The Céile Dé Priest Masons

Glen,

I must tell you that you are spot on when you conclude that the true and original form of Free Masonry was (and is) the first organised religion.

You may find our website of interest to you. For good reasons, we only start the time line on the "Grand Lodges in England" webpage from the issuing of the Royal Charter at St Peter's at York (King Athelstane - AD 926).

What we do not publish, is that this Charter gave royal assent to the Céile Dé Masonic Priest Architects to continue their activities, legally, in the face of considerable persecution, from Rome.

The Céile Dé Priest Masons came from Celtic/Druidic, pre-Davidic roots.

The Moderns form of freemasonry, as you probably already know, was a self-stared humanist breakaway (a corruption of the original) prompted by the Rosicrucians of the Enlightenment years. This hijacking of Free Masonry on behalf of Protestant Hanover, was planned and carried out as recently as 1723 (the Anderson Constitutions) in the back room of a London Pub (The Goose and Gridiron).

It is this form of freemasonry that constitutes the mass membership form of the old religion, but it is not the true and original form of the Craft, and, as you know has been reduced to little more than a social club. However, the Moderns form of freemasonry was further developed (we would say corrupted) with the added Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, Weishaupt's Illuminati etc.

I hope that you enjoy your visit to our website.

Peter

Peter J. Clatworthy
Grand Secretary
Grand Lodge of All England at York
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Rosicrucian Moderns system of freemasonry, from Germany,
claims to have been self-started in the tiny back room of a London
pub on the 24th June 1717. It has no history whatsoever prior to
this date, and in fact there are absolutely no records of the
Grand Lodge of London prior to 1723. It not only does not claim
prior existence, but denies the existence of Anglo-Saxon Free
Masonry prior to this date.

We know our roots which are pre-Davidic and comes down to us from
the original form of Christianity via Celtic/Druidic traditions.

We continue to ordain the Masonic Priesthood, as before. Without
these Holy Orders there can be no true Free Masonry.

I hope that this clarifies matters somewhat. A reference to our
website: the Welcome Page and the chronological history of Grand
Lodges in England will provide you with further information.

We continue to meet at the York Minster, and other ecclesiatical
premises throughout England.

Peter

Peter J. Clatworthy
Grand Secretary
Grand Lodge of All England at York
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Grand Lodge of All England deems it necessary to state in clear and unequivocal terms the Aims and Relationships of Craft Freemasonry consistently practised under its jurisdiction since time immemorial and to define the principles governing its relations with Grand Lodges with which it is in Amity:

The Grand Lodge of All England promulgates the doctrine of brotherhood, a world-wide community of men, not constituting a state, but bound by Anglo-Saxon values of independence, equality, justice, freedom, liberty, and democracy under the constitution, encouraging the development of good character, right action and fair dealing.

The Grand Lodge at York is a sovereign and independent Masonic body. It does not recognise or admit the existence of any superior Masonic authority, however styled.

The Grand Lodge of All England retains jurisdiction over the degrees of: Apprentice; Fellow; Mark Mason; Passed Master; Installed Master; Ark Mason; and Grand High Priest; all degrees and orders being at all times considered integral to Craft Masonry.

The Grand Lodge of All England at York warrants its Lodges to initiate candidates in the degrees of: Apprentice; Fellow; Mark Mason; Passed Master, Installed Master, and Ark Mason. The Holy Order of Grand High Priest may only be conferred in a St John's Lodge summoned for that purpose.

Grand Lodge at York recognises all regularly made Fellows of the Craft irrespective of nationality, ethnic origin, political affiliation, religious observation or social background.

The Grand Lodge of all England does not accept the bogus and un-Masonic doctrine known as "Grand Lodge Recognition".

The Grand Lodge of All England, at York does not comment on the internal affairs of any other sovereign or independent regular Grand Lodge.

The Grand Lodge at York has consistently refused to express any opinion on any question of domestic or foreign state policy, at home or overseas, unless it relates specifically to the liberty to freely practise Freemasonry. It will likewise never interfere on any question which may effect relationships between nations or sovereign states, government to government, or between political parties.

The Grand Lodge of All England does not allow any Associations or Conferences of Freemasons to represent it in any way or to express any views which may be attributed to it. Nor does it participate in association or conference with any external organisation unless the membership of such organisations strictly conforms with the principles upon which the Grand Lodge at York is founded.

