Should Freemasons have charitable status in UK?

I keep thinking back to that Television documentary about MI5's involvement in Harold Wilson's fall from power. There's a copy of it on GUBA in Documentaries and then conspiracy theories. It was made by the BBC and all the research done by two respected journalists.

It said that an MI5 cell was created in Northern Ireland to create black propaganda re Harold Wilson the Prime minister of the day. Then, the real MI5 acted on the false information created by the cell.

So clever.

Well, it worked because Thatcher demanded his resignation and off he went. Has anyone noticed that the MI5 logo is a triangle and at it's apex there is an all seeing eye enclosed in another triangle at it's peak?

Unmistakable, but isn't it against British law for anyone to be both a mason and work for military intelligence?

MI5 is only answerable to here Majesty

" Her Majesties secret service" and i think many people know that she is also the Grand patroness of world freemasonry too, isn't there a conflict of interest here knowing that when thew military coup in 1965 was being planned, it was done so by masons led by Lord Mountbatton?

To be a charitable organization as the Freemasons are in the UK, they cannot be political. Yet there are lodges in just about every county council in the land, there were two lodges in the houses of parliament i don't know if that is still true but it does suggest a political interest. Something more interesting is that there seems to be little or no proof that masons actually pay for the use of those lodges so in turn, it suggests that the public pay for them.

Is this right?

I think questions should be asked as to the charitable status of freemasonry especially as a worshipful master once told me he didn't have a clue as to how his charity money was being spent. If no one knows how it's spent, it may be used for any purpose including negative ones.

If it's proven that freemasons do have political aspirations, then they must by law, lose their charity status.

I mention The queen here because she actually believes that god chose her to rule her subjects and i will say without any doubt that she is right, god did choose her.

But if you look at the Freemasons arms when you pass one of their pubs in the UK, their emblem clearly shows two characters with cloven hoof which has always been a symbol associated with the devil. I wonder if her majesty would associate herself so closely with this organization if she knew what it's own emblem truly suggested and believing god chose her to rule?

Another point, women are excluded from their meetings and although there are black lodges all over the world, if you go down to the library and read their literature it clearly suggests that a mechanism is in place to keep a black man from just turning up and entering a lodge which also suggests racism is acceptable for a charitable organization. So, should a charity be given it's status knowing the organization is both sexist and racist? I say an investigation should be started immediately.

www.guba.com for the film re MI5 and Harold Wilson

Originally posted by stanboy


" Her Majesties secret service" and i think many people know that she is also the Grand patroness of world freemasonry too...

Then you turn right around and say:

Another point, women are excluded from their meetings . So, should a charity be given it's status knowing the organization is both sexist and racist?

Is masonry even requesting to be a recognize charity????

Originally posted by Nygdan
Is masonry even requesting to be a recognize charity????

I hope not!

They will probably recognize themselves for it..

Hi stanboy

You make some interesting observations which I would like to comment on. Hopefully as part of all this I'll answer the question

Well, it worked because Thatcher demanded his resignation and off he went. Has anyone noticed that the MI5 logo is a triangle and at it's apex there is an all seeing eye enclosed in another triangle at it's peak?

I think you're implying that freemasonry and MI5 are somehow connected. Whilst I think there is a good possibility that there are members of MI5 who are freemasons (statistically, if nothing else) there is no formal link between the two. There never can be, actually, as freemasonry is an overtly nonpolitical organization.

Unmistakable,but isn't it against British law for anyone to be both a mason and work for military intelligence?

Not law as far as I know. There was some attempt to single out freemasons for discrimination by the government at the end of the last century, but it fell foul of the ECHR and couldn't be implemented. Having said that, I imagine MI5 members are heavily vetted and if membership of freemasonry is deemed to be incompatible then there would be no membership overlap.

Incidentally, did you know that British freemasons are part of a very small section of British society who actually take an oath of allegiance to the Law of the Land? Your typical Brit won't have done that, and in my book that would make freemasons more reliable (on average) than non-masons

...and i think many people know that she is also the Grand patroness of world freemasonry too...

