U.
The twenty-first letter of the English alphabet, is a modification of the Greek letter T. upsilon; it is in the Hebrew or in the Chaldaie and hieroglyphical, the head of an animal with horns, hence its Symbolism. U has a close affinity to V, hence they were formerly interchanged in writing and printing.
U.-. D.-.
Letters placed after the names of Lodges or Chapters which have not yet received a Warrant of Constitution They signify Under Dispensation In the United States when a Lodge is started it is known as being Under Dispensation and after a certain time has elapsed and the members are found worthy they receive a regular Charter. In England no Lodge may assemble for work until it is duly warranted and constituted except in District Grand Lodges, where the Most Worshipful Grand
Master has authorized the District Grand Master to grant "Provisional Warrants"; in these cases the Master of the new Lodge must apply within one month for a regular Warrant.
UDEN, CONRAD FRIEDERICH
A Masonic writer of some celebrity. He was a Doctor of Medicine, and at one time a . Professor in Ordinary of the University of Dorpat; afterward an Aulic Counselor and Secretary of the Medical College of St. Petersburg or Petrograd. He was from 1783 to 1785 the editor of the Archiv für Freimaurerei unit Rosenkreuzer, published during those years at Berlin This work contains much interesting information concerning Rosicrucianism. He also edited, in 1785 and 1786 at Altona, the Ephemeriden der gesammten Freimaurerei auf das Logenjahr 1785 und 1786, Tables of the Total Freemasons of Lodges in 1785 and 1786.
UGANDA.
There are only about one thousand white men in Uganda, Central East Africa, but a Lodge has already been established there
UNAFFILIATED FREEMASON.
A Freemason who is not a member of any Lodgc. As this class of Freemasons contribute nothing to the revenues nor to the strength of the Order, while they are always willing to partake of its benefits, they have been considered as an encumbrance Spoil the Craft, and have received the general condemnation of Grand Lodges.
It is evident that, anterior to the present system of Lodge organization, which dates about the end of the eighteenth century, there could have been no unaffiliated Freemasons.
And, accordingly, the first reference that we find to the duty of lodge membership is in the Charges, published in 172.3, in Anderson's Constitutions, where it is said, after describing a Lodge that "every brother ought to belong to one"; and that 'in ancient times, no Master or Fellow could be absent from it, especially when warned to appear at it without incurring a severs censure, until it appeared to the
Master and Wardens that pure necessity hindered him" (Constitutions, 1723, page 51). In this last clause, Doctor Anderson evidently refers to the regulation in the Old Contstitutions, that required attendance on the Anuual Assembly. For instance, in the oldest of these, the Halliwell or Regius Manuscript (lines 107 to 112) it is said, and we modernize the language, "that every Master that is a Freemason must be at the General Congregation, if he is told in reasonable time where the Assembly shall be holden; and to that Assembly he must go, unless he have reasonable excuse."
But the Assembly was rather in the nature of a Grand Lodge and neglect to attend its annual meeting would not place the offender in the position of a modern unaffiliated Freemason. But after the organization of subordinate Lodges, a permanent membership, which had been before unknown, was then established, and as the revenues of the Lodges, and through them of the Grand Lodge, were to be derived from the contributions of the members, it was found expedient to require every Freemason to affiliate with a Lodge, and hence the rule adopted in the Charge already cited. Yet, in Europe, non-affiliation, although deemed to some extent a Masonic offense, has not been visited by any penalty, except that which results from a deprivation of the ordinary advantages of membership in any Association.
The modern Constitution of England, however, prescribes that "no Brother who has ceased to be a Subscribing member of a Lodge shall be permitted to visit any one Lodge more than once until he again becomes a subscribing member of some Lodge" (Rule 152). He is permitted to visit each Lodge once, because it is supposed that this visit is made for the purpose of enabling him to make a selection of the one in which he may prefer working. But afterward he is excluded, in order to discountenance those Brethren who wish to continue members of the Order, and to partake of its benefits, without contributing to its support. The Constitutions of the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland are silent upon the Subject, nor is any penalty prescribed for unaffiliation by any of the Grand Lodges of the Continent of Europe
In the United States of America a different view has been taken of the Subject, and its Grand Lodges have, With great unanimity, denounced unaffiliated Freemasons in the strongest terms of condemnation, and visited them with penalties, which vary, however, to some extent in the different Jurisdictions. There is, probably no Grand Lodge in the United States that has not concurred in the opinion that the neglect or refusal of a Freemason to affiliate with a Lodge is a Masonic offense, to be visited by some penalty and a deprivation of some rights.
