It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"High-Level" Masons? Doesn't appear to be.

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Since it's organization, Freemasonry has been plagued with spurious and irregular groups calling themselves "Masons." Some broke off from legitimate branches, some merely donned the attired of Freemasonry and claimed to be legit. In the recent couple of years this sort of fever had reared it's ugly head, starting in the United Kingdom and then in the U.S.A.

Here is the website of one such group. Note the word "Ancient" in their title, yet their organizational date of 2006.

www.supremecouncilsite.com:80...

Interestingly though, even THEY make this very interesting statement:

"The Ancient and Accepted Rite of Freemasonry shares the same belief of all regular Masonic organizations that there is no higher Degree than that of Master Mason." (Master Mason = Third Degree folks)

and later, this:

"The Supreme Council of North America and its Subordinate Bodies acknowledge the Supremacy of the Symbolic Grand Lodges and Grand Masters within their jurisdictions."

In the United States there are 51 Grand Lodges, one in each state and one in the District of Columbia. Each Province (I believe) in Canada has it's own Grand Lodge. In the UK, etc. etc.

Interesting that these 33rd Degree Masons (so-called), these "Sovereign Grand Inspectors General" openly admit that they hold no degree higher than that of Master Mason, just like we here have been saying all along.

Wait, what am I saying? If real Masons are liars, fake Masons must be REALLY BIG liars.

Oh, never mind.




posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Appak
 


Excellent post, Appak. I've always found these claims of some secret cabal of "high degree masons" to be interesting, because as you point out both regular masons (the "real-masons") and clandestine/unrecognized groups (the "fake-masons") both agree that there is no degree higher than the third degree. Yet somehow, this group supposedly exists - and no one who claims it exists can give us any proof of it, except the same old line of logic:

"It must be true because its a society, and society is compartmentalized. You wouldn't know about it, since your a low degree."

This is the only thing that is said about this theory over and over again, even though all of the regular and irregular rites of masonry agree: there is no degree higher than the third degree. The whole compartmentalization argument is interesting because no one can give an example of where this happens anywhere else. It is the sort of statement that lures people in because on the face of it, it sounds true. When you examine it though, it is completely false. Organizations are not compartmentalized, they have hierarchies. So does masonry, no one disputes it. Its even public information. For the non-masons, heres the basic hierarchy :

1. State Grand Lodge:
Grand Master
Grand Officers

2. Individual Lodges:
Worshipful Master
Lodge Officers
Lodge Members

Everyone above "lodge members" is elected (even members are elected for membership), some officer positions are appointed but they have little real power. Is it a hierarchy? Yep. Is it compartmentalized? No. There is a difference. I can show you how every organization is hierarchical. Show me how every organization is compartmentalized - or even just 1 organization similar to masonry which is.

So as we can see, the compartmentalization logic fails. All of masonry says there is no degree higher than the 3rd, as Appak shows. This entire theory falls flat on it's face.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Appak
 


OK.... fine... whatever..

But so long as there are those who believe in conspiracies, and believe we Masons contol the world.. who accept me as their overlord...

I will always claim to be a high ranking freemason (with reptillian connections on my mothers side twice removed)

I mean.. if someone says your their master, you better act like their master!



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   
So Masons from the 4th through 33d degrees hold their meetings at Denny's?

When a Mason runs for ofice and lists 32d degree Freemason as a qualification his opponent can call him a liar?

Shriners can get their deceitful selves and their overloaded motorcycles out of our parades?



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Yes, you are correct. I know of at least one local Scottish Rite Club (the 4th-33rd degrees) which does their monthly meetings at a Denny's. Surely, this must be a plot by the "higher level masons" to RULE ZE WORLD


I don't know of anyone who would bother listing a qualification of "32nd degree mason" - since all it indicates is you sat through and watched a ton of morality plays over a weekend or two. Anyone who would list such as a qualification when running for office would get a "who cares, not impressed" feeling from the brethren.

