undertaken such work, hire out anything that relates to ro concerns hewn stones and what belongs to them, be it stone, lime, or sand; but to break or hew by contract or by journey work he may be allowed without risk.

h. Item: If masons be required for hewing or setting stone, the master may set such at work, if they are able, so that the lords be not hindered, and those who are thus employed shall not be subject to these regulations unless of their own free will.

i. Item: Two masters shall not share in the same work or building, unless it be a small one, which can be finished in the course of a year. Such a work he may have in common with him that is a brother.

k. Item: If any master accepts a work in contract and makes a design for the same, how it shall be builded, then he shall not cut anything short of the design, but shall execute it according to the plan which he has shown to the lords, cities, or people, so that nothing be altered.:

l. Any master or fellow who shall take away from another master of the fraternity of craftsmen a work on which he is engaged, or who shall endeavor to disposes him of such work, clandestinely or openly, without the knowledge or consent of the master who has such work, be the same small or great, he shall be called to account. No master or fellow shall keep fellowship with him, nor shall any fellow of the fraternity work for him, so long as he is engaged in the work which he has thus dishonestly acquired, nor until he has asked pardon, and given satisfaction to him whom he has driven from his work, and shall also have been punished in the fraternity by the masters, as is ordained by these statutes.

m. Item: If any one accepts in whole or in part any work which he does not understand how to execute, not having consulted any craftsman thereon, nor having applied to the Lodge, he shall in no wise undertake the work; but if he attempts to do so, then shall no fellow take work with him, so that the lords be not put to expense by such ignorant master.

Item: No workman, nor master, nor Parlirer, nor fellow-craft, shall instruct any one, whosoever, who is not of our craft, in any part, if he has not in his day practiced Masonry.

o. No craftsman nor master shall take money from a fellow for teaching or instructing him in anything belonging to Masonry, nor shall any arlirer or fellow-craft instruct any one for money’s sake; but if one wishes to instruct the other, they may do so mutually or for fraternal affection.

p. Item: A master who has a work or a building for himself may have three apprentices, and may also set to work fellows of the same Lodge-that is, if his lords so permit; but if he have more buildings than one, then shall he have no more than two apprentices on the afore-mentioned building, so that he shall not have more than five apprentices on all his buildings.

Item: No craftsman or master shall be received in the fraternity who goes not yearly to the Holy Communion or who keep not Christian discipline, or who squanders his substance at play; but should any one be inadvertently accepted into the fraternity who does these things as aforesaid, then shall no master nor fellow keep fellowship with him until he desists therefrom, and has been punished therefor by those of the fraternity.

No craftsman nor master shall live in adultery while engaged in Masonry; but if such a one will not desist therefrom, then shall no travelling fellow nor mason work in company with him, nor keep fellowship with him.

q. Item: If a fellowcraft takes work with a master who is not accepted into the fraternity of craftsmen, then shall the said fellow not be punishable therefor. So also, if a fellow take work with a city master, or with another master, and be there set to work, that may he well do, so that every fellow may find work; but nevertheless such fellow shall keep the regulations as hereinbefore and hereinafter written, and shall also contribute his fee to the fraternity, although he be not employed in the Lodges o f the fraternity, or with his fellow brethren.

But if a fellow would take unto himself a lawful wife, and not being employed in a Lodge, would establish himself in a city, and be obliged to serve with a craft, he shall on every ember-week pay four pennies, and shall be exempt from the weekly penny, because he be not employed in the Lodge.

r. If a master have a complaint against another master, for having violated the regulations of the craft, or a master against a fellow, or a fellow against another fellow, any master or fellow who is concerned therein shall give notice thereof to the master who presides over the fraternity, and the master who is thereof informed shall hear both parties, and set a day when he will try the cause: and meanwhile, before the fixed or appointed day, no fellow shall avoid the master, nor master drive away the fellow, but render services mutually until the-hour when the matter is to be heard and settled. This shall all be done according to the judgement of the craftsmen, which shall be observed accordingly. Moreover, the case shall be tried on the spot where it arose before the nearest master who keeps the Book of Statutes, and in who district it occured.

s. Item: Every Parlirer shall honor his master, be true and faithful to him, according to the rule of Masonry, and obey him with undivided fidelity, as is meet and of ancient usage. So also shall a fellow. And when a travelling fellow-craft desires to travel farther, he shall part from his master and from the Lodge in such wise as to be indebted to no one, and that no man have any grievance against him, as is meet and proper.