The following plinciples may be laid down as constituting the law in the United States of America on the subject of unaffiliated Freemasons:
1. An unaffiliated Freemason is still bound by all those Masonic duties and obligations which refer to the Order in general but not by those which relate to Lodge organization .
2 He possesses, reciprocally all those rights which are derived from membership in the Order, but none of those
which result from membership in a Lodge.
3.He has no right to assistance when in imminent peril,if he asks for that assistance in the conventional way
4.He has no right to pecuniary aid from a Lodge.
5.He has no right to visit Lodges, or to walk in Masonic processions.
6.He has no right to Masonic burial.
7.He still remains subject to the government of the Order, and may be tried and punished for any offense by the Lodge within whose geographical Jurisdiction he resides.
8.And, Lastly, as the nonaffiliation is a violation of Masoniclaw, he may, if he refuses to abandon that condition, betried and punished for it ,even by expulsion, if deemed necessary and expedient, by any Grand Lodge within whose Jurisdiction he lives.
UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
In the beginning of the eighteenth century , when Freemasonry was reviving from the condition of decay into which it had fallen, and when the experiment was tried of transforming it from a partly Operative to a purely Speculative System, the great object was to maintain a membership which, by the virtuous character of those who composed it, should secure the harmony and prosperity of the infant Institution.
A safeguard was therefore to be sought in the care with which Freemasons should be selected from those who were likely to apply for admission. It was the quality, and not the quantity, that was desired. This safeguard could only be found in the unanimity of the ballot. Hence, in the sixth of the General Regulations, adopted in 1721, it is declared that "no man can be entered a Brother in any particular Lodge, or admitted to be a member thereof, without the unanimous consent of all the members of that Lodge then present when the candidate is proposed, and their consent is formally asked by the Master"(Constitutions,1723, page 59). And to prevent the exercise of any undue influence of a higher power inforcing an unworthy person upon the Order, it is further said in the same article: "Nor is this inherent privilege subject to a dispensation; because the members of a particular Lodge are the best judges of it; and if a fractious members hould be imposed on them, it might spoil their harmony, or hinder their freedom; or even break and disperse the Lodge."
But a few years after, the Order being now on a firm footing, this prudent fear of" spoiling harmony," or" dispersing the Lodge," seems to have been lost sight of, and the Brethren began in many Lodges to desire a release from the restrictions laid upon them by the necessity for unanimous consent.
Hence, Doctor Anderson says in his second edition: "But it was foundin convenieent to insist upon unanimity in several cases. And, therefore, the Grand Masters have allowed the Lodges to admit a member if not above three ballots are against him; though some Lodges desire no such allowance" (Constitutions,1738,page155).This rule still prevails in England; and its modern Constitution still permits the admission of a Freemason where there are not more than three ballots against him, though it is open to a Lodge to demand unanimity.
In the United States, where Freemasonry is more popular than in any other country, it was soon seen that the danger of the institution lay not in the paucity, but in the multitude of its members, and that the only provision for guarding its portals was the moststringent regulation of the ballot. Hence, in almost, if not quite, all Jurisdictions of the United States, unanimous consent is required. And this rule has been found to work with such advantage to the Order, that the phrase, "the black ball is the bulwark of Freemasonry," has become a proverb.
UNFAVORABLE REPORT.
