Jarosław Kubacki,Evangelical Monthly, Wolnomulary of Poland
Meeting in Leszno
It was a Sunday afternoon in 1992. W Parish Congregation Home Evangelical-Reformed on Warsaw Lesznie[and]We just ran out of pious coffee. I was sitting in a deserted hall in my favourite place other the entrance erstwhile 2 elegantly dressed gentlemen knocked on the door. As it turned out, they were curious in the image of the eye in the triangle placed in the tympanon of the parish building which they interpreted (and wrongly) as a Masonic symbol. Both were masons looking for traces of the erstwhile free-molar presence in Warsaw. I told them that, although the symbol to which they pointed was most likely not a free-molar prowess, they came to the right place, due to the fact that it was in the area of the evangelical-reformed congregation, specifically in the palace of Dziański, that the Masonic lodge was operating in the 18th century. The conversation didn't last long. erstwhile they said good-bye, they asked me if I'd be curious in slow-sea work. For my enthusiastic “yes” they left me a card of 1 of the most celebrated Polish masons, prof. Tadeusz Cegielski, then a doctor of history. In this way my life adventure with masonry began, although it was inactive six years before I crossed the threshold of the Ledejsk Honourable Lodge of St. Andrew, working under the auspices of the large East of the Netherlands, to be accepted into a free-mural fraternity. I was already a theologian at the time and was preparing for pastorial service in 1 of the Dutch Reformed Tradition Churches. erstwhile I gave my exam sermon in Utrecht a fewer months later, I invited the brothers from my lodge to the service, who appeared rather numerous, and after the service they took me and my fiancée at the time with dinner.
The fact that my first gathering with the Masonry took place virtually on church grounds gave a speech for the future. For many more years, I have bonded more and more Masonic work with ecclesiastical belongings, theology, ministry, and pastoral activities, and I have never felt alone in this, and I have never truly seen it as anything special. Not only due to the fact that I knew from household stories that respective of my ancestors did precisely the same thing, but above all due to the fact that I met many people with a akin dual identity and belonging both in the Masonry and in the Church. That is what I would like to devote my consideration to..
We're just
At 1 time, 1 of the Ledese lords asked her member, who was at the same time pastor of the French-speaking parish reformed in Leiden, to give a “board” (in the Masonic jargon “prelection” or “talk”) on his Church and freemasonry. This brother, known to the wider group under the comic nickname “Corktrain”, because, as a native Frenchman, he was entrusted with the care of the wine cellar, which he played with the undisclosed pleasance and unquestionable cognition of the subject, before about an hr and a half he divorced over the past and the present day of the Francophonic evangelicals in the Netherlands. Finally, he was asked about the second part of the subject. His answer gave me much to think: “You are asking about the relation between the Church and the Masonry?” he replied with his charming accent, “Well, this relation is that I am here.”
Christian-Masonian references can be given hours of reading and writing fathom articles. It is worth to look at authoritative documents, e.g. the position of the Evangelical Church of Germany on the Freemasonry of 1973, the study of the Synodal Commission of the Church of England of 1986, or this highly interesting collection of historical papers on the link between freemasonry and Anglicanism[ii]. Reading is an instructive reading. besides due to the fact that much can be learned from it about what is truly crucial to the Churches of different traditions, what they fear, what doubts they have, etc. Is it not crucial that, while representatives of the widely understood Catholic tradition express opinions about the alleged "mason imagination of God" and its compatibility with Christianity, the evangelists are mainly afraid about whether the Masonic perfect of moral perfection is not contrary to the imagination of salvation simply by grace? It is hard to anticipate a better introduction to the basic message of Catholicism and Protestantism. However, specified consideration is not my goal. In fact, it seems to me that, as with LGBTQ Christians or women who service the Word and the Sacrament, it is not theological analyses and authoritative papers that should be the starting point for conversation, but the designation of this undeniable fact that we are, we exist, we act. And whether anyone likes it or not, this fact must simply be accepted. Take a fast look at the past of Royal Art[iii]. The authoritative author of the Constitution of Wolnomulars, widely known by his name as Anderson's Constitution, was Presbyterian pastor James Anderson (1680-1739). The past of early freedom besides relates to the name of his friend, Rev. Jan Teofil Desaguliers (1683-1744), who was undoubtedly co-author of these Constitutions (Anderson many researchers consider as a figureholder)[iv]. Desaguliers came from a Huguenot household who emigrated to England erstwhile he was a child. After college, he was ordained priest of the Church of England. While these 2 figures are known to a wider audience, many may be amazed to learn that it was due to another Evangelical pastor, Friderist Desmond, the large East of France in 1877 that he decided to remove from the rituals the appeal to the large Architect of the Universe and remove from the bed of the Bible (Desmons in any case presided over the commission that made the proposal)[v]. To belong to the fraternity of countless lay members, clergymen and bishops of the Church of England and another Anglican Churches or Lutheran Church of Sweden, it is not worth writing, for these are facts commonly known. On the another hand, I do not think I can ignore the name of the Polish evangelical theologian and free-muralist, Fr.[vi], which was not only 1 of the most prominent symbolists utilized in the masonry and theorists of the symbol as such, but in my opinion besides the top Polish evangelical theologian and philosopher of religion of his times. In Serini's thought, spiritual and theological reflections intertwined with reflections resulting from Masonic practice. I am convinced that in his individual the Polish evangelical spiritual thought is undoubtedly indebted to the Royal Art, while the Royal Art undoubtedly owes much to the Evangelical spiritual thought.