t. A travelling fellow, in whatever Lodge he may be employed shall be obedient to his master and to the Parlirer, according to the rule and ancient usage of Masonry, and shall also keep all the regulations and privileges which are of ancient usage in the said Lodge,and shall not revile his master’s work, either secretly or openly, in any wise. But if the master infringe upon these regulations, and act contrary to them, then may any one give notice thereof.

u. Every craftsman employing workmen in the Lodge, to whom is confided these statues, and who is duly invested with authority, shall have power and authority in the same over all contentions and matters which pertain to Masonry, to try and punish in his district. All masters, Parlirers, and apprentices, shall obey him.

x. A fellow who has travelled, and is practiced in Masonry, and who is of this fraternity, who wishes to serve a craftsman on a portion of the work, shall not be accepted by that craftsman or master, in any wise for a less term than two years.

y. Item: All masters and fellows who are of this fraternity shall faithfully keep all the points and articles of these regulations, as hereinbefore and hereinafter stands written. But if anyone should perchance violate one of the points, and thereby become punishable, if afterward he be obedient to the regulation, by having compiled with what has been sentenced upon him, he will have done sufficent, and be released from his vow, in regard to the article wherefor he has been punished.

z. The master who has charge of the Book shall, on the oath of the fraternity, have a care that the same be not copied, either by himself or by any other person, or given, or lent,-so that the Book remain intact, according to the resolution of the craftsmen. But if one of the craftsmen, being of this fraternity, have need or cause to know one or two articles, that may any master give him in writing. Every master shall cause these statutes to be read every year to the fellows in the Lodge

Item: If a complaint be made involving a greater punishment as for instance, expulsion from Masonry-the same shall not be tried or judged by one master in his district; but the two nearest masters who are intrusted with the copies of the statutes, and who have authority over the fraternity, shall be summoned by him, so that there may be three. The fellows also who were at work at the place where the grievance arose shall be summoned also, and whatsoever shall be with one accord agreed upon by those three, together with all the fellows, or by a majority thereof in accordance with their oath and best judgement, shall be observed by the whole fraternity of craftsmen.

Item: If two or more masters who are of the fraternity be at variance or discord about matters which do not concern Masonry, they shall not settle these matters anywhere but before Masonry, which shall judge and reconcile them as far as possible, but so that the agreement be made without prejudice to the lords or cities who are concerned in the matter.

1. Now, in order that these regulations of the craft may be kept more honestly, with service to God and other necessary and becoming things, every master who has craftsmen at work in his Lodge, and practises Masonry, and is of this fraternity, and afterward each year four Blapparts; namely, on each ember-week one Blappart or Bohemian to be paid into the box of the fraternity, and each fellow four Blapparts, and so likewise an apprentice who has served his time.

2. All masters and craftsmen who are of this fraternity, who employ workmen in their Lodges, shall each of them have a box, and each fellow shall pay into the box weekly one penny. Every master shall faithfully treasure up some money and what may be derived from other sources, and shall each year deliver it to the fraternity at the nearest place where a book is kept, in order to provide for God’s worship and to supply the necessaries or the fraternity.

3. Every master who has a box, if there be no Book in the same Lodge, shall deliver the money each year to the master who has charge of the Book, and where the Book is there shall also be held divine worship. If a master or fellow dies in a Lodge where no Book is kept, another master or fellow of the said Lodge shall give notice thereof to the master who has a Book; and when he has been informed thereof he shall cause a mass to be said for the repose of the soul of him who has departed, and all the masters and fellows of the Lodge shall assist at the mass and contribute thereto.

4. If a master or fellow be put to any expense or disbursement, for account of the fraternity, and notice be given of how the same occured, to such master or fellow shall be repaid his expenses, be the same small or great, out of the box of the fraternity; if also any one gets into trouble with courts or in other matters, relating to the fraternity, then shall every one, be he master or fellow, afford him aid and relief, as he is bound to do by the oath of the fraternity.

5. If a master or fellow fall sick, or a fellow who is of the fraternity, and has lived uprightly in Masonry, be afflicted with protracted illness and want for food and necessary money, than shall the master who has charge of the box lend him relief and assistance from the box, if he otherwise may, until he recover from his sickness; and he shall afterward vow and promise to restitute the same into the box. But if he should die in such sickness, then so much shall be taken from what he leaves at his death , be it clothing or other articles, as to repay that which has been loaned to him, if so much be there.

These are the Statutes of the Parlires and Fellows

No craftsman or master shall set at work a fellow who commits adultery, or who openly lives in illicit intercourse with women, or who does not yearly make confession, and goes not to the Holy Communion, according to Christian discipline, nor one who is so foolish as to lose his clothing at play,

Item: if any fellow should wantonly take leave of a Grand Lodge or from another lodge, he should not ask for employment in the said Lodge for a year to come.