Grand Lodge of All England at York will either withhold or withdraw from association with any Grand Lodge or any other body or association which does not concur wholeheartedly with these aims or is in violation of any agreement, warrant, charter, or certificate issued by or entered into by this Grand Lodge.

Any attempt to link or associate The Grand Lodge of All England, also titled The Grand Lodge at York, the Ancient and Honourable Society and Fraternity of Freemasons meeting since time immemorial in the City of York with any individual, body, bodies, organisation, organisations, association or associations, whether Masonic or non-Masonic must be regarded as entirely false and possibly malicious unless supported by a written Treaty of Amity or Agreement ratified by The Grand Assembly of Masons at York or a Convocation of The Grand Lodge of All England, at York.

Any deviation from or alteration to these principles will preclude the Grand Lodge at York from associating with any Grand Lodge. Grand Lodges seeking Amity with the Grand Lodge of All England at York must be able to demonstrate that they have consistently practised these established and unalterable principles.

The Grand Lodge of All England at York is aware of the existence of bodies styling themselves as Freemasons which do not adhere to these principles. The Grand Lodge at York will consistently refrain from any relationships with such bodies which it does not regard as truly Masonic.

Whether the linguistic root of colquhoun is Old Norse (coill) or Irish (cuil, cul), we notice a common meaning: if coill refers to black wood or coal, the Scottish Gaelic roots cal, cul, or ceil implied something that protected, turned, or burned, often in association with fire, as in cuil-hil, turning wheel or cul-mhaire, wheelwright, cal, cail, ceill, to burn, also applied metaphorically in the Irish to the passions, ceili, ceill, cill, a round or fire tower, i.e. a place of devotion where the sacred fire always burned, cuilteach, a steeple, a fire house, ceil de, a preserver of the fires, i.e. a culdee, caileach, heat or passion of the mind; cal, lime, i.e. burnt stone( as in Calchou and Calchvynyd, the ancient names of Kelso), and calcam, to burn into lime; and culag, fuel, turf, peat. Thus we are inclined to think that Colquhoun originally designated a sacred narrow corner, which was guarded by black metaphorical "dogs", perhaps priests who practiced the "black art", making coal or working as blacksmiths.

splinters wrote:Would this be one of the parent organizations of all the fraternal orders?

I've never heard of a modern freemason conceding that it is a religion.

splinters wrote:

I've never heard of a modern freemason conceding that it is a religion.

Perhaps he is a true initiate of the higher orders, not one of the guys stuck out on the porch.

splinters wrote:

I've never heard of a modern freemason conceding that it is a religion.

Perhaps he is a true initiate of the higher orders, not one of the guys stuck out on the porch.

Cain:
elder son of Adam and Eve, from Heb. Qayin, lit. "created one," also "smith," from Sem. stem q-y-n "to form, to fashion." To raise Cain is first recorded 1840. Surnames McCain, McCann, etc., are a contraction of Ir. Mac Cathan "son of Cathan," from Celt. cathan, lit. "warrior," from cath "battle."

Enoch:
male proper name, in O.T. eldest son of Cain, father of Methuselah, from Heb. Hanokh, lit. "dedicated, consecrated," from hanakh "he dedicated," whence also Hanukkah.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Now I think there's Eric in Nebraska called in. Are you there, Eric? Hello.

Eric: Yes, I am. Alan?

Alan: Go ahead.

Eric: Alan, just a question a little bit off topic tonight, but I think you're the person who could help me. I've been trying to figure out how the very first kings got the job as being a king or the first ruler, I mean going back further back than the Egyptian times when they had Ra going back further than Sumeria. How did it all start where there was that key leadership position and do you have any idea about how that might have come about?