A individual Vision
Even if it inactive should be explained to those who are not acquainted with the phenomenon of masonry, for anyone who has learned more about freemulation, it is apparent that the look at the Royal Art is precisely as many as the Masons. Of course, they can be grouped differently, given the alleged "regularity"[vii], the interrelationship between Masonic organizations, their ideological face, or the engravings they use, but it does not change the fact that each freemason represents his own unique approach, his own knowing of what he actually does in the box, what is the meaning and intent of it. The same applies to these considerations. This is my individual vision, so it may be worth giving any answers to the question of what its specificity is.
First of all, it is simply a imagination of a Mason who has not been active in Royal Art for respective years. I decided to retreat from my lodge work after respective years of active membership, due to the fact that I concluded that in the current phase of my life, the amount of energy, attention and time it costs me to diligently grow masonry is disproportionate to the inspiration that freemulation gives me. In short, I was under the impression that present “the skin is not worth the expedition.” However, I did not become a "former mason" due to the fact that I share the view that this is fundamentally impossible. Real initiation, and masonry is simply a fraternity, you can't undo it: just as you can't hide the once-disclosed secret again. The Masonic organization can be performed at any time and no 1 will be repugnant about it. Tales of expected revenge, or even murder, masonic must be put between fairy tales. However, what happened to man and in man at the minute of the passage of the box threshold, as well as during each subsequent initiation, is indeed irreversible. I do not want to explain why this is the case, due to the fact that it would require more reflection in the field of psychology and spirituality. So I will stay only at the conclusion that in my opinion this is how it works, and that's why, although I haven't been freelancing for respective years and I'm not a associate of any Masonic organization, I inactive consider myself an adept of Royal Art.
My view of masonry has developed in the circumstantial conditions of Dutch freemasonry. This is age-freedom (slightly younger than British), diverse (I was successively a associate of 3 different Masonic organizations), located at the intersection of at least 3 large freemural traditions (British, French and German) and, last but not least, like the full Dutch culture, characterized by a reasonably liberal approach to rules and regulations. The Masons here, for example, have a very loose and whatever mocking attitude to mentors and anything imperial of both the United large Lodge of England and the French large East. Also, the division into male and mixed masonry can be treated very freely in practice. Against authoritative restrictions, brothers from the “regular” (as defined by the “London”) of the large East of the Netherlands visit the “irregular” workshops of the Order of Le Droit Humain or the large Lodge of Mixed Masonry. They take part in the work there, and erstwhile it is essential they do not hesitate to execute ritual functions. The large East turns a blind eye. Another feature of Dutch masonry is its small mysterious character. The rituals do not lie on the street, of course (although on the net they can be found without a problem) but, for example, no 1 makes a peculiar secret of his belonging to the fraternity. The lodges are located in buildings recognized as such, frequently of considerable historical value, which are regularly admitted by curious visitors. Finally, the last feature of the Dutch approach to Royal Art, to which I would like to draw attention, due to the fact that it undoubtedly affects the course of these considerations, is the perception of masonry primarily, if not exclusively, in terms of method. In the Dutch popular opinion, the essence of Royal Art is not in the sphere of ideology, but contains in a circumstantial way the transmission of content, namely in the alleged allusion method on which rituals are based. Even if we as masons feel like we are followers of certain ideals, we have at the same time a very strong awareness that these are actually not specifically Masonic ideals. In fact, we draw them not so much from any peculiar own heritage, but from different, much older traditions. Moreover, the Masonic symbols utilized in the works are besides viewed as loans. Among the experts of the subject there is simply a belief that the word “mason symbol” is at least problematic. Each symbol utilized in the Royal Art, headed by a celebrated circus and a miner, has a pedigree far further than the roots of the Royal Art itself.. The circumstantial Masonic is how we usage these symbols, and above all how they open fresh perspectives to us and lead to change in ourselves. Transformations, which are not so much intended to make us "better" people (Dutch Masons, unlike their British brothers, usually respond allergicly to any moralizing), alternatively people more human, more aware of their abilities and limitations, and wiser to exploit them in life. specified an approach causes me to proceed to be critical of anyone who tries to