|
Post by Two Ton Ted on Jan 12, 2005 21:06:09 GMT
In regard to the Royal Order of Scotland, would anyone know if the seat which is set aside for the King of Scots is ever occupied by anyone other than the King of Scots? Or has any of our modern day Kings ever occupied it since we became a United Kingdom?
Also, in the period when the Kings chair is not occupied, is anything placed on it, or over it, to indicate it's signiicance?
Kind regards to all, Two Ton Ted.
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Jan 12, 2005 21:24:41 GMT
Interesting Post TTT.
I would like to see the answers on this and hopefully a full explanation
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Jan 12, 2005 21:26:30 GMT
And who is regarded as the king of Scots in this present day ??
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Jan 12, 2005 22:09:59 GMT
Ted
The chair is never occupied it is resevered exclusively for The King of the Scots who is the hereditary Grand master of the Order. A Royal Robe & Crown and sometimes other emblems of Sovereignty are placed upon the chair.
Not even the Earl of Elgin would take this chair it is very much part of the whole Ritual. (He is the Present Grand master of the Order)
The Royal Order is considered to be a very 'pure' and 'ancient' Order. It is said as part of its ritual to of been first established On the Top of The Holy Mount Moriah, and then afterwards established at Icolmkill, Kilwinning. Where the King of Scotland sat as first Grand Master.
Anything else you want to know I'm afraid you will just have to join ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Two Ton Ted on Jan 12, 2005 23:04:01 GMT
Dear Brother MiddlePillar, I am so grateful that you told me what you have. I know that the Order is ancient, but not a lot more. If you yourself are a member of the Royal Order, you are indeed a lucky man. Thank you so much for your reply, I am really stunned by the reverence accorded to the King of Scots chair, as even though we are indeed a United Kingdom, not even a modern day King has ever occupied that chair, out of respect for an ancient King, and of equal rank. That is utterly amazing and so masonic. Thanks again helping me here.
Kind and fraternal regards, Two Ton Ted.
|
|
|
Post by Two Ton Ted on Jan 12, 2005 23:36:52 GMT
And who is regarded as the king of Scots in this present day ?? Hi Staffs, this question really deserves a thread of it's own. We have such a clouded history. I have researched a lot of history in this area. It is an extremly delicate and sensitive period of history and would affect most of the entire English speaking world. It may well be the case that Mary Queen of Scots had a much stronger claim to the Throne than Queen Elizabeth I, the daughter of Ann Bolyne, who was executed by the sword by King Henry VIII, her husband, as you are no doubt well aware. It was Queen Elizabeth who authorised the execution of Queen Mary by the axe and not the sword incidnetaly. But this is way off thread, but intensely emotive to many people perhaps. I do not know who the King of Scots is, according to history that is, however, that said, according to fact as we know it as such, and not wanting the entire world to descend upon my slender shoulders, we do not have a King of Scots, and we do not have a King of England or Wales or Ulster. To answer that part of your question. As the Prince of Wales is Heir Apparent, he will be the King of the British Isles and his dominions overseas, where those nations are still a dependency. In the meantime HM the Queen is the Ruler of us all and our Sovereign. But you know that ABC stuff Bro Staffs. But this question of yours needs air, oxygen. I am no scholar. I am just an ordindry guy. There must be many academics out there who can answer your question. Who is the King of Scots? I would like to know too, so that I can acknowledge him. As I am half a Scot and half an Englishman, but 51% a Scot when I am with the Malt. Kind regards, Two Ton Ted.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Jan 13, 2005 6:20:52 GMT
Having been born in Scotland, and a supporter of the Monarchy I suppose I could try to answer that question.
Simplistically, if a male succeeds Queen Elizabeth, be that Charles, or hopefully, (as far as I am personnally concerned), Prince William, then he will be King of Scotland and thus could, in Theory, occupy that Chair. The problem would arise if he was not a Freemason. Charles is not and is stated to be anti, perhaps William, who appears to be his own man and cast more in the mould of his late Mother than his father may join the Craft? There is of course a strong argument that a Stuart Claimant would be a more suitable incumbent of that position than one of Hanoverian descent but that is a separate argument and a bit off track for a Masonic Forum I feel.
|
|
|
Post by Two Ton Ted on Jan 13, 2005 9:45:30 GMT
Having been born in Scotland, and a supporter of the Monarchy I suppose I could try to answer that question. ..........but that is a separate argument and a bit off track for a Masonic Forum I feel. Yes we are going a tad away from matters masonic I agree. But I hope that is has answered Staffs question. If anyone has more info that would help either me or Staffs, as Staffs added a couple of questions, then I'd be pleased to recieve them on the quiet line each of us have on the Forum. I am grateful to Bro MiddlePillar, and to you Bro Taylorsman. Fraternal regards to all, Two Ton Ted.
|
|