Simcoe Masonic Lodge No. 79 – Bradford ON Canada
Image by antefixus21
The lodge was packed with a huge set of these type of pressed back chairs for its visitors
65 Church Street, Birmingham – 1908 (former Diocesan Lodge of the Girls’ Friendly Society)
Image by ell brown
Got these shots of 65 Church Street from the footbridge that goes over Great Charles Street Queensway (and links Ludgate Hill and Church Street by foot)
I don’t know much about this building but it might have been built in 1908, or it may date to the Victorian era.
On one search I found this …
65 Church Street provides grade A serviced office accommodation in central Birmingham, within a popular district and close to convenient local amenities. The building itself combines traditional Victorian exteriors with a fully refurbished interior that provides…
Another site says this:
Centrally located, period property currently being refurbished to include new lighting, carpeting & ceilings. There will also be a substantial re-design & refurbishment of the main reception. Available on flexible terms.
No. 65, the former Diocesan Lodge of the Girls’ Friendly Society, i.e. a women’s hostel, 1908 by Osborn, Pemberton & White. Warm orange-red brick with giant Ionic pilasters, appropriately feminine and domestic. Many small sashes, and oval windows under the swept-up, parapet. Large stone panel with the date split in the corners.
From Pevsner Architectural Guides: Birmingham by Andy Foster.
Question by jacarre: if one is a mormon what steps must be taken to lodge a formal complaint with the church leadership?
additionally what happens to the people who “vote” in opposition to a church leader being sustained?
Answer by gumby
I don’t know about the formal complaint. I would guess that if you have an issue with your bishop, you go to the stake president. BUT it better be a real issue and not a “I don’t like that he gave this calling to that person”.
As for the voting in opposition, I have seen it done once. The bishop said he would meet with those who had opposed sustaining after the meeting to discuss they’re reasons. In this particular case, the person that was supposed to be sustained still ended up with the calling. I have no idea why someone opposed them being called to that calling.
Give your answer to this question below!