Item: If a craftsman or master wishes to discharge a travelling fellow whom he had employed, he shall not do so unless on a Saturday or on a pay evening, so that he may know how to travel on the morrow, unless he be guilty of an offence. The same shall also be done by a fellow-craft.

Item : A travelling fellow shall make application for employment to one but the master of the worker or the Parlirer, neither clandestinely nor openly, without the knowledge and will of the master.
No craftsman or master shall knowingly accept as an apprentice one who is not of lawful birth, and shall earnestly inquire thereof before he accepts him, and shall question such apprentice on his word, whether his father and mother were duly united in lawful wedlock.

Item: No craftsman or master shall promote one of his apprentices as a Parlirer whom he has taken as an apprentice from his rough state, or who is still in his years of apprenticeship.
Neither shall any craftsman or master promote any of his apprentices as a Parlirer whom he has taken from his rough state, notwithstanding he may have served his years of apprenticeship, if he has not travelled for the space of one year.

If any one who has served with a Mason (Murer) comes to a craftsman and wishes to learn of him, the said craftsman shall not accept him as an apprentice unless he serve as such for three years.
No craftsman or master shall take an apprentice from his rough state for a less term than five years.

If, however, it happen that an apprentice should leave his master during the years of his apprenticeship, without sufficient reasons, and does not serve out his time then no master shall employ such apprentice. No fellow shall work with him, nor in any wise keep fellowship with him, until he has served his lawful time with the master whom he left, and has given him entire satisfaction, and brings a certificate from his master aforesaid. No apprentice shall ransom himself from his master unless he intends to marry, with his master’s consent, or there be other sufficient reasons which urge him or his master to this measure.

If an apprentice deems that he has not been justly dealt with by his master, in any way they may have agreed upon, then may the apprentice bring him before the craftsmen and masters, who are in that district, so that an explanation and redress may take place as the case may be.

Item: Every master who has a Book in the district of Strasburg, shall pay every year, at Christmas, a half-florin into the box of Strasburg, until the debt is paid which is due to that box.
And every master who has a Book, and whose building is finished, and who has no more work whereon he can employ the fellows, shall send his Book, and the money in his possession, which belongs to the fraternity, to the workmaster at Strasburg.

It was resolved on the day at Regensburg, four weeks after Easter, in the year, counting from God’s birth, one thousand four hundred and fifty nine on St. Mark’s day, that the workmaster JOST DOTZINGER, of Worms, of the building of our dear Lady’s minster, the high chapter of Strasburg, and all of his successors on the same work, should be the supreme judge of our fraternity of Masonry, and the same was also afterward determined on at Sprires, at Strasburg, and again at Spires in the year MCCCCLXIV. on the 9th day of April.’

Item: Master LORENZ SPENNING, of Vienna, shall also be chief judge at Vienna.
And thus a workmaster or his successors at Strasburg, Vienna, and Cologne these three are the chief judges and leaders of the fraternity; they shall not; be removed without just cause, as was determined on, the day at Regensburg, 1459, and at Spires in 1464.
This is the district that belongs to Strasburg; all the country below the Moselle, and Franconia as far as the Thuringian forest, and Babenberg as far as the episcopate at Eichstatten, from Eichstatten to Ulm, from Ulm to Augsburg to the Adelberg and as far as Italy; the countries of Misnia, Thuringia, Saxony, Frankfort, Hesse, and Suabia, these shall be obedient.

Item: To Master LORENZ SPENNING, workmaster of the building of St. Stephen, at Vienna, appertains Lampach, Steiermarch, Hungary, and the Danube downward.

Item: Master STEFFAN HURDER, architect of St. Vincent’s at Berne, shall have the district of the Swiss Confederacy.

Item: To Master CONRAD, of Cologen, master of the chapter there, and to all his successors liekwise, shall appertain the other districts downward, whatever there be of buildings and Lodges which belong to the fraternity, or may hereafter belong to it.

If any master, Parlirer, fellow-craft, or apprentice acts contrary to any of the hereinbefore or hereinafter written points or articles, and does not keep them collectively or individually, and reliable information be obtained thereof., then he or they shall be summoned before the fraternity, by reason of such violation, and shall be called to account therefor, and shall be obedient, to the correction or penalty which is sentenced upon him, for the sake of the oath and vow which he has pledged unto the fraternity.

And if he slights the summons without honest reason, and does not come, he shall yet give what has been sentenced upon him as a penalty for his disobedience, although he be not present. But if he will not do so, he may be brought before ecclesiastical or civil courts at the place where they be held, and may be judged according to what may be right in the matter.

