Are the Masons Evil?

page: 21
17
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

Maybe because his own filosophy was identical with masonry and there was nothing new to learn?


No, his philosophy was not identical to Masonry, which is why he wanted to "reform" Masonry.

Crowley considered Freemasonry to be an initiatory school of the Aeon of Osiris. Crowley believed that the Aeon of Osiris had ended, and the Aeon of Horus had begun, so he wanted to turn Masonry into a vehicle for Thelema, the religious current that he himself founded based upon his ideas of the new aeon.




Reformed in to what?


A Thelemic fraternal institution.


how can a member come in to a lodge that is not even reconised by all masonic bodies and try to reform the institution?
There is no logic in what you are saying.


I didn't say it was logical, I just said that was what Crowley had intended. He was not aware that his Lodge was clandestine, and was surprised when he was not allowed admission into a regular Lodge in London.


Here is what you are saing, this is what I'm reading.
He went 3 times and because he saw he can't reform masonry he left it.


Crowley had a deep understanding of esoteric and occult doctrines and practice, but knew practically nothing about Masonic jurisprudence and regularity. He received the degrees of the Cerneau Rite from John Yarker in London, which both Crowley and Yarker believed were legitimate Scottish Rite degrees. However, they were irregular. Same thing for the Memphis-Mitzraim degrees he received from Yarker.

Crowley then moved to the USA, and spent some time in Detroit, with his student Charles Stansfeld Jones, who was a regular Blue Lodge Mason. Crowley and Jones wrote a letter to the Supreme Council 33° of the Northern Jurisdiction of the USA, demanding seats on the Supreme Council, which was of course ignored by the Supreme Council.

Crowley knew at that point that he could not join the regular Scottish Rite because his Blue Lodge affilaition was clandestine, so he had Jones apply for membership. Even though Jones was a regular Mason, his application to the Scottish Rite was rejected, probably because of the stunt he and Crowley had pulled trying to get seats on the Supreme Council.

Crowley then moved to NYC, where he wrote several anti-Masonic letters to Jones, telling Jones that he could not recognize "anyone higher in Masonry than ourselves", and that regular 32° and 33° Masons were "dirt", for the obvious reason that the regular Scottish Rite Masons did not recognize Crowley.

After that incident, Crowley completely abandoned Freemasonry, and focused on building up the O.T.O.




posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 09:02 AM
link   
ML not to be disrespectful, but you took the same oaths as I did.Ones where you state that you will not make or be a part of the making of a clandestine Mason.A clandestine mason is not a mason,therefore a clandestine degree bestowed upon one does not a mason make.If I get about 10 friends together that are not masons and teach them all of the degree work and decide to start bestowing degrees on people with a declaration that they are now Freemasons it does not make them Freemasons.If I have my own irregular lodge and bestow degrees that does not make those degrees legitimate, even if they are done perfect to the T.Therefore Crowley could not have been a Mason.Even if the lodge down the road became legitimate it was not legitimate at the time Crowley was in so therefore The Beast was not a Mason.He tried to recruit Masons to the OTO though and offered a discount to masons that joined if I remember correctly,which in my opinion reaffirms that he was joining his (fake clandestine) lodge for mercenary reasons, IE, he could care less about Freemasonry, it was only a vehicle for him to gain new potential OTO recruits under the guise of having the "real secrets".

Furthermore the way Crowley led his personal life is an affront to all things Masonic.I would hardly call Crowley a man of high moral rectitude,unless you consider shooting heroin and screwing anything with a hole, in any hole virtuous.Don't even get me started on his writings on sacrifice and blood.Look at the Thelemic "cakes of light" ritual wafers thats ingredients were semen and menstural blood.The way that Crowley lived his life is an affront and a polar opposite of all things masonic.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Crowley was a Mason, but a clandestine one. If we say that Crowley was *not* a Mason, that would be the same thing as saying that Prince Hall Masons were not really Masons until the UGLE recognized them.

Obviously, PH Masons *were* already Masons, otherwise they could have not been recognized as such, but instead would have had to have been re-initiated.

Same thing for Crowley's Lodge, which is now a recognized Lodge. Aleister Crowley was a Mason in the same sense that Nat King Cole, Duke Ellington, Count Basie, and Thurgood Marshall were Masons. They were all regularly initiated, passed, and raised, but their Lodges were not at the time recognized by the UGLE.

