Sunday, May 18, 2014

Response to Fahim A. El-The Conclusion

In the name of Masonic Education, I continue this discussion with Brother Fahim A. Knight El.
My response will be in red.

Bro. Fahim's response to mine can be found here:
Bro Fahim's Response

Brother Fahim began his response:
Peace: Brother Hairston, you finally admitted openly that no one gave the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE) a charter to function and operate as an independent and sovereign body of Masons; thus, they like all other self-determining people in history declared themselves the right to invest in the ancient and modern forms of Freemasonry by implementing and establishing their own Masonic edit and therefore laying the foundation for others to follow.

Now, Bro. Fahim, I know that the audience who follows my blog, those who know me in Masonic research circles and even those from clandestine groups whom I debate regularly will find the opening of your response amusing. You stated that I had FINALLY OPENLY ADMITTED that no one gave England a Charter. I never denied that fact at any time, in fact I have publicly stated that to clandestine groups who believe that Grand Lodges receive charters to operate, because that is a practice that is the norm among illegal masonic bodies.
Again, you show signs of one who is among the Regular lodges but your heart is clandestine. The established norm since the founding of the Grand Lodge of 1717, the merger of the rival Grand Lodges in 1813 was that no Grand Lodge would need a charter to operate. This is Freemasonry 101.
Your contention that it is perfectly legal to go out and establish a Grand Lodge at anytime is a detriment to Freemasonry and further proves that your rationale may need a bit of fine tuning.
The origins of those "grand lodges" whom you so deem them within their right to form a Grand Lodge because they just can, is spurious and they have no legitimate origin.
John G. Jones in particular started a Grand Lodge with no lodges. He just went out, one week after being expelled and incorporated a Grand Lodge. I think you are quite aware of the expulsion of John G. Jones and may be you may NOT know that he started a Grand Lodge a week AFTER the trial and had NO LODGES to start a Grand Lodge. So what gave him the right to start a Grand Lodge?
What gave IFAAM or Modern Free?
These bogus grand lodges were illegally started and have no authority whatsoever to exist, because they were either formed by illegal lodges, with illegal charters, or they were founded by expelled masons or those who had no authority to just start a Grand Lodge.
Can you name a grand lodge, that would be considered clandestine that would have the Masonic right to just form?

Secondly, can you give me the masonic precedent that would allow any group of people to form a Grand Lodge after the established custom was established on how Grand Lodges were to form? Please provide documentation and NOT OPINION. You continued:

Perhaps since no and/or 'competent Masonic Jurisdiction' issued them a Masonic Warrant, Charter or Dispensation to function in a legal Masonic capacity, then any charters and warrants that followed (meaning those issued by the UGLE) would be considered irregular.

Bro. Fahim, I think it may be time to end these discussion if you can't begin to formulate better conclusions than these, because we are beginning to go in circles. There was no precedent on how Grand Lodges were to form prior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of England. This means the precedent was set by there actions. They didn't need to have a Competent Masonic Jurisdiction, because they became the FIRST GRAND LODGE. Prior to that formation, lodges were private lodges and operate autonomous from each other, there was NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY. Any group of masons could assemble and confer the degrees and form Lodges. Although a Grand Master was existent he had no Chartering authority, as there was no CENTRAL BODY in existence to issue such charter or dispensation.
In 1717, one of the primary reasons for the formation of a Grand Lodge was to provide a CENTRAL AUTHORITY that would regulate the the formation of private lodges and how the degrees were conferred. This Body was to give structure to a chaotic system. I think rather than join Freemasonry to be nosy, it would be wise to actually research the history and get an understanding of the environment that led up to the formation of the Grand Lodge of England. It would provide an insight to the rationale of a Central Body.
Now, not all lodges were with the new Grand Lodge and Chartering authority, but the Grand Lodge of England wasn't built to control all of Masonry, just regulate how Freemasonry would operate between the four lodges and other lodges that would be formed under them, they exerted no control over the lodges outside the four.
Later, other lodges that were existing in the UK saw the benefits of a CENTRAL BODY and came under the structure of the Grand Lodge of England. there were rivals to the Grand Lodge of England up until 1813, and therefore all contentions became uniformity and harmony in the Masonic world.

So, your logic that all charters emanating from the Grand Lodge of England could be deemed irregular is weak and unsubstantial. There was no Chartering Authority or Central Body to claim them antagonistic to. They were the FIRST CENTRAL BODY and Chartering Authority that was purely Speculative, which was a distinction from the private lodges that were predominately OPERATIVE. You have to actually do the homework Brother. You are just making statements for the sake of argument and trying to keep the debate going. You continued:

Now, I think that you are smart enough to read between the lines. But I also know that our acceptance of this illegal duplicity is rooted in a much deeper psychosis, which is mis-eduction and self-hatred--this always allows us to give Europeans and their culture a free pass.