This is not true I'm afraid.
1. There is no such thing as global freemasonry
2. British freemasons toast the Queen at every meeting, but in her capacity as sovereign and their capacity as loyal subjects. I think you will find similar happenings in other jurisdictions, e.g. in the USA freemasons recite the Pledge of Allegiance

... isn't there a conflict of interest here knowing that when thew military coup in 1965 was being planned, it was done so by masons led by Lord Mountbatton?

What coup would this be? And why would the masons be involved in it?

To be a charitable organization as the Freemasons are in the UK, they cannot be political. Yet there are lodges in just about every county council in the land, there were two lodges in the houses of parliament i don't know if that is still true but it does suggest a political interest. Something more interesting is that there seems to be little or no proof that masons actually pay for the use of those lodges so in turn, it suggests that the public pay for them.

There are certainly 'special interest' lodges in England, where freemasons who have interests in common meet, e.g. the Warwickshire Scout Lodge is geared towards freemasons who used to be Scouts. There used to be more "single occupation" lodges than there are now, but I believe that there are still one or two lodges that originally aimed for membership of council members. One such is Westminster City Council Lodge No. 2882, which no longer meets on council property and is highly likely to be open to anyone now, as membership has reduced over the last 50 years or so. There are 5 other 'council' lodges in London, none of which meet on council premises.

The claim that there are lodges in almost every county council in the land is quite untrue. Only four lodges meets on council property, at the same location in Berkshire.

As for political interest - absolutely!!! Politicians over the years have had a great interest in freemasonry and many great British heroes of yesteryear have been freemasons (e.g. Churchill). However these days it is no longer "politically correct" to be a freemason and I know of only 1 in the House of Commons.

Any lodge which meets on private property is likely to be paying the going rate for renting the room.

I think questions should be asked as to the charitable status of freemasonry especially as a worshipful master once told me he didn't have a clue as to how his charity money was being spent. If no one knows how it's spent, it may be used for any purpose including negative ones.

Technically it is the Grand Charity which has charitable status, and every English freemason is ex-officio a member. The UGLE does not have charitable status.

FYI the WM is only in position for 1 year, it would be the Lodge Secretary and Charity Steward who would allocate charitable funds. All lodges have to be audited annually by law, though, and this information is distributed to all members, including (obviously) the WM. If he doesn't know what's going on in his own lodge then that's his business.

If it's proven that freemasons do have political aspirations, then they must by law, lose their charity status.

Do you mean freemasons, or freemasonry? There is a difference. Freemasonry has no interest in politics, and indeed discussion of politics is banned at masonic meetings. Freemasons, however, are free to pursue their own public or private avocations, and I hope you are not suggesting certain people should be excluded from standing for public office because they are a minority group? As Chris Mullins has found, that is discrimination and contrary to European Law.

But if you look at the Freemasons arms when you pass one of their pubs in the UK, their emblem clearly shows two characters with cloven hoof which has always been a symbol associated with the devil.

Which pub would this be? UGLE doesn't own any pubs. And cloven feet are associated with a number of animals.

Another point...

... yes...

women are excluded from their meetings

That's because it is a fraternity. Men are excluded from sororities, and certainly excluded from Women's freemasonry. What's your point here?

and although there are black lodges all over the world, if you go down to the library and read their literature it clearly suggests that a mechanism is in place to keep a black man from just turning up and entering a lodge which also suggests racism is acceptable for a charitable organization.

There are no 'black lodges' in England. Any man can and does join freemasonry irrespective of the color of his skin. I have stood on the square with many black men, and have Hindus in my lodge.

So, should a charity be given it's status knowing the organization is both sexist and racist? I say an investigation should be started immediately.

And I say that you have a very poor source for your information. I'd be happy to go into any more detail on any of the misconceptions you have picked up if it would be helpful.

Oh, and if you took charitable status away from the Grand Charity less money would go to charity and more to the taxman. Is that what you want?

Check out how the Grand Charity spends masonic money here.

I've heard that a lot of the money that is collected by Freemasons does not actually go to Charity. There was an article in a newspaper a year or two ago saying that the money collected from Shrine Circises and such, did not actually go to charity but was kept. And the amounts that did go to charity was very minimal compared to what was actually raised.

