My brother is a member of mason society

Originally posted by adrenochrome
i'm curious then - why would they use the same exact name as the original Knights Templar if the masons didn't want it to imply it's the same organization? it's a bit confusing

I'm not sure what part of this is so confusing. They named a certain degree in the York Rite, to commemorate Knights Templar. By the logic you seem to be using - it would be just as reasonable to deduct that people who take part in civil war re-enactments had something to do with the original civil war. Can you not see the flaw in this logic?

reply to post by adrenochrome


I am under the impression that the original Knights Templar were disbanded quite some time ago. Long before speculative Masonry even began. Just as soon as I say I am sure of something, I usually get proven wrong, so I will leave it at that. The degree in the Scottish Rite is to pay tribute to the Knights Templar. My lodge actually put on that degree and it was very cool to watch. It had a nice message and story with it. In going through the 4-32nd degree, I didn't gain any great knowlege of the Templar knights being connected to masonry.(I was actually hoping this was the case) I am still looking an hope to find more answers to that question. What I do know is that masonry shares some of the same ideals, though we don't have some kind of mission to protect anything with our lives as they did. Our obligations are speculative as well. We are told that before we even take the obligations so new inductees don't freak out and think that stuff would actually happen in this day and age. If you want proof of that, look up what the penalties to the obligations are and then see if any bodys have turned up with those listed as cause of death. If nothing is found, then I think it's safe to say that either everyone has been good, or what I am saying is most likely true. Again, please pass on any info you may find about a connection. thanks.

Originally posted by scientist
If you are coming right out of the gates, claiming that you are speaking on behalf of "most people," then you are already jaded with your own view. Not a big deal, just something to keep in mind.

Sometimes things are simple - like definitions. That is the purpose of a dictionary - to provide the meanings of words that most people agree with. Its not about being jaded, its just about facts. The dictionary definition of "secret" does not match masonry, and thus masonry is not secret. It is private.

You have conveniently ignored my question, so I'll ask it again. How are signs and handshakes a secret when they are available online, in stores, and in the library? How is that secret, EXACTLY? You cannot answer these questions because they are in fact not secret. Nothing that is so easily accessible would be considered secret, nor is it secret according to the dictionary.

Originally posted by scientist
Think of this: let's say that you're password to ATS is secret. Only you know it, and you keep it from the view and knowledge of others. Now... someone could easily extract that password from you, with any number of techniques. If they were to then publish that password (unbeknown to you), you would still consider it a secret, correct?

If my ATS password showed up in Barnes & Noble, the university library, and on google - then no, it would OBVIOUSLY no longer be a secret.

Originally posted by scientist
Therefore, "secret" is a relative term - in that it's only secret if you don't know it, or if you are actively keeping it hidden from view to others. Also, since masons are not supposed to communicate secrets, even the books that claim to be exposing all these things cannot be trusted, as they violate the enter concept of masonry.

Not at all. I wish masonry still had secrets, since you can plaster the ritual all over the place and it doesn't really add to your knowledge since your not going through it. However, the fact of the matter is there are no more secrets. Every degree, every sign, every handshake has been exposed for quite along time.

Originally posted by scientist
Masons are not supposed to write all the secrets down, and publish the info to a library for all to see (in theory). Since those sources cannot be trusted, the only source to trust is the real source, free and accepted masonry. That means you have to join to really know what it's about - and after you join, you are not to share that information with anyone else, except it be a true and lawful brother mason or within a regular lodge of free and accepted masons, etc. etc.

In a perfect world where people do what they say they would do, you'd be right. We do not live in such a world. There are too many masons and not all of them are serious about their obligations. This is not unusual, it happens in everything. You can find out whatever you want about masonry without joining - except one thing. You will NOT have the genuine experience of being initiated into regular freemasonry, which is probably the only thing remaining that you could construe as a "secret."

[edit on 17-9-2008 by LowLevelMason]

Originally posted by adrenochrome
i'm curious then - why would they use the same exact name as the original Knights Templar if the masons didn't want it to imply it's the same organization? it's a bit confusing for obvious reasons, mind you

I'd have to agree with scientist on his response to you about the above.

Originally posted by adrenochrome
how are the old "Knights of the Temple" different from the modern-day ones if they're unrelated, aside from them being true knights? ...they both seem to practice chivalry and a high code of ethics, along with sharing a belief in a God... or has there never been any modern "Knights Templar" - is it simply just a name/label with no significance?