Should the Committee of Investigation on the character of a petitioner for initiation make an unfavorable report, the frequent usage, although some Grand Lodges have decided otherwise, is to consider the candidate rejected by such report, without procceding to the formality of a ballot, which is therefore dispensed with. This usage was, in Doctor Mackey's opinion, established on the principles of commonsense; for, as by the ancient Constitutions one black ball suffices to reject an application, the unfavorable report of a committee must necessarily, and by consequence, include two unfavorable votes at least. It is therefore unnecessary to go into a ballot after Such a report, as it is to be taken for granted that the Brethren who reported unfavorably would, on a resort to the ballot, cast their negative votes. Their report is indeed virtually considered as the casting of such votes, and the applicant is therefore at once rejected without a further and unnecessary ballot.
UNHELE.
An old English word meaning to uncover, or reveal. Spenser, in the Faerie Queene, says, "Then suddenly both would themselves unhele"(see Heler, also Hail or Hale).
UNIFORMITY OF WORK.
An identity of forms in opening and closing, and inconferring the Degrees, constitutes what is technically called Uniformity of Work. The expression has no reference, in its restricted sense, to the working of the same Degrees indifferent Rites and different countries, but only to a similarity in the ceremonies practised by Lodges in the same Rite, and more especially in the same Jurisdiction. This is greatly to be desired, because nothing is more unpleasant to a Freemason, accustomed to certain forms and ceremonies in his own Lodge, than on a visit to another to find those forms and ceremonies so varied as to be sometimes scarcely recognizable as parts of the same Institution. So anxious are the dogmatic authorities in Freemasonry to preserve this uniformity, that in the Charge to a Brother he is instructed never to "suffer an infringement of our Rites, or a deviation from established usages and customs."
In the Act of Union in 1813, of the two Grand Lodges of England, in whose systems of working there were many differences, it was provided that a Committee should be appointed to visit the several Lodges, and promulgate and enjoin one system, "that perfect reconciliation, unity of obligation, law, working:, language, and dress, might be happily restored to the English Craft"(ArticleXV).
A writer in C.W.Moore's Magazine, once proposed the appointment of delegates to visit the Grand Lodges of England, Scotland, and Ireland, that a system of work and lectures might be adopted, which should thereafter be rigidly enforced in both hemispheres. The proposition was not popular, and no delegation was ever appointed. It is well that it was so, for no such attempt could have met with a successful result.
It is a fact, that uniformity of workin Freemasonry, however much it may be desired, can never be attained. This must be the case in all institutions where the ceremonies, the legends, and the instructions are oral. The treachery of memory, the weakness of judgment, and the fertility of imagination, will lead men to forget, to diminish, or to augment, the parts of any system which are not prescribed with incertain limits by a written rule. The Rabbis discovered this when the Oral Law was becoming perverted, and losing its authority, aswell as its identity, by the interpretations that were given to it in the schools of the Scribes and Prophets. Hence,to restore it to its integrity, it was found necessary to divest it of its oral character and give to it a written form. To this are we to attribute the origin of the two Talmuds which now contain the essence of Jewish theology. So, while in Freemasonry we find the esoteric rituale continually subjected to errors arising mainly from the ignorance or the fancy of Masollic teachers, the monitorial instructions — few in Preston, but greatly enlarged by Webb and Cross—have suffered no change.
It would seem from this that the evil of non-conformity could be removed only by making all the ceremonies monitorial; and somuch has this been deemed expedient, that a few years since the Subject of a written ritual was seriously discussed in England. But the remedy Would be worse than the disease. It is to the oral character of its ritual that Freemasonry is indebted for its permanence and success as an organization. A written, which would soon become a printed, ritual Would divest Symbolic Freemasonry of its attractions as a Secret Association, and would cease to offer a reward to the laborious student who sought to master its mystical science. Its philosophy and its symbolism would be the same, but the books containing them would be Consigned to the shelves of a Masonic libary, their pages to be discussed by the profane as the common property of the antiquary, while the Lodges, having no mystery within their portals, would find but few visitors, and certainly no Workers.
It is, therefore, a matter of congratulation that uniformity of work, however desirable and however unattainable, is not so important and essentialas many have deemed it. Doctor Oliver, forinstance, seems to confound in some of his writings the ceremonies of a Degree with the landmarks of the Order. But they are very different. The landmarks, because they affect the identity of the Institution, have long since been embodied in its Written laws, and unless by a wilful perversion, as was the case in France, where the Grand Mastership was abolished, can never be changed. But variations in the phraseology of the lectures, or in the forms and ceremonies of initiation, so long as they do not trench upon the foundations of symbolism on which the Science and philosophy of freemasonry are built, can produce no other effect than a temporary inconvenience. The errors of a ignorant Master will be corrected by his better instructed successor.