Item: Whoever desires to enter this fraternity, shall promise ever to keep steadfastly all these articles hereinbefore and hereafter written in this Book; except our gracious lord the Emperor, or the King, Princes, Lords, or any other Nobles, by force or right, should be opposed to his belonging to the fraternity; that shall be a sufficient excuse, so that there be no harm therein. ut for what he is indebted for to the fraternity, he shall come to an agreement thereon with the craftsman who are in the fraternity.

Although by Christian discipline every Christian is bound to provide for his own salvation, yet it must be duly remembered by the masters and craftsmen whom the Almighty God has graciously endowed with their art and workmanship, to build houses of God and other costly edifices, and honestly to gain their living thereby, that by gratitude their hearts be justly unto true Christian feelings, to promote divine worship, and to merit the salvation of their souls therby.

Therefore to the praise and honour of Almighty God, His worthy Mother Mary, of all her blessed saints, and particularly of the holy four crowned martyrs, and especially for the salvation of the souls of all persons who are of this fraternity, or who may hereafter belong to it, have we the craftsmen of Masonry stipulated and ordained, for us and all our successors, to have a divine service yearly, at the four holy festivals and on the day of the holy four crowned martyrs, at Strasburg, in the minster of the high chapter, in our dear Lady’s chapel, with vigils and soul masses, after the manner to be instituted.

It was determined upon the day at Spires, on the ninth day of April, in the year, counting from God’s birth, 1464 that the workmaster, JOST DOTZINGER, of Worms, workmaster of the high chapter at Strasburg, shall have an assembly of craftsmen in his district, when three or four masters shall be taken and chosen, to come together on a certain day, as they may agree, and what is there determined on by a majority of those who are so congregated in chapters, and who are then present, and how they may decrease or increase some articles, that shall be kept throughout the whole fraternity.:i;

The day shall be on St. George’s day in the sixty-ninth year. ;

These are the masters who were present on the day at Spires, on the ninth day of April in the year 1464.
Item: JOST DOTZINGER, of Worms, workmaster of our dear Lady’s minster of the high chapter at Starasburg; Item: Master HANS VON ESSELINGEN; Item: Master VINCENCIE VON CONSTANTZ; Item: Master HANS VON HEYLTBUTRN; Item: Master PETER VON ALGESHEIM, Master at Nuhausen; Item: WERNER MEYLON, of Basle, on behalf Of Master PETER KNOBEL; of Basle, etc., etc.

INSTITUTION OF FREE MASONS C. 1725

The early history of this catechism, which is a manuscript version of The Grand Mystery of Free-Masons Discover’d (q.v.), is unknown. It was purchased c. 1905 from a dealer by Bro. A. F. Calvert of London. It consists of two leaves, 3 3/5″ X 5 9/10″, cut out of an old vellum-bound notebook, in which there were other writings which did not interest Bro. Calvert. It was purchased from him in 1941 by Bro. Douglas Knoop. The catechism is written on three sides and about a quarter of the fourth, the rest of the page being filled with some lines in a different hand headed “The Character of a Mason”. Dr. Schofield of the British Museum MSS. Department is of opinion that it was written in the first half of the eighteenth century. It was reproduced photographically in the Authors’ Lodge Transactions, iii (1919), following p. 408.

On 18th September 1842, through permission of the Great Mother Lodge “Zun den Drei Weltkugeln” a lodge was founded in Lippstadt. The founders chose the name “Zum Lebendigen Kreutz” (to the Living Cross). No reasons can be found for the choice of this name as all the documents were confiscated by the Gestapo.
Founder-Venerable Master was Friedrich Carl Freiherr Von Schauroth and his house, today the “Palais Schauroth,” became the official seat of the Lodge.
This house is located close to the “Dreifaltigkeist –Hospital” and today it hosts a library. The introduction of the Light was on 22nd January 1843 through the “Zum Hellen Licht” Lodge.

After a few years the Lodge was moved to the Hotel Koppelmann on the Lange Strasse. Ernst Walhert, Rector of the Hoheren Burgschule was the Venerable Master from 1846 to 1848. In 1852 the Light was off again for reasons unknown .
In 1855 a Masonic Union was founded under the auspices of the “Zur Bundeskette” Lodge i.O. Soest and work resumed.
From 1888 onward the Lodge would meet at the Sommerkamp-Alsen Restaurant in the Kluserstrasse close to the oriental end of the street.

All Masonic documentation was confiscated by the Gestapo in 1933. Part of the material was found after the unification of Western and Eastern Germany and it is kept today in Berlin at the “”Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz”.
A large collection of documents from the Lodge could be saved from the Gestapo but was then lost during the pilfering of 1945. On 16th January 1934 all the German Lodges were forcibly closed.