Wow, where to begin? Well for starters:

- The current "Knights Templar" has no relation to the Catholic Church
- The current "Knights Templar" do not function as bankers as the historical ones did, and thus they do not have vast sums of money - in fact they have no money except membership dues, being a not for profit organization.
- The current "Knights Templar" do not ride across the holy land claiming to defend pilgrims from harm.
- The current "Knights Templar" do not have any basis in the historical order.

In other words, there is nothing similar. The Knights Templar degree is simply held in honor of the original, and it emphasizes brotherhood and chivalry. That's it. It indeed has LOTS of significance for those who go through it, and the degree offers lots for pondering in terms of philosophy. However, it has no conspiratorial significance that you've been trying to attach to it.

Originally posted by adrenochrome
i'm curious then - why would they use the same exact name as the original Knights Templar if the masons didn't want it to imply it's the same organization? it's a bit confusing for obvious reasons, mind you

The allegory throughout the three Blue Lodge degrees is all set in the Temple erected by King Solomon. This is the same temple that the original Templars named themselves after (though they didn't date all the way back to Solomon either, so there's at least a history of groups naming themselves something to harken back to earlier times...) Both the Scottish Rite and York Rite extend on the stories and allegory of the 3 Masonic degrees in many (but not all) of their own degrees. Both York and Scottish Rites have chivalric degrees: as you noted in the illustration, the York Rite 14th° is the Order of the Knights Templar, and if you look on the other side, you'll see that the Scottish Rite 27th° is the Commander of the Temple (at least on that illustration. It's also called the Knight Commander of the Temple, so, in essence, it's a Templar degree as well.)

how are the old "Knights of the Temple" different from the modern-day ones if they're unrelated, aside from them being true knights? ...they both seem to practice chivalry and a high code of ethics, along with sharing a belief in a God... or has there never been any modern "Knights Templar" - is it simply just a name/label with no significance?

I don't claim to be a historian by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm not aware of any existing documents that actually spell out what the original Templars believed in... you know, a code of conduct or ideals or such. Honestly haven't the faintest idea if such a document survived, though I would think that by now I would have come across such thing at least mentioned in some of the Masonic texts I've read, as it would be pretty cool to be able to say you were living by a knight's code... Or at least some people would think so, so again, you'd think I would have come across it more readily.

I'm not going to over-elaborate, since I don't think this thread merits any more insight (or attention!) than it already had gotten. That being said, I'll keep this brief. Perhaps we could start a new thread.

Originally posted by LowLevelMason
masonry is not secret. It is private.

you say tomato, I say potato. This could be a game of semantics, but I suggest that any information that is exclusive to a certain group, is secret. Maybe you call it private, whatever. If the information is being kept from someone, it's secret. Doesn't matter if it's a password, an unlisted phone number, or a framework of rituals.

You have conveniently ignored my question, so I'll ask it again. How are signs and handshakes a secret when they are available online, in stores, and in the library? How is that secret, EXACTLY? You cannot answer these questions because they are in fact not secret. Nothing that is so easily accessible would be considered secret, nor is it secret according to the dictionary.

No, I can't (and won't) answer this, because you are not really asking a question. You a phrasing a rhetorical statement in such a way that it's obvious that there is no correct answer, other than total agreement. I don't like to be confined to such limited thinking. The truth is, things can be secret - and then revealed, and no longer secret... and then lost... so secret again. See?

Originally posted by scientist
If my ATS password showed up in Barnes & Noble, the university library, and on google - then no, it would OBVIOUSLY no longer be a secret.

In a perfect world where people do what they say they would do, you'd be right. We do not live in such a world. There are too many masons and not all of them are serious about their obligations. This is not unusual, it happens in everything. You can find out whatever you want about masonry without joining - except one thing. You will NOT have the genuine experience of being initiated into regular freemasonry, which is probably the only thing remaining that you could construe as a "secret."

this borders on self-righteousness. Judging how serious others are about their involvement with the same group you are in is a bit speculative, no? True, we don't live in a perfect world - but I think that's because the world was made with inherent flaws.

reply to post by scientist


so when you're a member of the modern-day Knights Templar, you're just playing a role, and simply going through the motions to contribute to an act, just for show? what's the point of the organization? just a tribute is all?