I respectfully disagree.

Prince Hall and his fellows were initiated into Irish military Lodge #441, which was attached to the 38th Foot Regiment, in 1775. At that point, they were members of a regular Lodge, recognized by the UGLE; they were Masons. They were also granted a dispensation to meet as "African Lodge." that means that they could legitimately initiate, pass, and raise other Masons until such time as the dispensation was revoked by African Lodge or by the Grand Lodge under which the dispensation had been granted - in this case, UGLE.

That African Lodge could not get a Warrant of Constitution from Massachusetts is unfortunate, but that did not make any of the Masons that were members of African Lodge at any time clandestine or irregular. The UGLE did recognize African Lodge and did grant a Charter, and - much like all the other U.S. Lodges, African Lodge did eventually declare itself it's own Grand Lodge and renamed itself Prince Hall Grand Lodge.

Which is completely different than what Crowley did; he joined an irregular, clandestine, unrecognized Lodge. Therefore, Crowley was not a Mason.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by masonica_esoterica
ML not to be disrespectful, but you took the same oaths as I did.Ones where you state that you will not make or be a part of the making of a clandestine Mason.


And I've never done so. BUT...

My Grand Lodge STILL considers Prince Hall clandestine. Does that mean that Prince Hall members aren't "really" Masons?


A clandestine mason is not a mason,therefore a clandestine degree bestowed upon one does not a mason make.


There is a difference between "clandestine" and "irregular". A clandestine Lodge works regulary, but without authority. These Lodges can eventually be recognized as legitimate by issuing them a charter from the legal body. They do not have to be re-initiated, because their initiation is considerd vaild, i.e., regular, because the Landmarks are observed.

Regularity concerns the Landmarks. If a Lodge is irregular and wants to regularize, its members must be re-initiated. For example, the Grand Orient of France Lodges are irregular because they do not confess belief in the Great Archirect of the Universe in their ritual. Anyone initiated in one of those Lodges would have to be re-initiated regulary.

Aleister Crowley was regularly initiated, passed, and raised. When his Lodge was regularized by the National Grand Lodge of France, the regular Grand Lodge recognized his Lodge's initiations as valid. The same thing is happening with Prince Hall. If Crowley was not a Mason, neither were the Prince Hall members. If the PH members were Masons, so was Aleister Crowley. Once again, his Lodge is now a regular, recognized Lodge.


He tried to recruit Masons to the OTO though and offered a discount to masons that joined if I remember correctly,which in my opinion reaffirms that he was joining his (fake clandestine) lodge for mercenary reasons, IE, he could care less about Freemasonry, it was only a vehicle for him to gain new potential OTO recruits under the guise of having the "real secrets".


That rule was already in effect when Crowley joined the O.T.O. There's nothing wrong with recruiting Masons for membership, the Shrine does it every day.


Furthermore the way Crowley led his personal life is an affront to all things Masonic.


I'm not an apologist for Aleister Crowley. The man certainly had psychological and emotional issues, and I don't condone his behaviour. However, the point I was addressing was his actual Masonic status, not whether or not he *should* have been a Mason.

It should also be pointed out that Crowley was raised a Master Mason in 1904, long before he became famous (or infamous). To his Lodge, Crowley was just a regular guy, no different than anyone else.


I would hardly call Crowley a man of high moral rectitude,unless you consider shooting heroin and screwing anything with a hole, in any hole virtuous.


Crowley was prescribed heroin by a physician before they knew the addictive attributes of it. Lots of people became heroin addicts the same way, before it was made illegal.

As for Crowley's personal sex life and attitudes, he had his own opinions, just as you have yours and I have mine. He was an advocate of "free love"; whether this is virtuous or vile is simply opinion.


Don't even get me started on his writings on sacrifice and blood.


Crowley wrote in symbolic allegory. He did not sanction literal sacrifice.


Look at the Thelemic "cakes of light" ritual wafers thats ingredients were semen and menstural blood.


This was not original with Crowley. The consumption of sexual fluids is an ancient practice among some sects of Gnostics.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmmeat


Which is completely different than what Crowley did; he joined an irregular, clandestine, unrecognized Lodge. Therefore, Crowley was not a Mason.


It was exactly the same. Duke Ellington joined a clandestine Lodge, and when Duke died it was still clandestine. Today, the Lodge is recognized by the Grand Lodge of NY.