The variation in the ritual can never be such as to destroy the true identity of the Institution. Its profound dogmas of the unity of God, and the eternal life and of the universal brotherhood of man, taught in lts symbolic method, will forever shine out preeminent above all temporary changes of phraseology. Uniformity of work may not be attained, but uniformity of design and uniformity of character will forever preserve Freemasonry from disintegration.
UNION DES FRANCS-MASONS ALLEMANDS.
SeeVerein Deutscher Freimaurer.
UNION, GRAND MASTERS'.
Efforts were made at various times in Germany to organize an association of the Grand Masters of the Grand Lodges of Germany. At length, through the efforts of Brother Warnatz, the Grand Master of Saxony, the scheme was fully accomplished, and on May 31, 1868, the Grand Masters 'Union Qrossrmeistertag, literally, the diet of Grand Masters— assembled at the City of Berlin, tile Grand Masters of seven German Grand Lodges being present. The meetings of this Body which became annual, were entirely unofficial; it claimed no legislative povers, and met only for consultation and advisement on matters connected with the ritual, the history, and the philosophy of Freemasonry.
UNION MASTER'S DEGREE.
An honorary Degree, said to have been invented by the Lodge of Reconciliation in England, in 1813, at the Union of the two Grand Lodges, and adopted by the Crand Lodge of New York in 1819, which authorized its Lodges to confer it. It was designed to detect clandestine and irregular Freemasons, and consisted only of the investiture of the recipient with certain new modes of recognition.
UNION OF 1813, THE.
UNION OF 1813, AMERICAN BEGINNlNG OF.
Canadian Masons, and by right of cousinship American Masons also, have a just and lively pride in the fact that the Union of the Modern and Antient Grand Lodges in 1813 was first begun and carried into effect in Canada; and that whereas it took their English Brothers some fifteen years or so and at a cost of agonized pride and characteristic long delays to effect a reconciliation, it was carried out in Canada with amicableness and promptness; this owing to the fact that Canadian Masons had never seen any excuse for a division which had begun and had always remained rooted in aristocratic prejudices which had possessed only a shadow existence among the democratic men of the Dominion. Since the Canadian first step in Union remained unnoted by English historians of the Fraternity from Gould and Hughan until Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins published his work on the Grand Lodge of England (wherein a new and fresher and less insular and more statesmanlike spirit entered English Masonic historical studies), the longneglected facts have a freshness and novelty, and ought to be set out in full detail in a book-length study. Until that is done students can only content themselves with the one short chapter on the subject in the virile, modern-spirited Early Catalan Massonry; 1759-1869, by Pemberton Smith (Montreal; 1939), a veteran antiquarian, and former president of the Canadian Historical Association.
Canada had possessed since 1759 a Modern Provincial Grand Lodge. The last Prov. Grand Master of it was none other than the American, Sir John Johnson, son of Sir William Johnson, the latter our country's outstanding man in the generation preceding Franklin's; and one of the fathers of Scottish Rite Masonry. Bro. Smith makes one of his few mistakes and is less than j ust to the spirit of fair play in American Masons both during and immediately follow ing the Revolutionary War when, on page 37, he writes: " Sir John Johnson had been a Mason in New York State [a Colony at that time], but remained loyal to the British Crown [no; only to the Tory Party of America] during the American Revolution, and is famous in history for his military exploits on the British side.
[One is reminded of the Cherry Valley Massacre u hich he planned!] In consequence, United States Masonic historians have little good to say for him; but, removing to Montreal after the v/rar was over, he was uelcomed and beloved by Canadian Masons. " Bro. Smith would find it difficult to name those historians. The two historians of Nen York, SIcClenachan and Lang, are factual, and are fair to Sir John, as were Masons on the Patriot side at the time; almost their only resentment is that when Johnson fled to Canada he took the Provincial Grand Lodge books and papers along with him, which were not his personal property —and did not return them even after the War. Johnson vwas appointed Provincial Grand Master of New Yorl; by Grand Master Lord Blayney in 1767, was installed after a long postponement in 1771, and served until he ran avwax with the Provincial Grand Lodgers books.