On 13th January 1955 after the Second World War, thanks to the Soest Lodge a new foundation act was granted and Bank Director Fritz Husmann from Lippstadt became the Venerable Master. The solemn introduction of the Light was celebrated on 16th March 1952 in the richly decorated ballroom of the Koppelmann Hotel, at the presence of 71 Brothers from various Westfalian Lodges.

Our Lodge associated with the Great A.F. & A.M. Lodge.
On December 1st, 1952 the Lodge rented from the Corporation of Butchers (Metzgeramt) the use of the historical building belonging to the Corporation. From 1968, after the first refurbishing of the premises carried out by the Brothers, the Lodge occupied the entire first floor.

The Corporation of Butchers of Lippstadt, 450 years old, is the only one in Germany that has been meeting according to the ancient rituals from its foundation to present days.
A contract of cooperation was signed on 29th June 1974 with the Erasmus i.O. Lodge from Bruxelles. The 25th anniversary of this event was solemnly celebrated on 26th May 1999 at the Great Assembly Hall of the City at the presence of the President of the Soest Province and the Lord Mayor of the city of Lippstadt. The solemn speech was delivered by Professor H. H. Hohmann.

In 1992 the Lodge celebrated its 150th Jubilee. The celebration was opened by the show “The Brotherhood of Masons” at the local Museum. It was a success which helped in clearing some prejudices.
The city of Lippstadt, offered the Council room for the solemn Jubilee celebrations. Present at the event were also the Great Master VGDLvD, and the Great Master of the GL A.F.u.A.M., the Great Master of the GL BFG and the DM of the l NRW. The Brothers present, 135 belonged to 46 different Obediences from Germany and abroad.

The reason for the presence of many foreign guests has to be attributed, last but not least, to the notoriety of the Lippstadt Lodge owed to its Great Master the Venrable Otto Ghirke, also President of the “International Masonic League”. A large group of Italian Brothers belonging to the Zarathustra autonomous Lodge also belonged to the League. The Great Venerable Master Simonetti, presiding the Zarathustra had been initiated by the Great Brother Otto Ghirke and had signed a friendly treaty with him during the 60s.

The city of Lippstadt offered the Council room for the solemn Jubilee celebrations. Present at the cerimony were VGDLvD Grand Master, the G.L A.F.U.A.M Grand Master., the GL. BFG Grand Master and the l NRW. DM. 135 Brothers from 46 different Obiediences from Germany

(n.d.w.:  Brother Simonetti was then initiated to the Scottish rite in Italy)
(In all honesty the crowd was made up only of 5 members.:.)

On the occasion of the Jubilee the charity organization “Humanitas” was founded. Brother Otmar alt, a famous artist from Hamm, created an etching named “An acrobat in Lippstadt”. This etching was donated by the Lodge and it can be found today in the Fundus of the Artothek of the same city.
Another picture can be found in the Town Hall of the city of Uden in Holland, a city twinned with Lippstadt. It has been there since 2001.

“HUMANITAS” mostly supports social activities in the city of Lippstadt and the province of Soest, but also activities which have an international dimension such as “Menschen fur Menschen” (Men for Men) directed by Brother Karlheinz Bohm and the “Hammer Forum”

In 1994 the Lodge had to find a new home owing to the restoration works that had to be made in the building of the Butchers’ Corporation. The search for new offices proved to be more difficult than imagined at first. The Lodge had to move to a house in Overhagen in the outskirts of Lippstadt. Two Brothers had bought the house for that specific purposes.
On the ground floor of the house there was a family owned restaurant that was restructured by the Brothers to become an exclusive seat for the Lodge.
After long months of work the Brothers have turned the family restaurant into a please well suited to the Lodge that now counts on 33 regular associates and 3 honorary members.

The Masonic path of the Zarathustra Lodge and Brother Simonetti can be understood from these events. During the eighties the Zarathustra Lodge gave birth to the Communion of the Free Masonic Lodges with the distinctive name of “Might and Freedom” and subsequently to the UMSOI, (Masonic Union of strict initiation observance) also known during the 90s as Social, Moral, International and operative Union.

Zarathustra and Zum Lebedingen Kreuz have had a very similar and difficult story . Both the Grand Master Otto and Brother Simonetti have added to the reverence towards the Cross the one towards the Roses. Their actions and histories make us think they went well beyond the Scottish rite.
In them perhaps we may find the Masonic founding principles as well as those of the legendary Rosenkreuz.