[edit on 23-1-2008 by LightinDarkness]



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Researcher
So Masons from the 4th through 33d degrees hold their meetings at Denny's?


Actually Scottish Rite (4th - 32nd) Degree meetings are typically held at the Scottish Rite building. Interestingly though, the meetings are held in the 14th Degree. The 33rd Degree (which is given as an honor to Scottish Rite Masons-32nd Degree - and to those who hold the K.C.C.H. in the Southern Jurisdiction) holds it's meetings at the Supreme Council. However, the Supreme Council meetings are opened in the 33rd Degree, then re-opened in the 14th Degree so that all members of the Scottish Rite may attend. You see (as has been said on this site repeatedly) the Scottish Rite uses numbers to designate it's degrees (each of which also have names, by the way) but higher numbers do NOT constitute higher rank. No matter what freemasonrwatch.com says.



When a Mason runs for ofice and lists 32d degree Freemason as a qualification his opponent can call him a liar?


I've never seen anyone running for office list one of his qualifications as being a Mason, let alone a 32nd Degree Mason. Have YOU???

In my Grand Jurisdictions (Kentucky & Missouri) it is against Masonic code to have a Masonic emblem on your business card or your personal checks because this might be misconstrued (or perhaps construed) as using Masonry for personal gain. That, uhm...ain't what we're about.



Shriners can get their deceitful selves and their overloaded motorcycles out of our parades?


Uhm, well...OK...if you say so?!?
You actually HAVE parades...personally? Hmmmmmm



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Man...

Masonry with a side of Grand Slam (extra eggs please) .. what the hell could be better then that?!!?!?!

Ah..

Masonry with a side of breakfast served with a tall, cold, Guinness......

If there is a heaven, surely that is what it must be like.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Man...
Masonry with a side of Grand Slam (extra eggs please) .. what the hell could be better then that?!!?!?!
Ah..


Thanks a lot Rock! Now you have me hungry for Dennys! And ordinarily I hate Denny's. Not because of the food (or even the 1/2 inch deposit of grease on the tables, countertops, floors, chairs, etc.) but because of a certain waitress that I always seem to get. I swear she sleeps in the dumpster!

Hmmm. Grand slam indeed.



Masonry with a side of breakfast served with a tall, cold, Guinness......
If there is a heaven, surely that is what it must be like.


Oh, wait! You might be on to something now. I could slide by O'Charley's for a few (read: several) Guiness' THEN go to Denny's for a late-night breakfast. Heck, I might even stop by the dumpster in the back parking lot and invite Shelley to join me.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Interesting idea though. Moving the meetings to Denny's should do wonders for the meeting attendance.


[edit on 24-1-2008 by Masonic Student]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Researcher
So Masons from the 4th through 33d degrees hold their meetings at Denny's?


I don't know about that, but my Scottish Rite KCCH Club (which consists of the 32° Knights Commander of the Court of Honour and 33° Inspectors general Honorary in my Valley) meets quarterly at the Olive Garden.


When a Mason runs for ofice and lists 32d degree Freemason as a qualification his opponent can call him a liar?


No, it's not an issue. Masons are encouraged to seek the additional degrees of the Scottish and York Rites, but it certainly isn't a requirement for office.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I would doubt anyone who is not intimately familiar with Scottish Rite Masonry would notice this (or someone who is just a pain for nuanced minutiae such as myself) but their title for SGIG is incorrectly written as Sovereign Grand Inspector GeneralS, not as it should be written: Sovereign Grand InspectorS General.

Obviously this is down to the minutiae, but nevertheless it appears spurious to me just from the homepage without reading anything else.

EDIT: The @hotmail.com e-mail address is a nice professional touch as well.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by Baphomet79]



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
The @hotmail just shows that we are committed to ruling ze world with...MSN's support


Masonry and MSN - ruling the world one website at a time.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Baphomet79
I would doubt anyone who is not intimately familiar with Scottish Rite Masonry would notice this (or someone who is just a pain for nuanced minutiae such as myself) but their title for SGIG is incorrectly written as Sovereign Grand Inspector GeneralS, not as it should be written: Sovereign Grand InspectorS General.
Obviously this is down to the minutiae, but nevertheless it appears spurious to me just from the homepage without reading anything else.
EDIT: The @hotmail.com e-mail address is a nice professional touch as well.


