My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Freemason Lodges in Prison ??

Travelling Man91

Registered User
I have seen a small difference with the first degree sign only. And from my understanding the sign of distress is different depending on what jurisdiction also. Something I have always wanted to know is, is Prince Hall and and other regular masons signs the same ? I guess I would have to ask a mason that has sat in both lodges.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
These are clandestine on anyone's chart.
I really wonder if they are clandestine....were the Freemasons on the side of the south in the civil war incarcerated by the north not freemasons anymore? Where the prisoners in the american revolution prision ship at New York not freemasons because they were there?....hmmm
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
So is the position that no matter how many regular brethren may be in a prison, under no circumstances should they hold a lodge?

Perhaps they should form their own Grand Lodge and issue charters to other prisons.

I think any group of mason can open a lodge if the have the needed number to open that lodge.
 

Travelling Man91

Registered User
I really wonder if they are clandestine....were the Freemasons on the side of the south in the civil war incarcerated by the north not freemasons anymore? Where the prisoners in the american revolution prision ship at New York not freemasons because they were there?....hmmm
I would feel more sympathy for a brother that was already a regular freemason before he went to prison than a guy that was made a mason in Prison. Just my two cents.
 

jvarnell

Premium Member
I would feel more sympathy for a brother that was already a regular freemason before he went to prison than a guy that was made a mason in Prison. Just my two cents.
Except for edicts of probation from some GL's could ,,, a Brother Master Mason's secrets as his own, murder and treason alone excepted.
 

cemab4y

Premium Member
As a member who actually attends lodge overseas, they are not the same.

My previous post was a bit unclear.

I have attended USA lodges from sea to shining sea, and the signs are uniformly the same.

In USA lodges that operate in foreign lands, they are the same.

I attended a lodge chartered by the United American-Canadian Grand Lodge of Germany. They use the Minnesota ritual. All signs are the same.

I attended a lodge chartered by the Grand Lodge of California, which uses the Massachusetts ritual. (Operating in Paris France) The signs are the same.

I attended a lodge chartered by the Grand Lodge of Ontario (Canada).. They used the Canadian ritual, and the signs are the same.

I attended a German-speaking, German-sponsored lodge in France. They used the Germany ritual. All the signs are the same, except for the FC, which was different from any I have seen before or since.
 
R

Ressam

Guest
Dear gentlemen.
If "clandestine lodges" are "bad" -- how do you "fight" with them?
Is there any legal ways?
Or, they, actually don't "damage" True Masonry?
 

cemab4y

Premium Member
I would rather not deal in hypotheticals. The fact is, that any group can meet, and call themselves "Masonic". The S&C logo is NOT copyrighted. I know a female freemason who lives in northern VA. There is a co-ed lodge in communist Cuba. There are 5 (five) Grand lodges in France (at last count). There are "lodges" that admit atheists.

These groups have been around for many years, and they do not detract anything (IMHO) from legitimate, recognized, regular Masonry. I say let them have their meetings, and let them practice the brotherly (and sisterly) love, relief and truth.

Legitimate, recognized Freemasonry, does not a monopoly on these virtues.
 

cemab4y

Premium Member
And that is -- The Problem!

Not necessarily. Please read:

The United States Patent Office took note of this in 1873. It told a flour manufacturer, and the world. ‘This device, so commonly worn and employed by Masons, has an established mystic significance, universally recognized as existing, whether comprehended by all or not, is not material to this issue. In view of the magnitude of the Masonic organization, it is impossible to divest its symbols, or at least this particular symbol—perhaps the best known of all—of its ordinary significance, wherever displayed." The manufacturer was denied the use of the Square and Compasses as a trade-mark.” (Reference: Allen E. Roberts; “The Craft and its Symbols: Opening the Door to Masonic Symbolism” pg. 12).

The fact that the S&C cannot be copyrighted, enables all of the manufacturers to design the belt buckles, ballcaps, etc.
 
R

Ressam

Guest
Not necessarily. Please read:

The United States Patent Office took note of this in 1873. It told a flour manufacturer, and the world. ‘This device, so commonly worn and employed by Masons, has an established mystic significance, universally recognized as existing, whether comprehended by all or not, is not material to this issue. In view of the magnitude of the Masonic organization, it is impossible to divest its symbols, or at least this particular symbol—perhaps the best known of all—of its ordinary significance, wherever displayed." The manufacturer was denied the use of the Square and Compasses as a trade-mark.” (Reference: Allen E. Roberts; “The Craft and its Symbols: Opening the Door to Masonic Symbolism” pg. 12).

The fact that the S&C cannot be copyrighted, enables all of the manufacturers to design the belt buckles, ballcaps, etc.
Thanks!
 

Glen Cook

G A Cook
Site Benefactor
I would rather not deal in hypotheticals. The fact is, that any group can meet, and call themselves "Masonic". The S&C logo is NOT copyrighted. I know a female freemason who lives in northern VA. There is a co-ed lodge in communist Cuba. There are 5 (five) Grand lodges in France (at last count). There are "lodges" that admit atheists.

These groups have been around for many years, and they do not detract anything (IMHO) from legitimate, recognized, regular Masonry. I say let them have their meetings, and let them practice the brotherly (and sisterly) love, relief and truth.

Legitimate, recognized Freemasonry, does not a monopoly on these virtues.
Actually, some of them do detract from Regular Freemasonry, deceiving their members as to their regularity.

What is the co-ed Lodge in Cuba?
 

Travelling Man91

Registered User
Well a brother has already stated that they were the same in other lodges. I am a mason and in no way would I ever ask a brother to violate their obligation. I don't see answering that question any different than a brother saying its the same in other regular lodges
 
Top