The ubiquitous and irrepressible Masons of the Antient Grand Lodge of England were in Canada not many years after that Grand Lodge had sprung to life in London in 1751and came there, most of them, in Military Lodges, the best of Masonie pioneers in that period, which, mothering so much of American Masonry, have not yet received from Craft historians the attention and the renown they are entitled to By 1732 there were three Antient Lodges in the Citx of Quebec alone, one of them the famous Merchants Lodge. 'the Moderns in Stir John Johnson's Provincial Grand Lodge, who had been officially ordered from London not to fraternize with the Antients, had only one interest in the latter—the sort of interest the tiger felt in the young lady from Niger. When word came that the Duke of Kent, one of the sons of King George III, was coming to Canada, and would doubtless become Provincial Grand Master, the Moderns were elated; they did not believe that the Antients, even the Irish Antients, could resist the allurement of serving under a Royal Head, so they expected to absorb the Antients. But the Duke himself sprang a prodigious surprise on Sir John Johnson.
The Duke of Kent was one of six sons of George III made Masons one after the other, one of whom was Clarence, Prince of Wales, another of whom was the Duke of Sussex, destined to be the Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge for a generation. The Dulse of Kent was initiated in Geneva, in 1790.
He was an extraordinary man; a thorough-going traveler; broadly as well as highly educated; a governor, a military leader, an administrator; but was possessed above every other interest of a passion for architecture which, with a complete lack of Hanoverian sluggishness, he satisfied from almost the moment of his landing in Canada, leaving, as the latest Canadian historian expresses it, a series of imposing and remearkable buildings by which his progress over Canada can be tracked. While governor of Nova Scotia he built almost single-handed the present city of Halifax, at least transformed it out of recognition; and the great Citadel which from its hill looked out Upon the Canadian-American sea and air armadas in World War II had been his doing, as had fortresses, sea-walls, and piers without number. One of his latest biographers says that letters from home told him that the King was afraid he would have no direct heir to succeed him; the Duke thereupon returned, married and his daughter Victoria afterwards became Queen. he preceding her with a Regency; she was the only Queen, at least for which there are any records, who ever became officially the Protectress of the Fraternity. The Duke continued to hold the office of Provincial Grand Master of Canada until the Union of 1813
In a speech to the Grand Lodge of England ma(le after the Union the Duke of Sussex said that his brother Kent and himself had vowed to unite the two Grand Lodges from the time of their becoming Masons; that they discussed ways and means often; that when Kent went to Canada it was agreed that he should there take the actual first step of Union, and thus prove that Union was possible. How this was carried out is told by Pro. Smith succinctly:
"To the astonishment of every Mason in Canada, when II. R.- H. Prince Edward (Duke of Kent) arrived in Quebec, he got in touch with the three lodges working under the 'Antient' regime, had himself 'made Antient,' and appointed as the first 'Provincial Grand Master of Canada' of the 'Grand Lodge of Antients."'
Graham, an earlier Quebec historian, exclaimed upon recording this unexpected turn of affairs: "A new era. A remarkable impulse was given to Antient Masonry . . . " He says it had a "wonderful effect, " and that great consequences were "very observable. "
They were indeed, for, to-continue to quote Smith: "As early as December, 1792, at his command, committees were meeting the officers of the Modern lodges, 'if possible to form a coalition of parties."' The modus operandi agreed on previously by the two brothers in England began to work with a rapidity in this case more Antient than Modern: "On St. John's Day the same month (December, 1792), the new Antient Grand Lodge met at four o'clock to install the Grand Officers elect; and at five o'clock, by the Royal and Right Wpfl. Grand Master's invitation, the present and past Grand Officers, [Antients] together with the Grand Officers under the H. R. H. the Prince of Wales, [Moderns] met the new Prov. Grand Master of Antients at dinner at Lane's Coffee House in Quebec."