Good point, Baphomet79!

This is a branch of the irregular group that calls itself the "Regular" Grand Lodge of England.

Sometimes one can simply shake one's head and wonder.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
BTW Appak, are you going to be in Birmingham for the Scottish Rite Leadership Conference? If so let me know and I'll buy you a beer.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
BTW Appak, are you going to be in Birmingham for the Scottish Rite Leadership Conference? If so let me know and I'll buy you a beer.


I'd like to (and would CERTAINLY enjoy a beer and meeting you in person) but I believe I'm going to be in Cincinnatti at that time.

The "powers that be" haven't confirmed yet, though. So there's a chance.



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 



True enough. Their fear and paranoia gives us power over them although we never asked for it and frankly dont want it. They disenfranchise themselves and dont even know it. The only "man" keeping them down is the man in the mirror.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 07:17 AM
link   
I was going to post a thread about this and realized these must've been quoted over and over here on ATS. Freemsaonrywatch.com probably has a whole section dedicated to these quotes.

However, and at the risk of sounding redundant, I feel that if we are to discussed the possibility of higher levels in masonry, then these quotes are of some importance.

I know, no man speaks for all of freemasonry, however these were distinguished Masons and they seem to believe in the existance of an elite within freemasonry. I'm just not sure why these two knowledgeable masons would think there's a inner circle if there are no possibilities of it existing.

Could someone who has read the books enlightened me as to what Hall met by "the invisible brotherhood"? And what did Pike mean when he talked of the "higher degrees"?

(I should note that Hall became a 33º Mason in 1973, some years after giving his lectures. It seems he wasn't even a Mason before that...
)

here's the Hall quote:


FREEMASONRY is a fraternity within a fraternity—an outer organization concealing an inner brotherhood of the elect. Before it is possible to intelligently discuss the origin of the Craft, it is necessary, therefore, to establish the existence of these two separate yet interdependent orders, the one visible and the other invisible. The visible society is a splendid camaraderie of "free and accepted" men enjoined to devote themselves to ethical, educational, fraternal, patriotic, and humanitarian concerns. The invisible society is a secret and most august fraternity whose members are dedicated to the service of a mysterious arcanum arcanorum. Those Brethren who have essayed to write the history of their Craft have not included in their disquisitions the story of that truly secret inner society which is to the body Freemasonic what the heart is to the body human. In each generation only a few are accepted into the inner sanctuary of the Work, but these are veritable Princes of the Truth and their sainted names shall be remembered in future ages together with the seers and prophets of the elder world. Though the great initiate-philosophers of Freemasonry can be counted upon one's fingers, yet their power is not to be measured by the achievements of ordinary men. They are dwellers upon the Threshold of the Innermost, Masters of that secret doctrine which forms the invisible foundation of every great theological and rational institution.


Source: Manly P. Hall in Lectures on Ancient Philosophy —An Introduction to
the Study and Application of Rational Procedure (emphasis mine)

Here's the Albert Pike quote:


The symbols of the wise always become the idols of the ignorant multitude. What the Chiefs of the Order really believed and taught, is indicated to the Adepts by the hints contained in the high Degrees of Free-Masonry, and by the symbols which only the Adepts understand.

The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry. The whole body of the Royal and Sacerdotal Art was hidden so carefully, centuries since, in the High Degrees, as that it is even yet impossible to solve many of the enigmas which they contain. It is well enough for the mass of those called Masons, to imagine that all is contained in the Blue Degrees; and whose attempts to undeceive them will labor in vain, and without any true reward violate his obligations as an Adept. Masonry is the veritable Sphinx, buried to the head in the sands heaped round it by the ages.


Source, Pike's Moral and Dogma (emphasis mine)

Why did these two men believe that Masonry had an inner core? What would have lead them to believe that there was?