Aleister Crowley joined a clandestine Lodge, and when Aleister died it was still clandestine. Today, Aleister's Lodge is recognized by the UGLE and all 51 US Grand Lodges.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by mmmeat


Which is completely different than what Crowley did; he joined an irregular, clandestine, unrecognized Lodge. Therefore, Crowley was not a Mason.


It was exactly the same. Duke Ellington joined a clandestine Lodge, and when Duke died it was still clandestine. Today, the Lodge is recognized by the Grand Lodge of NY.

Aleister Crowley joined a clandestine Lodge, and when Aleister died it was still clandestine. Today, Aleister's Lodge is recognized by the UGLE and all 51 US Grand Lodges.

With respect ... no, it's not the same. Not "exactly," and not even "close."

I understand that you really, really, really want to associate Crowley with Masonry, but to say that Duke Ellington's joining a Lodge (as a lifer) that was chartered by Prince Hall Grand Lodge - a Lodge that still possesses it's original charter - that was started by Masons, organized under a dispensation from the UGLE, and can trace it's history all the way back to the very first initiation in a recognized Lodge of it's very first members is 'exactly the same' as a guy who joined a Lodge that had no provenance whatsoever (then dropped out a year later) is irreconcilable to the reality currently operating in this dimension.

Crowley wasn't a Mason. He was just some guy with some wacky ideas and a penchant for joining odd groups.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mmmeat
 


mmmeat,

I realize you are not a Mason, and may not be familiar with all of Masonic history. You seem to think that a Lodge has to be originally regularly chartered in order for it to be legitimate. This is not the case.

If what you claim is true, then George Washington would not be a Mason either. Washington's Lodge, Alexandria Lodge in Fredericksberg, VA, was an A.Y.M. Lodge, chartered by the clandestine Grand Lodge of Antient York Masons of England. The Lodge became regularized, several decades *after* Washington's death, when his Grand Lodge merged with the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons.

I realize you don't *want* Crowley to be a Mason, but if you're not even a Mason yourself, I have no idea why. Regardless, Aleister Crowley was a Mason, although not a recognized one during his lifetime (just like Geo. Washington). However, like George Washington, his initiation is considered valid, and his Lodge is both regular and recognized.

A brief sketch on Aleister Crowley's Masonic connections can be read on the website of the Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon here.

Also see the Grand Lodge's article Aleister Crowley: Freemason!









[edit on 12-2-2008 by Masonic Light]



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
You seem to think that a Lodge has to be originally regularly chartered in order for it to be legitimate.

Not at all. In Freemasonry, believe that a Lodge has to be recognized for it to be considered regular. Not all Lodges are chartered.

While I appreciate how earnest you are in your conviction - and I, myself, am aware of Crowley's history - I still dispute that he was ever a Mason. The facts pretty much speak for themselves:

(1) He joined a non-recognized Lodge.
(2) He dropped off the rolls shortly thereafter.
(3) He isn't listed as a member of the (irregular) Grand Loge de France.

It's pretty simple, really.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by mmmeat
 


So... are you a Mason? Just curious.. reading your posts, I am a little confused. Do you or do you not claim to be a Freemason?



(1) He joined a non-recognized Lodge.


True. But technically... so did many of the early Americans. And the Irish, even though Ireland is home to some of the oldest lodges in the world. And the French.

They where no different.. just not recognized by another body.

There are however, irregular clandestine lodges that operate in a way that is not related to "main stream" Masonry. Forming subgroups and offshoots but altering the actual basis of what Main Stream Masonry is.



(2) He dropped off the rolls shortly thereafter.


Once a Mason, always a Mason. If he was a member for 2 days, but got all 3 degrees.. hes a Master Mason.

If you get initiated, then leave, and re-appear 5 years later... your still an Entered Apprentice.



(3) He isn't listed as a member of the (irregular) Grand Loge de France


I wouldn't know how to access records from that era from France, but I had always assumed that he was? Is there proof otherwise? The Grand Lodge of France is regular .. and will be present at the World Conference in DC this year.

By the way, any Masons on here planning on attending the WC?



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by tetsujin420
Wen don't have ancient secrets. The secrecy is half the fun IMO, and it could be called a trust thing. Its not hard to become a Mason, ask on to be one.