Alan: The general theory they give in the universities is that an opposing tribe clash at certain times over food in times of scarcity and the biggest man in fact would be chosen to be a leader. He's more intimidating et cetera and during his little reign during the time of strife he would be looked up to for advice et cetera, and then, once the little skirmish was over, he got accustomed to having a little bit more than the rest and got accustomed to having all the goodies. That's what they claim anyway. However, there's an occultic side behind it as well because king comes from Cane, Kain and Kingu. It all comes from the same root word including Cane, also used to be the term for a ruler. The ruler that you use in school, it was made of cane you see, it was a measurement, so it goes back to a much ancient system of builders, again to do with measurement, rulership. You measure by using the ruler and you have a cane. It became king and Kingu. Tsar is another term that they used in the Middle East for it as well. It's an occultic language in fact going down through the millennia that still carries on today, which doesn't surprise me since you look at the same emblems that they use in the nobility of Europe, the same emblems that were used in coats of arms thousands of years ago. They try and say it was all brought up during the Middle Ages and they invented the coats of arms, but that's so far from the truth it's laughable. They've found coins from around 800 BC when coins came in with coats of arms of the particular kings and they were always predators. It's always a lion or an eagle or something like that because they were the predators. So I don't know if that helps you or not.

Eric: But we are going back in pre-Egyptian times because the straw man theory wouldn't account for the intellect of the leader. It would only account for their strength and no one challenging them, but there had to be power.

Alan: Even in those days they didn't need too much intellect. Physical strength was intimidating and once you had the leaders – and this is the key to all in history. Once you had the leaders, the big men in all the big tribes intermarrying with their daughters et cetera, then the whole process of inbreeding started and the priesthoods which were always there. In the old days it was shamans in one form or another that would keep track of who was breeding with who, until you get to the stage of Sumer and then later Egypt where they actually married their own sisters, they keep this particular quality in the family.

Eric: Okay. Thank you very much.

Alan: Okay. I mean it's tremendously interesting and even the kings and queens they've dug up from Sumer are very interesting because we find that they wore wigs of the people they ruled over, the black-haired wigs, but they themselves were blond or red-haired. That's an interesting little fact. If you go into the Egyptian tombs and look at even the aristocracy around the pharaohs, they were often painted with green or blue eyes and they found the black woven wigs made by the local people that they wore during the day when they were showing themselves to the public. There's a thing here that goes back even into Aryan times to do with the ancient blond people, almost albino that swept through areas of the northern parts of the Middle East and then eventually into India. They were very proud of being ultra white, almost albino and that's where the whole concept of the Aryan race came from. Hitler was fascinated by that, as was Goering and a few other ones and Himmler. They tried to trace the roots back to what they thought was the Aryan race, a people who were highly skilled in war, very aggressive, almost merciless in fact; and in the Old Testament you'll find they called them "Hurrians" at one point. In Greek they called them the 'troglodytes," those who lived within caves, within mountains, very pale skin; and the supposed tribe of Manasseh interbred with them to the north and became very warlike and fierce and even turned upon the people of Israel according to their legends.

We’ll never know how much is truth or fiction or partly truth or myth. We do know that there were definitely a race of people who ruled over other peoples but did not interbred with the ones they ruled over, much the same as the European royalty. They never marry into the ordinary stock which they rule over. They only marry each other; and from the most ancient times up until really the 1600’s, we don't realize that in Europe when a king married a foreign queen, often the whole country was put down as her dowry and millions of people were handed over as property and all the land when they got together. That's what really happened, not so long ago, not so very long ago at all. Here we find, lo and behold, Professor Carroll Quigley in his book "The Anglo-American Establishment" telling us that the next system that's already coming in (it's already here) is a regurgitation of the feudal system with the top CEOs being the feudal overlords.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Matrix and Matrix 2 and 3
Matrix (all of them) self-evident to the few, a good fast entertainment for the general population, and the real meaning of who's who for a very, very, small minority.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The look and manner of Smith and his fellow Agents seem to be drawn from American pop culture. One influence appears to be the popular image of federal law enforcement agents as ruthlessly efficient automata who carry out their duties with cold precision and General American accents.

All Agents are Caucasian males (with a minor exception of female Agent Pace from the Matrix Online game), which also provides a dynamic compared to the majority population of Zion, containing many diverse cultures and walks of life. Agents wear dark sunglasses with corners or smooth angles. The Agents show blandness and an apathy for the human race, with the exception of Smith's obsession with destroying Neo and his general hatred of humans.

Other Agents have names like Brown, Johnson, and Thompson: common, innocuous, Anglo-Saxon names. It was mentioned in the Philosopher Commentary on the DVD collection that the names of Smith, Brown, and Johnson may be endemic to the system itself, demonstrating a very 'robotic' mindset on the part of the Machines.

In addition, the name "Smith" is explicitly attributed (as "IS 5416" on the license plate of Smith's car in The Matrix Reloaded) to Isaiah 54:16 in the Old Testament:

“"Behold, I have created the Smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy."”