The text comes from the Web. It is not ours but it tells our history.

U.M.S.O.I.

MASONIC UNION OF STRICT INITIATION OBSERVANCE

The independent Lodge was founded in 1982 by some Brothers who separated from the Italian historic Obediences. The Lodge chose a strict independence as the Brothers coming from other experiences would not tolerate once more the social constrictions the sclerotic attitude that ruled the actions of those Lodges.

The Zarathustra Lodge chose to become a unit attentive to social problems, dedicated to depth socio cultural researches which are constantly referred to the present and not to the past in spite of all the problems that this attitude implies.

The Lodge adopted the rituals of the Great Lodge of California as well as the statute and the rulings adopted in the USA. It shortly became a model for other lodges lodge thanks to the use of a new language less secretive but more suited to the needs of contemporary men.

The visitor of this web site will be able, in time, to verify the evolution of this Lodge’s workings, its principles which are expressed in clear and positive concepts and how much it has influenced a large part of Italian Masonry to the extent that its Master could say without fear of being contradicted “We are messengers and actors of a new Masonry founded on honesty, morality and clear principles. For these reasons we will be opposed by the traditionalists who fear novelties.

The spirit of this lodge towards Masonry in general is similar to the way in which Giordano Bruno took stance in front of the Catholic faith. Or, even better, it reminds of the trilogy of freedom, equality and fraternity which was born of the French Revolution and gave way to a new era in history. The liberal ideals also gave way to innovative models of democracy pushing the countries governed by a Monarchy to adopt a constitutional model. This is probably one of the reasons for the opposition to Masonry and its persecution by totalitarian and conservative regimes. This is also the reason for a strong co relation between Masonry and politics.

The frequent pronouncements of legal experts inspired by Lombroso see us as enemies. Of the same opinion are those who politically sustain the temporal power of the Church. They will never forgive us Masons for the siege of Porta Pia or the first Roman Republic of 1810.

The Zarathustra Lodge pursues another concept which can be expressed as “love in action” This principle makes the Lodge universal and mother of more Obediences. The Lodge has had an internationally difficult life and it has been opposed to, whilst suffering because of the jealousy and envy of others. It was able, nevertheless, to confirm its right to exist thanks to its tolerance, its dialogue. The humble attitude of its Masters was and is today its strength and a the focus of Masonic activities.

Same fate was shared by the Obediences that were generated by this Lodge and that were frequently subjected to less than honest principles. They were frequently divided and disassembled but they never generated Masonic monsters. Simply the obnoxious parts were cut off and expelled, having entered the organization to gain profit or other benefits. Zarathustra todayis rich of more than twenty years of experience and it is a reference point for anyone who has a pure soul, a clean mind, is honest in his actions and wants to learn .

The Honourable Master

G.Simonetti

Note:

By Historical Masonry we mean the Grande Oriente d’Italia (GOI) also known as the Palazzo Giustiniani Masonry and the Great Lodge of Italy also known as the Masonry of Piazza Gesù.

They are the only certifiable Masonry Obediences even if in the passing of time they have been frequently troubled from a social, Masonic and legal point of view.

These were the reasons why Brothers felt compelled to discuss and critically meditate on the situation and then join the Zarathustra to gain a renewed ideal and Masonic spirit.

Hayes accordingly appointed Isaac Da Costa Deputy Inspector-General for South Carolina, who in 1783 introduced the Rite into that State by the establishment of a Grand Lodge of Perfection in Charleston. Other Inspectors were subsequently appointed, and in 1801 a Supreme Council was opened in Charleston by John Mitchell and Frederick Dalcho.

There is abundant evidence in the Archives of the Supreme Council that up to that time the twenty-five Degrees of the Rite of Perfection were alone recognized. But suddenly, with the organization of the Supreme Council, there arose a new Rite, fabricated by the adoption of eight more of the continental advanced degrees, so as to make the Thirty-third and not the Twenty-fifth Degree the summit of the Rite.

The Rite consists of thirty-three degrees,which are divided into six sections, each section being under an appropriate Jurisdiction, and are as follows, (details on the right panel):

These are sometimes called the Blue or Symbolic Degrees. They are not conferred by the Scottish Rite in England, Scotland, Ireland, or in the United States, because the Supreme Councils refrain from exercising jurisdiction through respect to the older authority in those countries of the York and American Rite.

The classification of the above Degrees is as they are arranged in the Southern Jurisdiction. In the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction the Consistory grades begin at Grand Pontiff, the nineteenth, and include the thirty-second, Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret, and the Council of Princes of Jerusalem governs the fifteenth and sixteenth grades. Several of the titles of the Degrees vary in their use by the Supreme Councils but the above table covers most of these variations. The Southern Jurisdiction for example omits the word Grand from the names of the twelfth, fourteenth, nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-ninth grades, and also uses Elu instead of the other designations, omits Commander from the thirty-first, and specifies Master in the thirty-second.