convince me that there is something like ideology or even Masonic doctrine. From the very beginning, I was simply taught that in fact, Masonic is just playing with very circumstantial blocks, no of which is strictly Masonic provenance. The content of this game is primarily an individual decision of each mason, and to a lesser degree a question of the nature of the Masonic organization (obedition). What is crucial in this game is that it should, as the Dutch say, "onder de huid gaan" (meaning "inside the skin"), i.e. someway penetrate us, decision any strings within us that we did not even anticipate to exist. Who believes that having fun by nature is only something superficial, which makes it hard to anticipate specified profound action from her, should scope for the outstanding book Johann Huzingi ‘Homo ludens’[viii] Dutch theologian, Dominican Edward Schillebeeckx, even planned in his last book on the human request to have fun to base the concept of sacrament. I personally experienced the Masonic rituals that no uncertainty shook me and penetrated me to the bone. However, I remember those that, at least to the degree that I am able to measure it at this point, left no trace of myself. The peculiar accumulation of the second in a comparatively short period of time provided me with the eventual impulse to abandon active free-sea activities.
A Christian in a Lodge
Since I have already presented my “mason papers”, it is time to decision on to the fundamental subject of the attitude of Christian religion to Masonic activity. I'll start with anecdote again. This happened already in the end of the period of my active “murdering” and at the same time after a deep spiritual breakthrough, which caused me to abandon continental Protestantism for a more Catholic approach to religion and found my place in the Anglican tradition. After a longer break, I returned to the “school bench” and undertook complementary studies at the Archbishop of the Theological Seminary of the Old Catholic Church (English are in full communion with ancient Catholics) . My lecturer in liturgy was Father Koenraad Ouwens. due to the fact that I was fresh in this environment, I knew small about our lecturers. Therefore, it was besides not known to me what it turned out that almost everyone in the seminary knew, namely that he is besides a freemulator. 1 evening we performed liturgical exercises in the beautiful Old Catholic church in The Hague. While waiting for my turn, I watched my colleagues, practicing the Eucharist, and above all instructing them to Koenraad. Something in his attitude, in the way he did liturgical gestures, made me think of freemulation. At any point, the association became so strong that after finishing the class, I asked him if he was 1 of us. The answer was yes, which I immediately used, inviting him to my box “Pentagram” to deliver ‘board“ symbolism. Although the “Pentagram” operates under the aegis of the large Lodge of Mixed Masonry in the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and Dr. Ouwens was part of a workshop working within the (male) large East (which I myself left a fewer years earlier), not maintaining authoritative ritual relations with mixed obeditions, recognizing them as “irregular”, only the aforementioned nonchalance with which the Dutch treat specified rules can be attributed to the fact that the invitation was accepted. Back then, members of the “Pentagram” represented a wide scope of worldview attitudes, but fewer of them identified themselves with church Christianity. So you can imagine my slight embarrassment erstwhile he appeared in an arranged evening in a... collared shirt, after which he carelessly stated that his late father utilized to go to his lodge in an officer's uniform, so he decided to wear a dress indicating clearly what he did in everyday life.. Then he gave 1 of the best ‘board“ symbolism I've never heard of. Even the top anticlericals in the lodge after it was finished, they found it essential to continue. Looking at this event from the position of my full Masonic experience, I sometimes ask myself why I was actually embarrassed. In the tens of beds of respective different Masonic obeditions, many of which were considered in any case highly anti-cleric, and in the eyes of any I have never hidden my spiritual beliefs or the fact that I am a theologian and pastor. It's been reacted in different ways, but I can't describe any reaction as definitely negative. Even at the time erstwhile I participated in the establishment of the first Belgian-Dutch lodge, operating under the auspices of the Order of Le Droit Humain, Emergo, in Zealand, for the first time in contact with them for a reason who were considered hard-headed anti-clericists, and sometimes even militant atheists, brothers and sisters from across the confederate border, I never met them with aversion. Moreover, I was elected as talker of this lodge by the joint voices of the Belgians and the Dutch, replacing Belgian brother, who was an active activist of the free-thinking organization. Greater signs of trust towards the yet unquestionable “glass” are hard to imagine in the Masonic workshop, for the talker is, as it is termed, “the sum of the box”[ix]. I worked in Emergo for a year, performing this function with large pleasure, and I left only due to the fact that I was tired of long commutes.