PS I realize the OP isn't strictly addressing this point, but it seems the conversation in the thread which was suppose to address these issues directly has turned into anti/pro bickering fest. Furthermore, the OP has ignored my arguments, therefore I will ask my questions here in the hope of getting a better response.

EDIT: I've just read Axeman's post on the Pike quote from his pre-mason days. He believes Pike was simply referring to the symbology which is quite probable. Thanks Axeman
But then, who are the Adepts?



[edit on 1/2/08 by ConspiracyNut23]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23


Could someone who has read the books enlightened me as to what Hall met by "the invisible brotherhood"? And what did Pike mean when he talked of the "higher degrees"?


As to Hall, he used it to describe those Masons who are interested in the esoteric and metaphysical philosophies. When Pike spoke of the "high degrees", he was usually talking about the Scottish Rite, although he also referred to other York Rite degrees as "high degrees" as well.


(I should note that Hall became a 33º Mason in 1973, some years after giving his lectures. It seems he wasn't even a Mason before that...
)


Hall became a Mason in 1954, and became a Knight Commander of the Court of Honour of the 32° in 1973. He received the 33° in the late 80's (1988, I think), just a few years before his death.


Why did these two men believe that Masonry had an inner core? What would have lead them to believe that there was?


Both authors realized that the vast majority of our membership consisted of guys who viewed Freemasonry with a social club mentality. The "inner core" would be those brothers who take it seriously, and devote considerable portions of their lives to its study and practice.


But then, who are the Adepts?



In Pike's terminology here, an "Adept" is any member of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite who has attained at least the 28° (Prince Adept). This degree is the strictly Kabalistic degree in the Scottish Rite. The ceremony mainly consists of having two presiding officers (Father Adam and Brother Truth) who give orations on the Kabalah, and quote Kabalistic texts.

Pike believed that the Kabalah was the primary basis of Freemasonry, and that Freemasonry was formed to preserve the wisdom of the Kabalah for future generations.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Many conspiracy theorists will say that there is indeed a hierarchy amongst masons, with "low level" masons on the bottom who are completely ignorant of the "great conspiracy" and "high level" masons on the top who are not only aware of the "great conspiracy," but are also mastermining and controlling it. The conspiracy theorists may be willing to concede that the difference between "high level" and "low level" masons is not in the degree they have, but some other qualification. For example, a conspiracy theorist may concede a 33rd degree mason who has been a member of a lodge for decades can be completely in the dark about the "great conspiracy," but recent initiates into "Skull and Bones" (who according to some Conspiracy theorists is part of masonry even though virtually all masons would deny it) are part of or wil soon be part of "high level" masonry.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
The conspiracy theorists may be willing to concede that the difference between "high level" and "low level" masons is not in the degree they have, but some other qualification. For example, a conspiracy theorist may concede a 33rd degree mason who has been a member of a lodge for decades can be completely in the dark about the "great conspiracy,"



That's circular reasoning. IF there are high-numbered-degree masons who aren't in on the conspiracy, you cannot really call it a grand masonic conspiracy.

In other words, if a guys rank in the organization is not a reliable indicator of his membership in the grand conspiracy, then talking about a masonic conspiracy per se, is a misnomer. It's like having a "world-wide" Jewish conspiracy, only the average jew has no knowledge of it. It sort of makes it lose it's particular flavor.

As another example. All of the men and women behind J. W. Boothe's assassination of President Lincoln were southerners; but that didn't make it a "Southern" conspiracy. Especially since 999 out of 1000 southerners were ignorant of it, and there was no general uprising at news of the event.



but recent initiates into "Skull and Bones" (who according to some Conspiracy theorists is part of masonry even though virtually all masons would deny it) are part of or wil soon be part of "high level" masonry.


In that case, the problem is a "skull and bones" conspiracy, rather than a masonic one. Again, saying that "most of the group aren't in on it" would undercut any claims to a specific label for the conspiracy.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join