A full account of the Rite is in Doctor Mackey’s revised History of Freemasonry.

Some authorities call this the Ancient and Accepted Rite, but as the Latin Constitutions of the Order designate, it as the Antiquus Scoticus Ritus Acceptus, or the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, that title has now been very generally adopted as the correct name of the Rite.

Although one of the youngest of the Masonic Rites, having been established not earlier than the year 1801, it is at this day most popular and the most extensively diffused. Supreme Councils or governing Bodies of the Rite are to be found in almost every civilized country of the world, and in many of them it is the only Masonic Obedience.

The history of its organization is briefly this: In 1758, a Body was organized at Paris called the Council of Emperors of the East and West. This Council organized a Rite called the Rite of Perfetdion, which consisted of twenty-five Degrees, the highest of which was Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret.

In 1761, this Council granted a Patent or Deputation to Stephen Morin, authorizing him to propagate the Rite in the Western Continent, whither he was about to repair. In the same year, Morin arrived at the City of Santo Domingo, where he commenced the dissemination of the Rite, and appointed many Inspectors, both for the West Indias and for the United States. Among others, he conferred the Degrees on Moses M. Hayes, with a power of appointing others when necessary.

U.M.S.O.I.

MASONIC UNION OF STRICT INITIATION OBSERVANCE

THE SCOTTISH RITE

Some authorities call this In 1761, this Council granted a Patent or Deputation to Stephen Morin, authorizing him to propagate the Rite in the Western Continent, whither he was about to repair. In the same year, Morin arrived at the City of Santo Domingo, where he commenced the dissemination of the Rite, and appointed many Inspectors, both for the West Indias and for the United States. Among others, he conferred the Degrees on Moses M. Hayes, with a power of appointing others when necessary.

C. Fred Kleinknecht 33° Sovereign Grand Commander Presiedente il Rito Scozzese Antico ed Accettato della Gran Loggia Madre del Mondo USA

Hayes accordingly appointed Isaac Da Costa Deputy Inspector-General for South Carolina, who in 1783 introduced the Rite into that State by the establishment of a Grand Lodge of Perfection in Charleston.Other Inspectors were subsequently appointed, and in 1801 a Supreme Council was opened in Charleston by John Mitchell and Frederick Dalcho.There is abundant evidence in the Archives of the Supreme Council that up to that time the twenty-five Degrees of the Rite of Perfection were alone recognized. But suddenly, with the organization of the Supreme Council, there arose a new Rite, fabricated by the adoption of eight more of the continental advanced degrees, so as to make the Thirty-third and not the Twenty-fifth Degree the summit of the Rite.

The Rite consists of thirty-three degrees,which are divided into six sections, each section being under an appropriate Jurisdiction, and are as follows, (details on the right panel):

I. SYMBOLIC LODGE
II. LODGE OF PERFECTION
III. CHAPTER OF R0SE CROIX
IV. COUNCIL OF KADOSH
V. CONSISTORY OF SUBLIME PRINCES OR MASTERS OF THE ROYAL SECRET
VI. SUPREME COUNCIL

These are sometimes called the Blue or Symbolic Degrees. They are not conferred by the Scottish Rite in England, Scotland, Ireland, or in the United States, because the Supreme Councils refrain from exercising jurisdiction through respect to the older authority in those countries of the York and American Rite.

The classification of the above Degrees is as they are arranged in the Southern Jurisdiction. In the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction the Consistory grades begin at Grand Pontiff, the nineteenth, and include the thirty-second, Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret, and the Council of Princes of Jerusalem governs the fifteenth and sixteenth grades. Several of the titles of the Degrees vary in their use by the Supreme Councils but the above table covers most of these variations. The Southern Jurisdiction for example omits the word Grand from the names of the twelfth, fourteenth, nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-ninth grades, and also uses Elu instead of the other designations, omits Commander from the thirty-first, and specifies Master in the thirty-second.the Ancient and Accepted Rite, but as the Latin Constitutions of the Order designate, it as the Antiquus Scoticus Ritus Acceptus, or the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, that title has now been very generally adopted as the correct name of the Rite.

Although one of the youngest of the Masonic Rites, having been established not earlier than the year 1801, it is at this day most popular and the most extensively diffused.

Supreme Councils or governing Bodies of the Rite are to be found in almost every civilized country of the world, and in many of them it is the only Masonic Obedience.