Does this mean that I consider the problem of the common relation between Christianity and free-mealing to be apparent? And yes and no. Yes, due to the fact that questions on this subject very frequently come from people with very fundamentalist views (I am referring to both spiritual and anti-religious fundamentalists), who only seemingly ask questions, due to the fact that in fact they already have a ready answer, sending into space, if not straight in the depths of hell, Christian freemulators. I'm not going to argue with these people. As I pointed out at the outset, any dialog on this subject must, in my view, have the unconditional acceptance of the fact that we simply exist, and the designation of the fact that what we do is sincere and convinced that at least in our lives freedom and Christianity can be joined together. This belief may or may not be right, but in rule I do not let anyone to question the sincerity of the intentions that lay at the foundation of my decision to become a free-mulator and push myself into positions in which I would gotta prove that I am not a camel.
This does not change the fact that in my sense there is clearly noticeable tension between free-molarism and Christianity, especially Christian orthodoxy. This is due to many factors. According to my approach to Royal Art, which I described above, I will start with symbols. Many Masonic symbols come from traditions which Christian orthodoxs consider at least suspicious: gnosy, hermetism, alchemy, rose cross, deism. Here, however, something must be said, which barely reaches the head of a feeding belief that there is 1 single truth, which must, of course, be "my own." The symbols are by nature ambiguous. The unambiguous symbol ceases to be a symbol, becomes a sign (of course there are besides theories of the symbol and of the sign that are precisely the other – the symbol is unambiguous and the sign has many meanings). The usage of a symbol derived from a peculiar tradition does not mean affirmation of this meaning, which has been established in this tradition and considered to be only or at least leading. For example, this eye in a triangle, from which everything started, at least in my case. The triangle is simply a trinitarian symbol, but in the 18th century, erstwhile the eye went to the bed, the trinitarian explanation mostly gave way to the deistic explanation (the Divine Architect looking from above human action). Many Masons would respond with surprise present to the trinitary explanation of the eye, while many Christians would feel much discomfort by proceeding a deistic interpretation. Masonic fun is based on a multiplicity of symbols. What unites freemulators is the fact that they usage the same symbols, however, giving them many different meanings. Thus, the discovery in the box of the symbol of gnostic or rose cross prowess does not mean that the Masons working there are gnostic or rose Crossers (although they may be). Similarly, ubiquity in the symbolism of Masonic triangles and triads truly does not mean that all mason believes in God in the Holy Trinity, although they exist, especially in the Anglo-Saxon tradition, specified "higher degrees" of Royal Art, in which at least basic openness to the content contained in the Trinitary dogma is required from the initiated.
Although each mason has an inalienable right to his own interpretations, of course there is something like a certain spiritual climate that prevails within a given Masonic tradition. I have already mentioned anti-clerical obeditions, alongside them there are obeditions and individual lodges, in which the speech is given by deism, theosophy, alchemy, but besides Christianity (example is the alleged Swedish Ryt). The common mistake of free-multure critics is that they extrapolate this spiritual climate to all masonry. This is why we encounter revelations erstwhile and for all, according to which the masonry "really" would be a form of theosophy, deism or even Satanism. However, it is always pars pro toto: an untrained referencing of something that may be actual in relation to a peculiar current in free-multure to the full Royal Art.