This move, the first of many, and Kent's vigorous development of Antient Masonry, resulted not in a formal union but in an absorption, for one after another of the Modern Lodges "went over" to the Antients and by 1797 not one was left. From this came a new Provincial Grand Lodge. This Second Provincial Grand Lodge of Canada (1792-1813) was therefore to prove to England that differences had become illusory, and that Antients and Moderns could fraternize with each other in the light as well as in the dark
(American Freemasons were as much gratified at the time by this union as their Canadian Brethren
and ever since have shared their pride in the fact that while discussions had already begun in England, the first actual deed of union was done on American soil.
That deed interests them also, less importantly and yet with a vividness, as. one more illustration among the many illustrations in the English system of how Royal and Noble Grand Masters and Provincial brand Masters were able to decide Craft affairs "by command and out of personal and private decisions"; for in the merger of Antient and Moderns in Canada it was the Duke of Kent who took the lead and made the decisions, on his own personal authority, and without action first being taken by the Grand Lodge's consent. The custom of calling the Grand East "the throne" was more than a metaphor. It was at this point, one may believe, that the true cause of the division between Moderns and Antients had its beginning. It was at least the root of the trouble between the two Bodies in Colonies of America before the Revolution.)
UNION OF 1813, THE 1
At one time two conflicting Grand Lodge Bodies were inexistence in England. One, known as the Grand Lodge of England, originally with four old Lodges assembling at London on June24, 1717. This Lodge we will designate as the Grand Lodge of the Moderns, that being the name by which they were known during the famous controversy, inspite of the fact that they were in existence long before the other competitor. There as on for the designation Modern in this instance is that parts of their ritual and ceremony had been modified or changed, as time went on, from the ancient workings of the Freemasons. The other Lodge, while of more recent establishment, became known as the Grand Lodge of the Antients because they claimed that their ceremonies had come down from the ancient or Operative Lodges without change.
This Grand Lodge of the Antients was also known as of Atholl Matsons, it having been headed by Lord Atholl. They elected their first Grand Master on December 5, 1753, their membership at that time consisting largely of Irish Freemasons then resident in London. This Antient Grand Lodge became strong as time went on. The Grand Lodgeof the Moderns was weakened by dissension within its own ranks between the Operative and Speculative Lodges, some of whom joined the opposing Grand Lodge of the Antients. The famous Laurence Dermott was for many years the head of the Antients. Dermott was selected Grand Secretary of the Antients February 5, 1752. After much conflict between the Antients and Moderns a Union was consummated, the Articles of Union being signed November 25, 1813, by the Dukes of Sussex and Kent, the Grand Masters of the two Lodges. Later, December 27, 1813, the Act of Union confirmed this agreement at a joint meeting of the two Lodges and the present United Grand Lodge of England came into existence.
UNION OF GERMAN FREEMASONS.
The German title is Verein deutscher Freimaurer. An association of Freemasons of Germany organized at Potsdam, May 19, 1861. The Society has met annually at different places and cultivates the Masonic science, the advancement of the prosperity and usefulness of the Order, and the closer union of the members in the bonds of brotherly love and affection (see Verein Deutscher Freimaurer).
UNION OF SCIENTIFIC FREEMASONS.
The German name is Bund scientifischer Freimaurer. An Association founded, November 28, 1802, by Fessler, Fischer, Mossdorf and other learned Freemasons of Germany. According to their Act of Union, all the members pledged themselves to investigate the history of Freemasonry from its origin down to the present time, in all its different parts, with all its systems and retrogressions, in the most complete manner, and then to communicate what they knew to trustworthy Brethren.
In the assemblies of the members, there were no rituals, nor ceremonies, nor any Special vestments requisite, nor, indeed, any outward distinctions whatever.A common interest and the love of truth, a general aversion of all deception, treachery, and secrecy were the sentiments which bound them to gether, and made them feel the duties incumbent on them, without binding themselves by any special oath Consequently, the members of the Scientific Union had all equal rights and obligations; they did not acknowledge a superior, or subordination to any Masonic authority what ever.