Bro. Fahim, you sound disgruntled. I don't believe that the acceptance of the standards of regularity is based on mis-education and self-hatred, it is based on acceptance of the system of freemasonry as it was established. You are the type who will paint a white lie black and then call it truth. What was done during the time of slavery is not forgotten nor is it just swept under the rug. There are reparation movements, civil and national rights movements that are fighting on those fronts. There are many grass roots organizations that are out in the community voicing these issues. The thing you can't seem to grasp is that Freemasonry isn't a CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, IT ISN'T POLITICAL. Freemasonry isn't the forum nor platform to deal with those issues. You are asking Freemasonry to become other than what it was formed to be. We will not allow Masonic crimes to be accepted just because they were committed by Black people. Black Nationalism isn't a philosophy that asked for the acceptance of criminal and subversive conduct in the name of a "black agenda".
You are trying to paint all white masons as racist and a danger to black masons, and this is just ridiculous and shows that you you're self are a racist hiding in the ranks of Freemasonry. You want Prince Hall mason to provide a pass to John G. Jones, his masonic crimes, and the after effects of those crimes based solely that he and those who follow him are black?! That is a racist perspective. You continued:

So No other Masonic entity had the right to do exactly what the United Grand Lodge of England did, if you understand what deductive reasoning is either you would objectively conclude that England had every right to establish itself as a 'competent Masonic' jurisdiction or what they set-up by mere reasoning is illegal or legal in which affords others this same Masonic right and privilege.

Bro. Fahim, who said that no other masonic entity couldn't do what the Grand Lodge of England did?
Where are you coming up with these conclusions?
Scotland, France, Ireland, India, and the various Grand Lodges of America did so. Here is the MAJOR DIFFERENCE, they did so by legitimate means and with the framework of the established usages and customs of the day. The clandestine lodges, either have no legally chartered lodges, expelled masons, charters for Grand Lodges, grand lodges formed by "Supreme Councils", etc.
Grand Lodges can form in the same manner as the Grand Lodge of England, just NOT OUTSIDE THE ESTABLISHED USAGES AND CUSTOMS.
The deduction of why those four old lodges decided to form a Central Body and put structure into the system is more than logical, it saved Freemasonry. If Freemasonry was practiced the way that led up to the formation of the first Grand Lodge, you would not even recognize it today; it would be a chaotic stew of every man is his own Grand Master, no harmony, no uniformity, no regulation. But I guess that flawed concepts of life flourish in chaos, because it would appear normal. You continued:

But not only this, the UGLE would eventually impose their Masonic will the world over.

Do you even understand what you're saying here?
You are distorting the truth for the sake of trying to breathe life into a conceptual corpse.
Let me give you an example that will utterly dispel the above statement.

If the UGLE exerts control over the Masonic world, then why are their still Grand Lodges in America that don't recognize Prince Hall Grand Lodges?

If the UGLE controls the Masonic world, how is it that all Grand Lodges in America have OES auxiliaries?

The UGLE doesn't control any Grand Lodges or Jurisdictions. The Grand Lodges have the option to accept the standards of regularity and apply them as they deem conducive to their jurisdiction. It is a willful and lawful acceptance of the UGLE standards. ALL GRAND LODGES ARE SOVEREIGN. You just have to accept that. You are creating a straw man argument. you continued:
No, speak for yourself, I do not practice nor follow the tenets of the UGLE or any other European Masonic body; my good brother, once I accepted the knowledge of self, it was clear that what so-called African American Masons were following was distorted and a perverted version of Masonry and I truly desired to look to the East and at least investigate the Ancient schools of thought that evolved in Ancient Kemet that predated learning and initiation long before the Caucasian exited the Hills and Caves sides of Europe.

Bro. Fahim, are you a Mason in good standing with your lodge in North Carolina? If you are then by that virtue, what you have stated above is refuted by your own actions to make sure your dues are paid so that you can remain in good standing with that UGLE styled Masonry that you're covered by. You continued:
You are literally following a baby on the planet who has only been in existing a little over 6,000 years and in your response you desire to downplay the citadel of all knowledge which is Kemet. This much has been thoroughly verified by Chelkh Anta Diop and Yosef Ben Jochannan and many of our revolutionary scholars.