Another charge that is repeatedly heard is that of spiritual eclecticism. Apparently, the mason must admit the equality of all religions and worldviews, while the masonry is their conjuncture Indeed, there are specified interpretations, specified as the explanation of successive degrees of introduction in the Scots Ritual Old and Recognized by the Belgian spiritual student and liberal politician Eugeniusz Goblet d’Alviella (1846-1925), according to which each of these degrees constitutes an introduction into a different spiritual tradition, by which individual who reaches a degree of 33 is in a sense a believer of all religions at once. .. True, I left the active free-mulation practice just before I reached grade 30. , and so from my own experience I can only talk of the preceding steps, but I believe that this experience entitles me to express my opinion. With all due respect for the imagination of a learned brother, I can say that I personally did not experience the introduction of this ritual in the next steps. It was clear to me that they were any kind of encounter with the spiritual content of different religions, or rather, strictly speaking, with how they received and understood these contents of the eighteenth-/nineteenth-century Scots Ritual creators, but it did not persuade me to neither value them nor to treat myself as their followers. My favourite and most profoundly experienced was the evangelical degree 18. – Cavalry of the Rosary – the only ritual, a regular participation in which I sometimes lack. In the Netherlands, this has been a separate step for many decades under another Masonic organization as the 7th and originally highest in the alleged French Rhythm . The circumstantial form rooted in the climate of liberal Protestantism was given to him by an outstanding lawyer and freemulator, boy of the pastor, Johannes Hendrik Carpentier Alting (1864-1929). To this day, this degree can be obtained in both the French and the Scottish Old and the Recognized.
In writing about the importance of peculiar Masonic rituals from the point of view of a Christian, 1 cannot avoid yet another question: about the ratio of free-meal initiation to the basic and, in fact, the only initiation that Christianity knows, namely baptism. Does the Christian mason view free-mural rituals as any "complement" of the sacrament? Of course, I cannot talk for everyone, but I can say that I have never seen it that way myself. There is no request for baptism and, indeed, there is no way to “complete”. In my opinion, for example, there is no confirmation rite, although this is sometimes the case. All the more reason why they're not Masonic initiations. However, there are no uncertainty moments in rituals introducing into the various stages of Royal Art, which provided an chance for me to relive – this time already consciously – certain aspects of the sacrament of Holy Baptism. Luther is told that in hard times he utilized to compose “I am baptized” on the wall. This encouraged him. I think that for a Mason professing Christianity, any free-mural rites can service as just specified a “print on the wall”. Sometimes it seems to me that the sacrament of Holy Baptism can be compared to a gift that we receive at any point, and then we spend our full life unpacking it. I have no uncertainty that working in the lodge made it easier for me to unpack.
With the unquestionable right to specified interpretation, however, the Christian freemulator must admit that his professed or unreligious brothers and sisters will interpret the same rites differently... The lodge is simply a place where we should practice treating others with respect, even if they are far from our own, but is not a place where ideological propaganda can be practiced, let alone imposing our own views. The Masons effort to talk to each another without a polemic, not question the beliefs of their brothers and sisters (which may sometimes lead to harmful same - censorship). However, just as no 1 can claim to a freemural to come to the work of a lodge in a collar, no 1 can make him a charge of witnessing about Christ by his own example. I know from experience that specified an attitude, even if it has been implemented in specified an imperfect way as in my case, usually creates a kind curiosity for the brothers and sisters, which in turn leads to requests for the preparation and transportation of a spiritual “board”.
What, then, was the main origin of tension between religion and Masonic commitment? In retrospect, it seems to me that in my case it was not so much Christianity as my reformed Protestantism, and especially my typically Protestant attachment to verbal transmission and conviction of its unlimited power of action. Of course, there are besides very strong verbally Masonic rituals, just as there are rituals spoken to no little than the average evangelical-reformed service. However, in my reception the masonry emphasizes what is outside- and oververbal, which cannot be put into words, but which is someway expressed by gesture, symbol, ritual action. I would like to mention to the online lecture by Fr. Karol Serini on the symbol in free culture[x]. Over time, I experienced a gradual decline in the request for a verbal lecture, coupled with an increase in the request for nonverbal transmission – both in Masonic rituals and in church life. In the Church, I discovered the meaning of sacramental life. No substance how unusual and suspicious this would not sound in the ears of many Catholics, masonry has helped me discover Catholic Christianity. Sometimes I like to talk about the parish priest of the Anglican parish in Haarlem, Fr Brian Richards, that he “made me” from a liberal Protestant to a dedicated Anglo-Catholic, but I never had any uncertainty that my Masonic engagement helped him greatly.