The license plate also bears the state slogan "New South Wales - Towards 2000" which is also symbolic of the Matrix being a recreation of "the pinnacle of (human) civilization" at the turn of the millennium.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Preston wrote:Hey Winston...in regards to your sig pic

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The license plate also bears the state slogan "New South Wales - Towards 2000" which is also symbolic of the Matrix being a recreation of "the pinnacle of (human) civilization" at the turn of the millennium.

splinters wrote:The fabian society have used at times a tortoise or turtle as one of their symbols.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who is a member of the Fabian Society

The Fabians originally were an elite group of intellectuals who formed a semi-secret society for the purpose of bringing socialism to the world. Whereas Communists wanted to establish socialism quickly through violence and revolution, the Fabians preferred to do it slowly through propaganda and legislation. The word socialism was not to be used. Instead, they would speak of benefits for the people such as welfare, medical care, higher wages, and better working conditions. In this way, they planned to accomplish their objective without bloodshed and even without serious opposition. They scorned the Communists, not because they disliked their goals, but because they disagreed with their methods. To emphasize the importance of gradualism, they adopted the turtle as the symbol of their movement. The three most prominent leaders in the early days were Sidney and Beatrice Webb and George Bernard Shaw. [2] A stained-glass window from the Beatrice Webb House in Surrey, England is especially enlightening. Across the top appears the last line from Omar Khayyam:

Dear love, couldst thou and I with fate conspire
To grasp this sorry scheme of things entire,
Would we not shatter it to bits, and then
Remould it nearer to the heart's desire!

10 Downing Street
23 October 1997


Dear Isaiah

I very much enjoyed your interview with Steven Lukes in Prospect this month. I hope you don’t mind me following up with a letter asking your thoughts.

The brief discussion in the interview of the relationship between your two concepts of liberty is, I think, illuminating. The limitations of negative liberty are what have motivated generations of people to work for positive liberty, whatever its depradations [sic] in the Soviet model. That determination to go beyond laissez-faire continues to motivate people today. And it is in that context that I would be interested in your views on the future of the Left.

You seem to be saying in the interview that because traditional socialism no longer exists, there is no Left. But surely the Left over the last 200 years has been based on a value system, predating the Soviet model and living on beyond it. As you say, the origins of the Left lie in opposition to arbitrary authority, intolerance and hierarchy. The values remain as strong as ever, but no longer have a ready made vehicle to take them forward. That seems to me to be today’s challenge. Political economy has been transformed over the last 25 years, and it is here that there is a great deal of work to be done. But there remains action, too, to devolve political power and to build a more egalitarian community.

So reconstruction, yes, but the end no!

I would be interested in your further views on the current situation, its historical place and significance, and the prospects for renewal.

All good wishes.

yours ever

Tony Blair

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Preston wrote:The Fabians don't like communism...check out Tony Blair's letter to Isaiah Berlin

A word so frequently met with in histories of the medieval Churches of Ireland and Scotland, and so variously understood and applied, that a well-informed writer (Reeves) describes it as the best-abused word in Scotic church-history. The etymology of the term, the persons designated by it, their origin, their doctrines, the rule or rules under which they lived, the limits of their authority and privileges have all been matters of controversy; and on these questions much learning and ability has been shown, and not a little partizan zeal. In the Irish language the word was written Ceile-De, meaning companion, or even spouse, of God, with the Latin equivalent in the plural, Colidei, anglicized into Culdees; in Scotland it was often written Kelidei. All admit that, in the beginning at all events, the Culdees were separated from the mass of the faithful, that their lives were devoted to religion, and that they lived in community. But the Scotch writers, unwilling to trace the name to an Irish source, prefer to derive it from "cultores Dei", worshippers of God, or from cuil, a shelter, or from kil, a church. The Irish derivation, however, is the easiest and the most natural, and the one now generally accepted. From Ceile-De the transition is easy to Colideus and Culdee; and in the Irish annals the epithet Ceile-De is appropriately given to St. John, one of the twelve Apostles, to a missioner from abroad whose coming to Ireland is recorded in the Four Masters at the year 806, and to Aengus (q.v.), the well-known monk and author of Tallaght, whose penances and mortifications, whose humility, piety, and religious zeal, would specially mark him out as the companion of God.