[edit on 12-11-2007 by tetsujin420]


I am truly interested in this! and I know people who were lower lever masons, however it is common belief that at some point in order to become a higher level mason you must sacrifice a human! This binds you to your secrecy and is why you don't have a lot of high level masons coming clean!

Although this would make sense in order to keep people quite, just as easily it could be the "secrecy" that causes rumors to be created! I am not saying that I believe these rumors, but it honestly could go either way! It would be easy for a mason to make a non mason seem like a fool for believing this (which is why it is such a good idea to begin with) and at the same time, it is easy to see how this could simply be made up by somebody because there is really NO WAY to disprove it!

Honestly I have no idea! and even if it was true, I don't necessary think you would know about it nor would you tell me if you did... lol



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by sparda4355
I am truly interested in this! and I know people who were lower lever masons


"Were"? Might you (or they) want to share why this became a past-tense relationship with Masonry?


Originally posted by sparda4355
however it is common belief that at some point in order to become a higher level mason you must sacrifice a human! This binds you to your secrecy and is why you don't have a lot of high level masons coming clean!


Care to share where the threshold is betwixt "lower lever" and "higher level" Masonry lies? Any guess why there and not elsewhere?


Originally posted by sparda4355
Although this would make sense in order to keep people quite, just as easily it could be the "secrecy" that causes rumors to be created! I am not saying that I believe these rumors, but it honestly could go either way!


Oddly enough, organisations like the military which are regularly responsible for far many more secrets of greater importance than Masonry don't (so far as I know) find it necessary that their members kill someone to prove their ability to maintain a secret but instead find an oath to be quite sufficient. That being the case, why would Masonry be any different?


Originally posted by sparda4355
It would be easy for a mason to make a non mason seem like a fool for believing this (which is why it is such a good idea to begin with) and at the same time, it is easy to see how this could simply be made up by somebody because there is really NO WAY to disprove it!


Well actually, there's a fairly simple and straightforward way of disproving it. Ask yourself "where are all the bodies"? And usually, it's the vehement non-Mason that makes a fool out of himself with no help from Masons.


Originally posted by sparda4355
Honestly I have no idea! and even if it was true, I don't necessary think you would know about it nor would you tell me if you did... lol


And around and around and around it goes! Where will it stop? Nobody knows!



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by sparda4355
I am truly interested in this! and I know people who were lower lever masons, however it is common belief that at some point in order to become a higher level mason you must sacrifice a human! This binds you to your secrecy and is why you don't have a lot of high level masons coming clean!

I do not believe that there is a 'common belief' such as what you mention. I'm sure there are anti-Masons - who know nothing of Freemasonry, but that doesn't stop them from spreading vitriolic nonsense - who could start such a rumour. With the number of Masons raised every year, common sense would indicate that the body count would be quite significant.

Sometimes using 'common sense' rather than an unfounded 'common belief' is the best way to go.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmmeat


(1) He joined a non-recognized Lodge.
(2) He dropped off the rolls shortly thereafter.
(3) He isn't listed as a member of the (irregular) Grand Loge de France.

It's pretty simple, really.



Sorry to keep rehashing the same thing, but it's important to undesratdn that it isn't simple at all. Your #1 is correct, but as I mentioned, that also holds true for Nat King Cole and George Washington.

Your number 2 is also correct, but as the brother mentioned, that would be irrevelant. If you are a non-Mason, you may not know the answer to the question "What makes you a Mason?", but it has nothing to do with paying your dues or being in good standing in any particular Lodge.

As for number 3, this question is not so easily determined. A couple of US Grand Lodges consider the GLdF to be regular, although not officially recognizing them. The Grand Lodge of Minnesota *did* recognize them 7 or 8 years ago, which caused friction with the Grand Lodge of Michigan.

Regadless, it doesn't really matter. Like Washington's Lodge, Aleister's was of AYM origin, via the Grand Orient of France. When the Grand Orient was de-recognized, Crowley's Lodge pulled out in order to preserve the Landmarks, and became a founding member of the GLdF, which had to cease work after the German invasion in WWII. The UGLE recognized the NGLdF instead simply because it was up and running, not because the GLdF was irregular. The GLdF and NGLdF allow intervisitation, and did so during Crowley's lifetime.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by sparda4355
...however it is common belief that at some point in order to become a higher level mason you must sacrifice a human! This binds you to your secrecy and is why you don't have a lot of high level masons coming clean!



Oh boy, here we go again.
I'm so tired of this.

