Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Lagavara1 last won the day on October 31 2022

Lagavara1 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About Lagavara1

  • Rank
  • Birthday 04/03/2011

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Recent revelation that money was not repaid has again raised awareness to connected events. A member was sentenced to jail (six months) for fraud without any action taken apart from being merely ‘struck off’ for not paying his dues. Neither his Lodge, the Province nor Grand Lodge acted to the unquestionable facts either before, during or after the court case. His fraud occurred over five years of which during that period of time he was joint signature on a charge sheet that successfully attained unmasonic charge against others leading to their suspension. With the legitimacy of the charge sheet discredited, by his conviction, I would have deemed the allegations he levied against others as both dubious and self-protectionist due to his rank. Is there ever a time limit to correct that which is wrong or requires explanation?
  2. The scrutineers of each unit must advise before the balloting of any prospective member. It appears the prosper and seconder not aware of what order they belong to, and why. Why introduce a new member who is not aligned to the ethos of the unit. Maybe units should hold the traditional position and other units may decide to go woke!
  3. Another edict. As reported in the Irish News, Belfast. ‘People have been guessing what foot I kick with all my life' – Belfast Freemason Brian McBride reacts to Vatican ban on Catholics joining organisation - The Irish News
  4. PM George, thank you for recalling your experience on matters in Scotland. For clarity, the issue is solely a masonic issue and not of someone in jail. I wonder in your instance if the brother was appealing his judgement of Lodge or Provincial at a Grand Lodge setting. It is good practice that a higher authority not be involved as it enables a pathway of appeal. Here in Ireland I do recall a non masonic solicitor representing a brother at masonic trial. Unfortunately Grand Lodge Ireland has deleted past minutes of proceedings from its website, co-incidentally at a time when Grand Masters Lodge expelled several members and the Grand Secretary position was relinquished. However, this specific (IC) Grand Lodge trial was directed and managed by the Deputy Grand Master under instruction openly aired at a Provincial Grand Lodge meeting by the Grand Master. Whilst this in itself is somewhat bizarre in itself and setting that aside, the accused ultimately has no pathway of appeal as Grand Lodge has no route of challenge against the direction and will of the Grand Master. Never the less, even judgements not derived from any Grand Masters direction the accused is never in attendance in Ireland. I believe sentencing a brother in his absence is wrong and it is unjust.
  5. In recent times there has been numerous instances, highly publicised, at court sentencing when the accused have declined to be present to hear the (guilty) outcome of their trial. Freemasonry in Ireland regretfully also is required to hold trials. However, in Freemasonry the accused is not permitted to be present to hear the outcome at Grand Lodge when judgment is delivered. Rather the entirety of those attending Grand Lodge both hear and vote on the judgment while the accused (guilty) learns from hearsay or awaits postal correspondence. Masonic scholars will advise that matters are proven rather than have guilt applied. This may so but the absence of the accused is not justifiable in today’s modern world of openness, transparency, and human rights. What is the position in UGLE and GL Scotland when an accused is judged?
  6. Members in Freemasons' Hall Arthur Square Belfast, struggle with the Halloween menu. ( The Trustees are pleased to assist with the jovial Halloween spirit )
  7. Regrettably some lodge secretaries in Belfast (IC) are not informing members that to gain access to their hall that they must follow the same covid regulation as if seeking to enter a hotel, bar etc. These public covid regulations have been applied for several weeks and merely copied to Masonic premises. And yet of those turned away some become annoyed and allegedly surprised of the hall management enforcement. It is disappointing that the lodge almoner also appears to be sleeping behind the wheel to assist those more elderly. The messaging from both Grand Lodge based in Republic of Ireland and that of the Provincial Grand Lodge based in Northern Ireland is conflicting and discourages members from attending halls that are fully adherent to public safety. Hopefully good word of a Halls covid compliance will spread and that all members long awaited return will be further encouraged to do so. Stay safe and follow the rules, where ever you are.
  8. An update on hall (mis) management.... PGL Antrim sold its purpose built hall, which was only 50 years old and choose to rent 4th flloor office space above a betting shop at the nearby High Street. This 2017 arrangement was much praised by the hierarchy. Whilst the proceeds of the sale were never disclosed on annual accounts it is now published in the Antrim newsletter that savings of £40,000 per annum will now be made by relocating out of Belfast capital city to a village in Templepatrick near the airport to an abandoned Masonic hall. However the newsletter states, '' It was explained that the proposed refurbishment to the premises, was estimated to cost between £145,000.00 and £200,000.00, but due to the spiralling costs of materials, the costs could be as high as £400,000.'' So five years of apparently excess costs of £40k have been incurred despite 10 years of prior planning upon the sale of its former offices and now a proposed refurbishment tf a property which has an unknown cost, but likely to exceed estimates by £255.000. The PGL Antrim treasurer in 2017 was jailed for stealing £120.000 from the Order. I wonder has he now started a building company !! Happy and prosperous new year to all.