The history of its organization is briefly this: In 1758, a Body was organized at Paris called the Council of Emperors of the East and West. This Council organized a Rite called the Rite of Perfetdion, which consisted of twenty-five Degrees, the highest of which was Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret.

Meeting internazionale 1997. Da sinistra: il Fr.: H.Harnold di Romania, il Fr.: Kleinknecht (Sov.:G.:Comm.: USA), il Fr. Simonetti (UMSOI Italia), ed il Fr.: Lemon (California)

Il Fratello Elvio Sciuba unitamente al fratello Kleinknecht che molto si adoperarono per far avere all’U.M.S.O.I. i riconoscimenti internazionali

In 1761, this Council granted a Patent or Deputation to Stephen Morin, authorizing him to propagate the Rite in the Western Continent, whither he was about to repair. In the same year, Morin arrived at the City of Santo Domingo, where he commenced the dissemination of the Rite, and appointed many Inspectors, both for the West Indias and for the United States. Among others, he conferred the Degrees on Moses M. Hayes, with a power of appointing others when necessary.

Hayes accordingly appointed Isaac Da Costa Deputy Inspector-General for South Carolina, who in 1783 introduced the Rite into that State by the establishment of a Grand Lodge of Perfection in Charleston. Other Inspectors were subsequently appointed, and in 1801 a Supreme Council was opened in Charleston by John Mitchell and Frederick Dalcho.

There is abundant evidence in the Archives of the Supreme Council that up to that time the twenty-five Degrees of the Rite of Perfection were alone recognized. But suddenly, with the organization of the Supreme Council, there arose a new Rite, fabricated by the adoption of eight more of the continental advanced degrees, so as to make the Thirty-third and not the Twenty-fifth Degree the summit of the Rite.

The Rite consists of thirty-three degrees,which are divided into six sections, each section being under an appropriate Jurisdiction, and are as follows, (details on the right panel):

I. SYMBOLIC LODGE
II. LODGE OF PERFECTION
III. CHAPTER OF R0SE CROIX
IV. COUNCIL OF KADOSH
V. CONSISTORY OF SUBLIME PRINCES OR MASTERS OF THE ROYAL SECRET
VI. SUPREME COUNCIL

These are sometimes called the Blue or Symbolic Degrees. They are not conferred by the Scottish Rite in England, Scotland, Ireland, or in the United States, because the Supreme Councils refrain from exercising jurisdiction through respect to the older authority in those countries of the York and American Rite.

The classification of the above Degrees is as they are arranged in the Southern Jurisdiction. In the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction the Consistory grades begin at Grand Pontiff, the nineteenth, and include the thirty-second, Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret, and the Council of Princes of Jerusalem governs the fifteenth and sixteenth grades. Several of the titles of the Degrees vary in their use by the Supreme Councils but the above table covers most of these variations.

The Southern Jurisdiction for example omits the word Grand from the names of the twelfth, fourteenth, nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-ninth grades, and also uses Elu instead of the other designations, omits Commander from the thirty-first, and specifies Master in the thirty-second.

A full account of the Rite is in Doctor Mackey’s revised History of Freemasonry.

Our Association has expressed its willingness to promote an aid campaign aimed at all those people who are risking extinction around the world. Such aid is not limited to money but also includes a denounce of this fact.

Through this actions we are hoping to stimulate the conscience of those for whom the word CIVILISATION is protection and respect of other people’s cultures.

Happy Children O.N.L.U.S di Medola (MO)

nel 2007 l’associazione ha fornito un aiuto per i bambini di Butela (RO)tramite la Happy Happy Children O.N.L.U.S di Medola (MO)

U.M.S.O.I.

MASONIC UNION OF STRICT INITIATION OBSERVANCE

UMSOI is a Masonic Union which includes foreign Lodges and brothers.

The Union demands that we give international exposure to this site which must report masonic or socially relevant news in the various original languages.

Translations of such news might be asked to the General Secretariat by subscribing Brothers who posses a specific interest for the news published.

The Document

We aim at the conquest of moral and material values which are an integral part of Man with a capital “M “. We are in fact talking not just about the person but more so as a social entity who thinks and believes.

Man has lost too many values such as love loyalty, courage, honesty, tolerance, understanding but, most of all, the ability to believe in himself.

We, Free Masons, cannot say we possess all that has been lost as we are men like others but we try and find such values in all the knowledge that has been passed down to us and look for them where they are hidden, in our soul, buried deep within ourselves.

When people can look inside themselves, when people can find their better part they become real brothers in spirit, the same spirit that makes us alive and teaches us so much.