CC

Originally posted by chief_counsellor
I've heard that a lot of the money that is collected by Freemasons does not actually go to Charity. There was an article in a newspaper a year or two ago saying that the money collected from Shrine Circises and such, did not actually go to charity but was kept. And the amounts that did go to charity was very minimal compared to what was actually raised.

Shriners regularly hold fundraisers for Temple expenses and activities. Shriners do not divert money from the charitable fund into the activity fund, it's all separate.

CC

Take a look at the link I provided above. It shows a wide spread of giving to both masonic and non-masonic activities. And that is just the centralized charity - both provincial and private lodges give significant amounts to local charities as well.

FYI the Shrine is virtually non-existent in the UK.

...Freemasonry's charitable works have been publicly criticized. The Orlando Sentinel published that the Shrine generated $23 Million in 1985 from it's circuses through the country, but it's tax returns showed less than two percent (or $346,251) actually went to medical care for children. The rest of the money was used to furnish the Shrine's elaborate temples and to purchase food, alchohol, and costumes for rituals (August 3 and 7 1985; September 15, 1985)

This is taken from Masonry Unmasked, by John Salza, bottom of page 75.

Originally posted by chief_counsellor

...Freemasonry's charitable works have been publicly criticized. The Orlando Sentinel published that the Shrine generated $23 Million in 1985 from it's circuses through the country, but it's tax returns showed less than two percent (or $346,251) actually went to medical care for children. The rest of the money was used to furnish the Shrine's elaborate temples and to purchase food, alchohol, and costumes for rituals (August 3 and 7 1985; September 15, 1985)

This is taken from Masonry Unmasked, by John Salza, bottom of page 75.

CC,

What's your point?

Did the advertising for the Shrine Circus say ANYWHERE that money paid will be given to the Hospitals? Did those who bought tickets and food and candy, etc. get a tax-deduction receipt to give to the IRS? Or for their $5 or $6 did they get to...uhm....WATCH A CIRCUS? I wonder how much of the money was used to PAY for the Circuses themselves? (There are several...not just one)

Shrine charities are incredible. Orthopedic and burn care which is SUPER-EXPENSIVE given to children at no charge. EVER. If your child is taken to a Shrine Hospital you will never, ever, ever see a bill. In fact you're NOT ALLOWED to pay. If you can afford to pay for the care without hurting your family monetarily, you're not eligible for Shriners Hospital care. That's one of the things they assess when a child is admitted.

www.masonicinfo.com...

That being said, certainly the Shrine has to raise $$$ to pay for her buildings, etc. and the Circus is a good way to do it. The local Lions Club has a pancake day once a year and they raise a lot of money. And for they money you pay, you get to eat pancakes...no tax receipt though. The $$$ is for the club. They might give some of it to charity but not 100%. Neither does the Shrine.

Give the Shrine Hospital a donation (which anyone can and many people regularly do) and you'll get a tax receipt for the IRS and the $$$ will go to the hospital. Line up at the door of the tent and give the Shrine Circus $6 or whatever and you'll see a circus. Easy stuff.

Oh, and by the way in my home town where the Shrine Circus comes once a year, there are several places that have Free Admission tickets to the Shrine Circus that they give to kids.

[edit on 14-1-2007 by Appak]

Can we keep to the topic please guys? This thread is about UK masonic charitable status and there are virtually no shriners in the UK.

CC - have you turned up any concerns with masonic charities in the UK?

I'm afraid the OP isn't going to return. He's made two 'propaganda' posts on ATS and hasn't been back since. This is very disappointing but I guess entirely predictable, as when allegations and theories such as these are challenged the proponents tend to slink off as there is no basis of truth in most of them.

The charitable giving of freemasonry in the UK is an entirely genuine and useful contribution to society. Grants are given to local charities, as well as international disasters such as the Tsunami appeal and the Katrina disaster. Much of it is not given at a central level and there is virtually no publicity apart from perhaps a byline in the local paper. When I was Master we gave about $200 to a local small charity and I couldn't even get the Press interested at all. Perhaps it's just as well, as I think in general masons don't want to publicize charitable activities but the increased awareness of the fraternity through publicity is regarded as something worth pursuing.