Bro. Fahim, I am not following anything but the Volume of Sacred Law, The Constitution of the United States, and the Code and Constitution of my Grand Lodge. I think you are exhibiting selective reading and you are reading what you want into my statements. I am well aware of all the contributions that black people have made to World Civilization. I am well aware of the abilities of Black people. I just refuse to paint all white people devil, when I learned that a devil is ANY MAN MADE WEAK AND WICKED. And there are times when one is made weak by his own delusions and flawed concepts of life.
You have no clue as to what I see through these eyes. I know how to judge what is and what is not. I see good in ALL good people, regardless of their race. I will not live life acting as if white people are the cause of every issue in my life. I refuse to paint all white people are racist. You are wasting your masonic experience harboring ideological distortions and historical revisionist theories.
So, your above statement really has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL POINT, and I dismiss it because it doesn't negate the fact that Freemasonry as you joined was formed by English lodges. You still haven't provided a citation for a Grand Lodge in Egypt prior to 1717.
Don't read something that is not there in the statement. I know there were Mystery Schools and Initiatic Schools all over Africa, but they were not the system you practice in your lodge. Nor did you have the Grand Lodge system that is practiced. I believe that there are surviving mysteries from Egypt, I just don't believe that they were communicate and practiced as we do in Freemasonry.
I believe that Freemasonry is a door that will lead you into other paths, because the paths of all converge within its halls of learning. You continued:

I do give you credit we are making some baby steps the in fact that you did acknowledge and admit that no one gave the Europeans their charter in 1717 (this is huge and this admittance deflates the premise and foundation that your argument rest).

Fahim, I think that you're bit over confident with absolutely no evident reason to be. You continue to believe that England had a Charter in 1717. You see, your attempt to be sarcastic becomes the stage the public is allowed to see just how inconsistent and lacking your understanding of Freemasonry is. Please allow me to reiterate for the third time, THERE WAS NO CHARTER FOR THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND in 1717. This is how I know that you may not be attending your meetings regularly, especially not study halls. You said, no one gave Europeans their Charter and this is erroneous. England did not possess a CHARTER and they never have possessed a Charter, because Grand Lodges DO NOT OPERATE BY CHARTERS. they operate by Code and Constitution and the allegiance of the Subordinate lodges that IT CHARTERS. The Grand Lodge of England ISSUED CHARTERS, they did not HAVE ONE THEMSELVES, because Grand Lodges don't need charters.
This is a tell tell sign that a Grand Lodge is bogus, if the Grand Lodge has a Charter from some body to operate. This is a clandestine practice. Again, SUBORDINATE LODGES NEED CHARTERS TO OPERATE, NOT GRAND LODGES. So, the very fact that you continue to believe that it takes a charter to form a Grand Lodge, then your above statement backfires and become the shot in your foot. You continued:

This in my opinion, is much bigger than John G. Jones and his lodges, it really sets a legal precedents for other non-Prince Hall Masons to use their own sovereign authority and power to establish and create their own Masonic reality.

Fahim, you are so far from the true concept of Freemasonry. There is no black Masonic reality to attain, there is only ONE MASONIC REALITY, and it is inclusive of ALL RACES UNDER ONE UMBRELLA. As it stands today, Prince Hall Masons operate sovereign and Independent Grand Lodges. So the above statement is the presentation of one who has a very narrow view of Freemasonry. You are trying to see a great concept through "black lenses" and it is distorting your view of truth. You continued:
Let me set the record straight because I know the mindset of zealots; it would be a total a distortion and misnomer for anyone to suggest that Brother Knight-El, a Prince Hall Mason supports clandestine Masonry (no I am given you and others a lesson in critical thinking) and it is an outright lie for anyone to leave this conversation with that assertion.

Fahim, you are making the above statement seem like a phony disclaimer. You are definitely a support of clandestine practices as it continues to leak out of your statements. I will leave the readers to decide. You continued:
I do advocate Black Masonic unity above all else and I also believe in talk diplomacy with other non-Prince Hall jurisdictions and perhaps we could find some common ground. I think it is very much immature to tell a Masonic organization such as Ancient Free and Accepted Masonry (John G. Jones this group is over 100 years old) the only option is to come before the PHA alter and be "Healed" for some they might find this to be a reasonable option and even I might in some instances a agree with this stringent mandate, but what about those who are comfortable with being an upright man in the space which now they presently occupy. I have a lot more to say.