Okay, how about this...
From now on, if anyone is going to post something that they heard about Masonry, please read EVERY SINGLE other post by EVERY ONE else who's ever posted on the subject.
Seriously, people just go on perpetuating these ridiculous stories and I for one am tired of having to deal with it.

Go to my thread (www.abovetopsecret.com...) with any real inquiries.




posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparda4355
I am truly interested in this! and I know people who were lower lever masons,


At what "level" do you believe these individuals were?



however it is common belief that at some point in order to become a higher level mason you must sacrifice a human!


I've been a Mason for around 20 years. I've read TONS about it, I've written about it, I've talked to heaven only knows how many people (pro and con) about it and I have NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, EVER heard this claim. I'd say at best it's a very UNcommon belief.


This binds you to your secrecy


No indeed. Our Obligation binds us to secrecy. "I do solemnly promise...to keep the secrets...." et cetera. We neither commit murder, nor do we conceal murder. This is illegal and immoral. One of the first lessons in the Degrees is that we are to conform cheerfully to legal authority. Another lesson revolves around Friendship, Morality and Brotherly Love. Killing people is certainly not condoned by Freemasonry, at ANY "level."


and is why you don't have a lot of high level masons coming clean!


"coming clean" about what? Admitting to murders they didn't commit?


Although this would make sense in order to keep people quite, just as easily it could be the "secrecy" that causes rumors to be created! I am not saying that I believe these rumors, but it honestly could go either way!


People have always feared that which they do not understand. Because Freemasonry is perceived as a "secret" organization by some has certainly perpetuated wild rumors and speculation.


It would be easy for a mason to make a non mason seem like a fool for believing this


But, there is no need for a Mason to do this.



(which is why it is such a good idea to begin with)


I guess I don't understand what you're saying. It's a good idea to kill someone? Surely that's not what you mean. Please clarify.



and at the same time, it is easy to see how this could simply be made up by somebody because there is really NO WAY to disprove it!


Certainly there is. Just like Fitzgibbon said, WHERE ARE THE BODIES? There are a LOT of Masons, so if the so-called "high level" ones had to kill a human to get to that level, why aren't there lots of missing person reports surrounding the various Masonic Lodge, Chapter, Consistory, Grand Lodge, etc. buildings around the world?


Honestly I have no idea! and even if it was true, I don't necessary think you would know about it nor would you tell me if you did... lol


Not only would I tell you about it, I would FIRST tell the Authorities! If I thought for one instant that there was truth to it there's no way I'd remain a member of the organization. And trust me, I have no intention of leaving, because whether you believe it or not, there's simply no way this is true.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by wu kung

Originally posted by sparda4355
...however it is common belief that at some point in order to become a higher level mason you must sacrifice a human! This binds you to your secrecy and is why you don't have a lot of high level masons coming clean!



Oh boy, here we go again.
I'm so tired of this.

Okay, how about this...
From now on, if anyone is going to post something that they heard about Masonry, please read EVERY SINGLE other post by EVERY ONE else who's ever posted on the subject.
Seriously, people just go on perpetuating these ridiculous stories and I for one am tired of having to deal with it.

Go to my thread (www.abovetopsecret.com...) with any real inquiries.



If I go to that thread, will I have to sacrifice a human?

Just curious, because I one had an uncle who had a friend that knew somebody down the street who owned a motorcycle that was test driven at a dealership where a mechanic worked who knew this girl with a butterfly tattoo whose Dad once dated a striper who once danced for this underaged fella who had a buddy who knew this bus driver who was a Mason, and HE said I'd have to sacrifice a human if I wanted to.

But I don't know for sure, because I just read it offin' a website that knows all the secrets of Masonry. You guys haven't ever seen sites like these before! It totally opened my eyes!

Freemasonrywatch
The Forbidden Knowledge



Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I am not sure how everyone else's lodge feels about murder, but here at mine we have a pretty clear policy.

If you kill somebody, please turn in your apron and don't let the (tyler) hit you on the way out.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmmeat
If I go to that thread, will I have to sacrifice a human?


Yes.
Yes you will.



Just curious, because I one had an uncle who had a friend that knew somebody down the street who owned a motorcycle that was test driven at a dealership where a mechanic worked who knew this girl with a butterfly tattoo whose Dad once dated a striper who once danced for this underaged fella who had a buddy who knew this bus driver who was a Mason, and HE said I'd have to sacrifice a human if I wanted to.


