C.T. Russell: a confirmed Pittsburgh Free Mason

by kid-A 118 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  zagor

  Geez, can't believe this question has been raised again...

  I've studied this question through and through, went through all available Masonic sources and I can state with confidence that to this day there is NO evidence that Russell was ever a freemason.

  In fact if you read that disputed article you'll see a number of profound misunderstandings about what freemasonry is about. Russell simply didn't have an inside knowledge of freemasonry, end of story.

  Rather, I'd say he tried to mimic what apostle Paul said of trying to be everything to everybody "to Jews a Jew to gentiles a gentile..." etc. in order to win them over to his point of view.

  just one of many masonic sources --> http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread4401/pg1
• 

  Cygnus

  Zagor, I totally agree.
• 

  Kenneson

  Cygnus,

  I second that.
• 

  AndersonsInfo

  I just posted the following information on JWD under the subject, Beliefs, Doctrines & Practices, in the hope that as many people as possible will see the facts, although, as other posters have observed, if some people want to believe Russell was a Freemason, nothing will change their mind. Apparently, some of us don't want to be confused by the facts!
  
  NO, CHARLES TAZE RUSSELL WAS NOT A PENNSYLVANIA FREEMASON!
  
  Back in 2001, I requested historical information from the ANCIENT ACCEPTED SCOTTISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY, VALLEY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, asking if Charles Taze Russell, his father, Joseph Lytel Russell, and his uncle, Charles Tays Russell, were Freemasons. This is the answer I received in a letter:
  
  "AFTER A SEARCH OF OUR RECORDS, WE DETERMINED THAT THE THREE RUSSELL'S WERE NOT MEMBERS OF OUR ORGANIZATION."
  
  In their letter, the Pittsburgh Chapter recommended that I send an inquiry asking for further research on this question to the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania located in Philadelphia, which I did. On April 27, 2001, I received this reply:
  
  "THE RECORD BOOKS IN THE GRAND SECRETARY'S OFFICE ARE UNAVAILABLE AT THIS TIME AS THEY ARE BEING CONSERVED AND SHOULD BE BACK SOME TIME IN THE FALL."
  
  Inasmuch as I was very involved with other, more pressing, things then, I did not follow-up and eventually my desire for resolution of this question faded out of my mind. That is, until today, when I saw that this subject has not been resolved to the satisfaction of some posters, so I sent a follow-up email to the Masonic Temple, Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Just a few minutes ago, I received this reply:
  
  DEAR MS. ANDERSON,
  
  CHARLES TAZE RUSSELL WAS NOT A PENNSYLVANIA FREEMASON. NOR DOES HE APPEAR IN THE RECORDS OF ENGLAND OR IRELAND.
  
  I SHALL CHECK THE RECORDS FOR THE OTHER TWO RUSSELLS.
  
  BEST,
  
  GLENYS A. WALDMAN
  LIBRARIAN
  
  If and when I receive an answer from the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania about the other two Russells, I will post it.
  
  In any event, I would hope that this answer from a search of the original records will forever put this issue to rest that Charles Taze Russell was never a Pennslyvania Freemason.
  
  Barbara Anderson
• 

  Kenneson

  WOW! Thank you Barbara. The final proof.
• 

  chasson

  Barbara is it possible to have the scan of the two letters? This is for my website.

  Thanks

  Charles
• 

  Carnie

  kid a did you get the links from Beacon of Truth?
• 

  LittleToe

  Barbara:

  The Grand Lodge letter is pretty conclusive, as this would be where his membership of the first three degrees would be held (the ones that REALLY count).

  The Letter from the Chapter of Scottish Rite confirms that he couldn't have been a 32* or 33* Mason, as some suggest.

  The only stone that's left unturned (albeit covered by the Grand Lodge letter) is that of the accusation of him being a Knight Templar Mason. The Chapter of York Rite could answer this: http://www.yorkrite.com/pa/ - http://www.pagrandlodge.org/knightstemplar/

  IMHO the ultimate irony is that it would have been no big deal 100 years ago if he were a Mason, as many men were. Notwithstanding that, the evidence confounds the proposition.
• 

  Cygnus

  Bingo Barbara. Thank you.
• 

  Golf

  Zagor, you have brought out a good point. Paul became all things to all men for the sake of Christ.
  
  I've read Fritz Springmeier's "Bloodlines of the Illuminati" and when I compare his info with other sources,Charles Taze was not a Freemason.
  
  
  Golf