  9. Sontaran, hope you fully recovered. I have from within my immediate family those who attend to private households with Covid as their jobs demands so. Their job demands they follow appropriate measures and they never disregard their own personal reasonability. Masons are well able to follow government guidelines and regulations. The Orders blanket decision in Ireland telling members not to meet is financially closing down larger halls with catering and club bar facilities. If government permits catering and bars to be open then masons should surely be able to meet in their own premises. Even if an actual meeting is deemed unnecessary the gathering of the lodge at catering and bar maintains the masonic connection nad breaks the isoloation of many elderly. Of course such gatherings are invitational and not a summons !
  10. Sir Crawford McCullagh was indeed a member. Whilst he was a foundation member in another lodge his membership in his name sake Craft and RAC units is unclear. He also was a Rose Croix member. A few years ago, I spoke with Susan Cunningham who penned the life of her great grand-father in a book ‘Sir Crawford McCullagh – Belfast’s Dick Wittington.’ Regrettably, the publication makes no reference of his masonic involvement. It is perceivable that the absence of masonic membership recognition appears typical of that era when disclosing your membership was discouraged. And I believe that we today are missing an opportunity to promote our past successful and eminent members who made valuable contribution and impact in public life. Slightly digress – another member Sir Charles Cameron who also had a lodge (353) named after him. The Royal College of Surgeons Ireland (RSCI) whilst marking the centenary of his death in 2021. The RSCI hosted a favourable section on his masonic interest. see link https://www.rcsi.com/cameron/index.html and scroll to near end of article.
  11. Sir Crawford McCullagh was not the pioneer of the ‘Two Minutes Silence’, as Newtownabbey author Bob Armstrong claimed in his publication “Through the ages to Newtownabbey.” According to The Belfast Telegraph at the time Sir Crawford called for a ‘Five Minutes Silence’ on 11th July 1916, following receiving news of the death of thousands of soldiers from the 36th (Ulster) Division at the Somme. However, significantly, he was the first recorded person to publicly call for a period of silence for fallen soldiers. This was in response to a decision made by the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland to cancel the annual 12th July celebrations. The Lord Mayor of Belfast Sir Crawford McCullagh instead requested that all businesses be suspended for the duration of 5 minutes from noon till 12.05pm. He asked that street traffic be at a complete standstill for 5 minutes, so that the City’s tribute to the heroes of the Ulster Division would thus be impressive and universal. Trains stopped in their tracks, the city’s trams came to a halt and the Police Courts were adjourned. As men and women on factory floors, in hospitals, in shops and in homes all over Ulster bowed their heads in respect of the 36th Ulster Division who had lost their lives at the Battle of the Somme. Silence echoed through the streets of Belfast as the city came to a complete standstill. Susan B Cunningham author of Sir Crawford McCullagh: Belfast’s Dick Whittington says, the first recorded instance of such an “official moment of silence” was in Portugal in 1912. In the UK, the formal adoption of a two-minute silence to remember the war dead occurred in 1919. But she added: “I think it can be held that Sir Crawford was the pioneer.” This silence was the precursor of the 2 minute silence which is now recognized worldwide. Therefore, it can be argued that Sir Crawford McCullagh was the first recorded person to publicly call for a period of silence to honour those who have fallen in battle. V W Bro Tim Whiteside penned and hosted the above on https://arthursquare.org/assets/pdfs/2020-Reflections-Issue8.pdf Regrettably in 2014 ML 427 Sir Crawford McCullagh returned its warrant but RAC 427 of same name continues within the Irish constitution.
  12. I had travelled down to RoI from NI during the weekend - not a masonic meeting but another grouping. However, another mason from RoI was attending whom i knew. Discussion regarding vaccination certificate requirement and the regulation that masonry has applied was mentioned. It appears that GLI have selected to apply the most strict regulation . I suppose better safe than sorry. Apparently we the same men could meet under a different category title of gathering without need to show a jab certificate. All very difficult and delicate issues, but surely members are well capable of assessing their own risk when many lodge rooms are only opened up once a month. Anyway - keep safe.
  13. The web site of arthur square hall have recently hosted an article on artist John Luke painting / mural. I had often sat and gazed upon it, but was never any the wiser as to what it really all meant. Hall link https://arthursquare.org/education/the-original-john-luke Hopefully this is interest to Masonic scholars.
  14. I concur that GLoI often makes Laws and stipulations up as they wish without discussion. But as a stipulation it is appears that it is only being applied partially within a part of its jurisdiction. That is not within NI, but only in RoI. And thus i enquire if any other province or GL seeking proof of jab / vaccination.
  • Create New...