I know that guy.


But I don't know for sure, because I just read it offin' a website that knows all the secrets of Masonry. You guys haven't ever seen sites like these before! It totally opened my eyes!

Freemasonrywatch
The Forbidden Knowledge


Yes.
All that tasty wisdom.
Just there for the taking.




Your pal,
Meat.


Aw.


*Well said mmmeat! That's actually one of the best responses I've ever read here on ATS. Kudos to you.*






posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
I love most of freemasonry. My issues lie in the politics. Most masons I know that have been good to me, ignore the politics and don't take them personally. They ignore the slights, racism, disgruntled, off color comments, and other negatives. Which makes me wonder sometimes if I am a good mason.

I despise racism. I do not remind others of their errors when I hear racist comments from other masons but have made it known that I despise racism. Having a desire to learn yet being passed by because someone's voice "supposedly" carries better than mine is hurtful. Being slighted by a certified lecturer because I let it be known to him personally some of my beliefs which it seems he takes personally and doesn't agree with, is hurtful. Listening to people maneuver themselves into positions in a way that seems "un-masonic" at best, is bothersome. Having a grand lodge officer tell me.."we don't want those kind here..." is saddening. Hearing a 33rd say if he knew the belief system of a certain member when they were being initiated he would have gotten up and walked out of the initiation, is disturbing.

It is every man's right to believe what he choses and there is nothing wrong with folks not wanting to join a group based on belief, but I have heard several times from brothers that they won't join the Shriner's due to the Allah connection. It bothers me when it probably shouldn't. Like I said most seeming good masons I know ignore this stuff. I don't talk out in the lodge about it but it bothers me. It bothers me that my perception is that only abrahamic beliefs are considered acceptable by many masons in my area.

It bothers me that nothing is being done charibly in my area and that our lodge sits on its duff and goes through the motions at meetings.

Does these things bothering me make me a bad mason? Should I just ignore the things that seem negative to me and just be thankful for all the good I see in it? It has helped me. It has made a good man better. But I still struggle with these negative perceptions.

From my experience it also make me feel that if decided to pursue or show interest in organizations such as B.O.T.A., A.M.O.R.C., O.T.O, the Golden Dawn, or any other "esoteric" system, my masonic membership might be revoked Whether this is silly speculation on might part or not, I am unsure but there is cause for me to ponder it.

I have a small book collection that cost me quite a bit of money that I should have been spending on other things. First editions of Manly P. Hall, Clymer (a rosicrucian), and a myriad of others connected to masonry and other societies. I collect masonic liturature that leans esoterically. WHen I mention anything from these books, my masonic brothers locally look at me like I am insane. Like the things I ask are not associated with masonry. Like Kaballah, cabala, qaballah, or howerver one wishes to spell it, isn't something a mason should have interest in and that there is no association at all. When I mention gnosticism I get even more hard looks. I once asked if my belief in christianity as allegorical in many ways was good enough for me to join the Knights Templar of the York Rite. If anyone that anyone who considered other versions of Jesus' life was acceptable. One said that I couldn't or if I did was it really ethical and another said sure there was no problem with it. I still have yet to petition the York Rite becasue of the uncertainty. Yet I have two antique Masonic Templar swords hanging on my wall at home.

I once showed someone in our lodge a deck of Masonic Tarot cards I had aquired and asked about them. They wouldn't comment and although speculatory...looked at me like I was satan himself for having such. After looking on the back of the packaging where it said made in france...they said..well that explains it and that was the end of the conversation.

Unfortunately these things bother me and make me wonder if I really fit within the politics of my area.



posted on Feb, 15 2008 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by sentientsojourner
 


That's some serious stuff my brother.
I feel for you and your dilemma, truly.
I guess I'm lucky in the sense that, if nothing else based purely on location, we have not only a diverse crowd at my lodge, but there is no dissension whatever and all men are wholly tolerant of each others belief system.

Although, perhaps it's not due to location.
Perhaps it's due to these guys taking their obligations to heart and their love of the Craft.

Now, I'm not saying your boys don't love the craft, and the GA knows I'm less-than-tolerant of lots of things, but whilst inside the lodge, we're all equal.
It's a wonderful thing.

Feel free to come chill at my lodge with me and have a beer (or several).

All Brothers are welcome!






new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join