Fahim, the space that all JGJ groups occupy now is illegal, and just because they may feel comfortable in that space doesn't mean that we call it legal. It is not immaturity to ask someone to follow the protocol that has been established for some time now. But that is neither here nor there. I am glad that YOU THINK, because that holds no weight in the Masonic world, you have make the OPINION justified by real masonic precedent and substantial masonic documentation.
I love black people and desire their unity, but I will not compromise the stability and structure of the system just to provide a space for a "unity" that isn't based on anything stable. You have to understand, that asking them to abandon their clandestine practice is the best option and at this point their ONLY option to enjoy MASONIC UNITY.
The unity of black people doesn't need Freemasonry. But Masonic Unity does, and you can post a thousand times, but it will change nothing, and the you are not presenting a good case to those of the Prince Hall Craft while you use these types of conclusions and operate under this type of delusion. For the cause that you have not legitimately presented a good cause masonically, and that you continue to post in a circle, without any real verification or substantial reasoning. I bid you peace in your hopeless quest. We have went back and forth, and you have only continue to prove that you have no clear understanding of Freemasonry, and that you choose to deviate from the root practices of Freemasonry to maintain a flawed ideology.

WB John L. Hairston, Editor
The Quill and The Sword


  1. Peace: Brother Hairston, let me first sincerely thank you for this insightful debate; it represented that we were on opposite ends of the pole, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. I respect your right and desire to end this debate in which the only victory would be if we both said enough and represented our positions to the best of our intellectual ability and allow others to decide where the truth lie. But before we close this debate let me correct you when it comes to Freemasonry; there is no compulsion when it comes to a Masonic Brother who is in good standings to be obligated to do anything. Thus, this includes a brother having the right to attend every communication or none—this should not be held against a Masonic Brother who is in good standings and therefore all of the Masonic rights and privileges should be his. Now, my brother that is typical Freemasonry etiquette and we serve at the pleasure of our right to remain in good standings. Yeshuaa Ben Yosef (Jesus the son of Joseph) instructed us that the temple of God is within—no physical structure has the ability to determine intelligence or our level of humanity. Thus, often attending meetings, perhaps only makes us good ritual Masons, but my focus is delving into Speculative Masonry and this is what separates me from most Prince Hall Masons, in particular and Masons in general. I am not to ego driven and arrogant that I cannot learn, but I am not impressed with ones appendant Masonic bodies affiliations or one’s title; I am equally not impressed with how many Masonic Houses that one belongs, but what impresses me is the level of ones knowledge and most of all the level of their humanity (this is the only criteria that I have found relevant in my Masonic travels). You falsely have accused me of being a threat to ‘regular’ Masonry because of my opinions and views, but if you truly understood Speculative Masonry (philosophical Masonry) this science allows us to explore a diverse spectrum of ideas and schools of thought and we should not limit ourselves to this expansive ideological field of Masonry. But what becomes dangerous to Freemasonry is when we stop allowing others the right to disagree and intelligently cite their disagreement even if it’s opposite of the popular version of the truth. There is no room for censorship or censuring just because a Brother Mason takes the antithesis position in a debate in order to bring balance and clarity and even point out positions that might be flawed and/or in some cases have proven to be valid. I do not put out disclaimers, I vehemently standby every word that I have written to you in this debate. You see good brother, I am not a coward and I only have to answer to the Supreme Deity and not man. Truly a man should be judged by his works, deeds and actions. The principles of Democracy looms high in Freemasonry and it is this principle that allows us the right to exercise a sense of Masonic freedoms—we learned very early that there were two subjects that was not allowed to be discussed in open lodge, which was religion and politics. I think if you look at how the United Grand Lodge of England was established and if you got away for a moment from you personal biases relative to how the UGLE was initially formulated, it would be easy to detect a Eurocentric form of absolutism and no one else has the right exercise a form of Masonic self-determination—this is ludicrous. I pity those who accept this as a golden rule.

    Stay Awake Until Meet Again,
    Fahim A. Knight-El

  2. Bro. Fahim El,

    You're welcome.
    I don't believe in censure either, but if the views you espouse come without regard to substance or accuracy, then there is a need to give that voice time to mature in the development and stability of research, actual research not a read and form by biased opinion.
    I think that we have said enough for those who have listen can make a determination on what is truly Masonic and what is a closed and narrow view cloaked as Freemasonry.
    Speculative freemasonry doesn't allow for the exploration of spectrum of ideas to be marred by personal bias and nationalism in any form.
    I just hope that you will learn more about freemasonry before you begin to attempt a version of its presentation, without that you do Freemasonry a great disservice.

    I AM
    WB John L. Hairston, Editor
    The Quill and the Sword