Originally posted by adrenochrome
reply to post by scientist

 

so when you're a member of the modern-day Knights Templar, you're just playing a role, and simply going through the motions to contribute to an act, just for show?

and welcome to masonry! You pretty much hit the nail on the head. The reasons behind the "show" are interpreted differently for each person, but I believe that each ritual / degree / etc. is laid out in such a fashion that the actual knowledge is contained in a combination of words, actions, tempos, arrangement of furniture / etc. They all have significant meaning within the context of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

To only take one of those elements from the process, is to be ignorant - not in a condescending way, but in a literal way - in that you do not know what is really going on. Imagine someone reading Animal Farm, that has no idea what communism is, or that there is an underlying story to the entire book. That is similar to someone who just reads about degrees, or sees a youtube movie and assumes they have the whole story.

Originally posted by scientist

Originally posted by adrenochrome
reply to post by scientist

 

so when you're a member of the modern-day Knights Templar, you're just playing a role, and simply going through the motions to contribute to an act, just for show?

and welcome to masonry! You pretty much hit the nail on the head. The reasons behind the "show" are interpreted differently for each person, but I believe that each ritual / degree / etc. is laid out in such a fashion that the actual knowledge is contained in a combination of words, actions, tempos, arrangement of furniture / etc. They all have significant meaning within the context of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

Yep. It's actually one of the reasons I decided to join a lodge. I'd taken a couple of philosophy courses in college, but hadn't really tried applying allegory as a means of looking at my own life. The rituals and oaths of Masonry are all allegorical. They ARE playing roles and going through motions. And as Scientist says, each person gets something different out of that. Sure, some of it is common sense; a lot of it is presented elsewhere in other philosophies or ways of life.

One that resonated with me early on is the 24 inch gauge. From Duncan's

The twenty-four-inch gauge is an instrument made use of by operative masons to measure and lay out their work; but we, as Free and Accepted Masons, are taught to make use of it for the more noble and glorious purpose of dividing our time. It being divided into twenty-four equal parts, is emblematical of the twenty-four hours of the day which we are taught to divide into three parts, whereby we find a portion for the service of God and the relief of a distressed worthy brother, a portion for our usual avocations, and a portion for refreshment and sleep.

Pretty straightforward lesson, right? Use your time wisely. Divide it equally so that there's balance in your life between your work and your family and what you do for your fellow man. Yeah, OK, it's a ruler. But it can still be symbolic too.

The degrees are allegories, of life, of learning. The penalties are allegories. Nobody's really going to be disemboweled for telling the secrets, but they want to make sure you take the oath seriously, so you imagine how you'd feel if you did incur those penalties. The offices are allegories, as are the positions of the officers within the lodge room. It's all symbol, it all has some origin and means something somewhere. And no, it might not all be explained to you all at once, and some stuff has probably been forgotten about the "why" things are done the way they are. But you don't really need to know all that unless you WANT to know all that, and even then, you'll likely arrive at your own conclusions.

but why would they want to name themselves after an order that's been known for participating in war? what's so noble and holy about that? why would they want to keep alive that thorn in the side of history - why continue to use the name "Knight"? knights, although valiant and chivalric, promote war and death by their very definition..

Originally posted by adrenochrome
but why would they want to name themselves after an order that's been known for participating in war? what's so noble and holy about that? why would they want to keep alive that thorn in the side of history - why continue to use the name "Knight"? knights, although valiant and chivalric, promote war and death by their very definition..

Don't ask me. There are still thousands of people who willingly enlist in military service; there are plenty of other countries which require military service... And while I'm not a historian, I suspect more conflict has been fought over religious differences than any other cause. When the York Rite Knight Templar swears to defend the Christian faith over any other, yeah, that's not my cup of tea either. So I haven't joined that order. *shrug* Don't feel like I'm missing out on too much.

reply to post by adrenochrome


I think that Josh summerised the situation when he indicated that it was in honor of the original Knights Templar's supposed chivalric demeanor. Whether we, in the present day, believe thier actions to indeed by chivalric is moot. At the time this degree was adopted there was a predominate 'Revial' movement in both the United States and other countries which encompassed the perceived ideals and charaterisitcs of past movements or influences. This sentiment did not end or begin with Masonry but extended to such divergent arts such as architecture and literature.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Sure. There was a craze around Egyptology when the appendant degrees were formalized, too. So Pike rewrote one of the Scottish Rite degrees based on Egyptian mythology. I hear the Scottish Rite Northern Jurisdiction have more recently rewritten some of their degrees to have more modern references, but I'm not familiar with what all the differences are.

[edit on 9/19/2008 by JoshNorton]