Instead of conclusions
Since the dawn of the masonry, triumphs have celebrated the “discovery” of the ex-masons. I hope that not only due to the fact that I avoid calling myself "former", what I wrote is different from their revelation. possibly that is what disappoints some. If so, so be it. I can't aid reasoning that my departure from active Masonic activity actually speaks more about me in any period of life and about my individual needs than about Royal Art. On the another hand, I am reminded of the presumption made in the conversation with me, which took place shortly after the first gathering in Leszno, by Prof. Dr. Tadeusz Cegielski. At the time, he said that possibly freedom was the reason why the interest of Protestant clergy was so intense that it filled in their lives a spiritual gap resulting from the liturgical poorness of their Churches. Although, for example, with respect to the Anglicans, it is truly hard to talk of "liturgical poverty" (although it must be admitted that the 18th century was not a period of peculiar prosperity of liturgical life), it is worth considering this thesis at least. If this is true, it is possible that it is the sacramental and liturgical wealth of the Anglican tradition, which has become my tradition, that I do not feel ritual deficits, and so and the request to return to the lodge. Knowing from experience that it is impossible to be a prophet not only in your own country, but besides in relation to your own life, I do not intend to prejudge anything. On the another hand, I consider it a kind of moral work to share with others my experience of being a Christian and a freelour. Royal Art is not a religion, it is not to save anyone. Personally, I besides have serious doubts, which I have expressed above, whether its aim is, for example, to make people better. But 1 thing is certain: in my life, religion and freedom have intertwined, and so it will most likely stay in any sense, regardless of the further destiny of my Masonic activity. Jarosław R. Kubacki (1971-2025) is simply a theologian, pastor of the ecumenical base community in the Netherlands, writer and blogger. Since 2012 he has besides co-ordinated the activities of the Polish Episcopal Community, “A group of people who pray together, celebrate the Eucharist and effort to live their religion all day, utilizing the rich heritage of Anglicanism, talk to each another and meet regularly at retreats to “reveal to God in holiness”. He studied at the Christian Theological Academy, the University of Theological Reformed Churches in Kampen, Netherlands, and theological seminars of the Remonstrants Church and the Old Catholic Church. He worked as an assistant at Leiden University's Theological Department. He is simply a associate of the Episcopal parish of All Saints in Waterloo, Belgium.
[and] The street, where there is simply a complex of buildings of the Evangelical-Reformed Parish in Warsaw, was called “Leszno” before the Second planet War, after the war in the times of the Polish People's Republic, was renamed “Świerczewski Street” and is now called “alleys” SolidarityIt’s okay. ”
[ii] See http://Englishhistory.org/misc/freemasonry (23.09.2013).
[iii] About the past of free music in Polish in: Karol Wojciechowski, The conflict of Royal Art. Treaty on Masonry and regularity, Wrocław 2011.
[iv] More about the Anderson Constitution in: Tadeusz Cegielski, The Book of the Constitution of 1723 and the origins of speculative freemasonry in England, Warsaw 2011.
[v] On this subject more in: Karol Wojciechowski, First to quit the large Builder, ‘Virtual Free East’ 03.06.2012, available online: http://volnomultwo.pl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=547&Itemid=28 (23.09.2013).
[vi] Read about Fr. prof. Karol Serinim in: Kamil Opalski, Karol Serini (1875-1931), ‘Ars Regia’ 1992, No. 1, pp. 100-101 and Paweł Matwiejczuk, Karol Serini, “Volunteer of Poland” 2013, No 56, pp. 22-29.
[vii] Read about “regularity” in: Kamil Racevicz, Typeologies of masonry, ‘Virtual Free East’ 24.10.2015, available online: http://volnomultwo.pl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=30 (23.09.2013).
[viii] See Johan Huzinga, Homo ludens. Fun as a Cultural SourceThu. Maria Kurecka and Witold Wirpsza, Aletheia, Warsaw 2007.
[ix] The talker is simply a associate of the College of Officers (management) A lodge that acts as the guardian of the Constitution and general provisions; its duties include, among others, the submission of motions to vote.
[x] See Karol Serini, Symbol in Free Mulling, Warsaw 1933 or in: “Ars Regia” 1992, no. 2, pp. 124-147; besides available online: http://www.sbc.org.pl/dlibra/plain-content?id=1033 (23.09.2013).