As to the origin of the word, Reeves might well remark in his notes on Columba's Life, "Culdee is the most abused term in Scotic church history." As the Ceile De, the Four Masters mentions them in 806. Todd writes of them thus--"The earliest Christian missionaries found the native religion extinct, and themselves took the name of Culdees from inhabiting the Druids' empty cells." Jamieson styles them Culdees or Keldees, Kyldees, Kylledei. O'Brien has them the Irish Ceile De, servant of God. Another call them Clann Dia, Children of God. Barber considered them Mithraists.

Higgins, in Celtic Druids, will have Culdees only changed Druids, and regarded the Irish hereditary Abbots of Iona, the Coarbs or Curbs, as simply Corybantes. Latin writers knew them as Colidei or God-worshippers. Bishop Nicholson thought them Cool Dubh, from their black hoods. As C and G are commutable letters in Irish, we have Giolla De, Servant of God. The word Culdee was used by Boece in 1526. Dr. Reeves, in the Irish Academy, calls the Servus Dei by the Celtic Celi-Dé, and notes the name Ceile-n-De applied to the Sligo Friars in the Four Masters, 1595. Monks were reputed Keledei in the thirteenth century. Brockham's Lexicon finds regulars and seculars called so in the ninth century.

The Four Masters record that "Maenach, a Celae-Dé, came across the sea westward to establish laws in Ireland." In the poem of Moelruein, it is the Rule of the Celae-n-dé. The Keledei of Scotland, according to Dr. Reeves, had the same discipline as the Irish Colidei. One Collideus of the Armagh church died in 1574. One Celi-dé of Clonmacnois, dying in 1059, left several sons, who became Abbots after him.

Quibus_Licet wrote:There's some info on the Culdee in Naudon - The Secret History of Freemasonry - Its Origins and Connection to the Knights Templar:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Naudon's book is the best historical study on the veracity of the legends about the ultimate origins of Freemasonry. He basically says the transmission is this: Roman collegia > Culdees > Benedictine monks > monastic associations > brotherhoods > guilds

There's a small tidbit you posted from the Catholic encyclopedia that said: "in the Irish annals the epithet Ceile-De is appropriately given to St. John ..."

That's an important observation for the fact that St. John is basically the Patron Saint of Freemasonry. One should familiarize themselves with the research here, and then follow some leads, along these lines.

A Brief History of the Culdians

The old Culdians, or Culdees as they were first known, were part of the British or Keltic Christian community, prior to its romanisation under Augustine, after which it suffered severely through persecution and suppression.  However, it survived to a greater or lesser degree until the great persecutions of the late Middle Ages, when the flame was finally extinguished, only a few sparks surviving to kindle the present revival.

It was thought that because of its obviously ancient roots the word 'Culdian' was derived from "Chaldean" through 'Culdee'.  This is not so; 'Culdian' is derived from 'Kailedy' through 'Culdee'.  The word 'Kailedy' (or Kailedi) originated with the early Christians who came to Britain in 37AD led by Joseph of Arimathea and means 'wise strangers'. However, it should be noted that the Keltic word 'Culdee' could also be translated as 'Servant of God'.

The Old Culdians were never numerous after the original persecutions and were loosely organised.  The fact that they were itinerant craftsmen helped considerably as they could maintain a considerable degree of individual freedom.  However, during the latter part of the thirteenth century a John Culdy of Bardsea founded a more settled community in Scotland.  It has been assumed that this John Culdy founded the Culdians and that they derived their name from him.  But the fact is that John Culdy was an assumed name, derived from 'Culdee', and was a name used by his successors as well.

The last head of the Old Culdians was Nathaniel Smith, martyred at the beginning of the seventeenth century and with his death the Old Culdians ceased to exist in a cohesive form, though steps were taken to preserve the secret spiritual lore known as Culdicraft.

The Culdians were revived in New Zealand in 1980,  following a metaphysical revelatory experience by a group of people near Thames on the Coromandel Peninsula. It was made clear to them that while the revived Culdians would carry on the basic tenets of the Culdee Church.  There is a natural affinity between the Culdees of old and the modern Culdians and what may be termed the 'lost lore' is gradually being bought to light.  Culdians can be regarded as the successors of the ancient Culdees and there is a strong Keltic flavour to their work and symbology.