Any upright scientifically cultivated Master Mason, a Sincere seeker after truth, might join this Union, no matter to what Rite or Grand Lodge he belonged, if the whole of the votes were given in his favor, and he pledged himself faithfully to carryout the intention of the founders of the Order. Each circle of Scientific Freemasons was provided with a number of copies of the Deed of Union, and every new candidat, when he signed it, became a partaker of the privileges shared in by the whole ; the Chief Archives and the center of the Confederation were at first to be in Berlin.
But the Association, thus in augurated with the most lofty pretensions and the most Sanguin ecxpectations, did not well succeed."Brethren,"Sags Findel (History, English translation, page 501),"whose cooperation had been reckoned Up ,did not join the active working of others was crippled by all sorts of scruples and hindrances, and Fessler's purchase of Kleinwall drew of fhis attention wholly from the sulbject. Differences of opinion, perhaps also too great egotism, caused dissensions between many members of the Association and the brethren of the Lodge at Altenburg. Distrust was excited in everyman's breast, and, instead of the enthusiasm formerly exhibited, there was only lukewalmness and disgust. "Other schemes, especially that of the establishment of a Saxon Grand Lodge, impaired the efforts of the Scientific Freemasons. The Union gradually sank out of sight, and finally ceased to exist.
UNION OF THE TWENTY-TWO.
See German Union of Two and Twenty.
UNIONS, LODGE OF.
This Lodge, No.256, was constituted in England in 1785 and under its sanction the famous Emulation Lodge of lmprovement meets (see Emulation Lodge)
UNITED .-.
- UNITED FRIARS, FRATERNITY OF.
- UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND.
- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
UNITED FRIARS, FRATERNITY OF.UNITED
FRIARS, FRATERNITY OF
A pllilosophic and social organization established in 1785 at Norwich, England, meeting at the College of Saint Luke, and devoted, to quote from their own original records, To the cultivation of a liberal and rational system of good fellowship. Whatever evils may have arisen from monastic institutions, or however incompatible with refined policy the sequestered habits of former times may be considered, it is allowed, on all authorities, that with in the gloomy mansions of the ancient religious fraternities the fine arts were nurtured, philosophy and science flourished; all the profundity of erudition was deposited; and ,to add lustre to the scene, the eleemosynary virtues took their stand before their gates, and dispensed the blessings of charity far and wide throughout the world!...
Disclaiming everything which appertains to religious functions of the monks and friars this Society professes only to imitate what has been justly deemed praiseworthy in that description of men; to emulate their scientific acquisitions their love of learning, their benevolence and philanthropy; and, adopting decent mirth in lieu of their austere rules, to exhibit the picture of a convent free from the dark and offensive shadows of bigotry, enthusiasm,
and superstition.... To give external consistency to this plan, and to strengthen the idea of fraternal combination, the United Friars have thought proper to assume the habiliments of all the known Monastic Orders; but in every instance where they have adopted the formalities of the Romish Churche special care has been taken to divest them of all reference to religion or sacred objects and, in lieu thereof to annex to them meanings Significant to those moral and social duties which apply essentially to the interest and happiness of mankind.
The officers were Abbot, Prior, Procurator, Confessor, Bursar, Hospitaller, and Librarian. Each year when the Abbot was elected heas sumed the name of Paul I, Paul II, and so on. The Order did much charitable work and during 1796-1820 the Almoner's Book shows that 5100 pounds, about $ 24,786, were expended among the poor. A Library was one of their first achievements. An impressive initiation ceremony was held and each initiate was given some Special charge by the presiding officer.. A small group of men at London associated themselves with the organization and from 1818 to 1824 held meetings twice monthly at the College of Saint Mark in Great Saint Helens. They elected no Abbot, out of deference to the parent Body, their highest and presiding officer being the Prior. At these meetings the members read papers, usually historical, and each one of the Fraternity was required, soon after initiation, to render an account of that Order whose garb he assumed on his profession. The London Branch was finally disbanded about 1825 (see brother Mackenzie's Royal masonic Cyclopedia) |
