Yes, I have a lot of chips.
Nothing personal.

I didn't take it too personally Mogus - you know very little about me so I know nothing you said was aimed at me as an individual.

I guess we're coming down to a culture difference here. I'm english, not american; things seem to be more different than I ever realised. Most british seem to have the impression that america is more advanced in all ways that quaint old england, but from what you briefly described it seems as if that's not actually true.

Do you know that in my 30 years of doing some generally non-feminine things this is the first time I've ever encountered opposition because of my gender? Perhaps radical feminism never hit quite as hard here - people I know just do as they do. Tradition is not mocked but manages to co-exist alongside change.

People should be able to maintain thier urge's at any function. If one can not do that, then they could lose control of those urge's, which is very dangerous. Somehow I just can't swallow that exuse. Not to mention, in many old masonic texts and pictures you see women at the ceremonies. So what is up with that?? I got a prediction. This masonry talk about not accepting women is a lie. Unless these Freemasons among us just don't know what they are talking about. Can someone help me on this. I thought for sure that women had their own lodges. Hasn't anyone herd the same???

ok this one has been mentioned elsewhere and I have also checked it out as well. There are women's lodges and also mixed co-masonry lodges in existance but like several other offshoots of regular freemasonry, they are not given recognition by the Official Grand Lodge.

Now I could seek to join one of these pseudo organisations, but if I'm going to do something I like to do it properly!

But what is "doing it properly" Arc? If you want to join what you call proper freemasonry just because women aren't allowed to and you wanna break the mould, you're wanting to join for the wrong reasons. Even as a woman.
I'm a freemason in the UK whose in a couple of degrees and I find it hard enough to explain in a normal conversation why women aren't allowed in regular freemasonry. Writing my thoughts down is even harder. The written word can be misconstrued so easily. But I'll try for you.
Brotherhood is a damned hard word to quantify, to explain. It's one of those words that even when you speak to another man, they'll find you all ghey and uncool. But freemasonry gives me brotherhood. A love of man that it's hard to gain in the social system that we live in today. It gives me the chance to be with my fellow man at a level where real life would not give me the opportunity. It gives me a chance to interact socially and spiritually with another person. It's damned hard to define. Almost impossible.
To admit women would break that sanctity. That wouldn't be the women's fault. It's just the way things are. You don't go into KFC and order a hamburger.
You went to a Catholic nun's school. Were there any boys there? Or any none Catholics? If there weren't does that mean that your education was sold out? Does it mean you should have admitted protestant boys? Would things have been better?
I can fully understand the critisisms that you have. Hell, without trying to sound condescending, if I were in your position I might feel the same way. But the fact is that I'm not.
Let us men have our freemasonry. There's millions of other things where women and men are on equal terms. And there's millions of things that are women only. Do I have a right to join the Women's Institute? Hell no. Does that mean that for the sake of political correction that they should change their rules and admit men? Hell no, again.
Some things are just the way they are. You can't change them for whatever reason (good or bad). Freemasonry is one of those.

It doesn't mean I look upon you as any less of a person as a woman because you can't be a freemason. It just is.

Leveller thanks for trying to put the concept of brotherhood across to me. I think I understand what you are trying to say and can appreciate why you said it.

Perhaps I didn't explain too well what 'doing it properly' meant, plus maybe I don't know enough about the organisation and inside information of a lodge. I feel that because the pseudo co-masonic and women only lodges are not recognised, they are also not regulated in the same way. However if these lodges are to all intents and purposes identical to regular lodges apart from this official recognition, then that at least is a start.

To use your catholic school analogy - this would almost be like saying the girl's school could pretend to be catholic and do lots of catholic things, but it would lack the essential sense of catholism.

Sure there are women only organisations, although the WI isn't really my style (have attended with my mother on occasion) but there is nothing really with the same far reaching history and values that I believed (perhaps incorrectly) masonry has. All of you are painting a rather grim picture of masonry as a gentleman's club with pretensions - if that is the case then maybe I should leave the men to defend their own

I hate to say it arc but you probably know more about the Organization than Leveller does.

Don't be fooled by the Judge of Character, they aren't always the shinning light.

Mogus -- "I mean, how are men supposed to remain men if we have women shoving their damn noses into everything we do?"

Mogus -- "and dislike many of the people in it"

Dare I call you and Leveller Hypocrits?

I make a bad joke, admit it was bad, and say my appologies to Arc, then you two have the GAUL, to say anything about me?

I should really take this to the Moderators, there are reasons I become aggrevated on this board, and not ONCE have I pointed it out to the Moderators, but you Mogus went to far in this Thread, and Leveller you are full of lies about yourself.

You constantly say I'm putting masonry in a "bad perspective" and how's that?

I MADE A JOKE, not Masonry. I DON'T HAVE THE SAME OPINIONS AS OTHERS, not Masonry. You should know that right? "Brother".

As for you arc, man you have become real cool, I feel sorry I'd never let women into the "fraternity" because honestly (and what these 2 chumps won't admit) is there is NO good reason to omitt women.

It's tradition, plain and simple. You keep dreaming maybe our ridgid views one day will be over turned. And we'll see it was for the better.

[Edited on 17-3-2003 by Hammerite]

Freemason .... I thought Hammerite sounded familiar! LOL So ... Ole FM is back huh?

Actually hammerite comes from the AWESOME game of "Thief" go play

Originally posted by Hammerite
I


I should really take this to the Moderators, there are reasons I become aggrevated on this board, and not ONCE have I pointed it out to the Moderators, but you Mogus went to far in this Thread, and Leveller you are full of lies about yourself.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really give a monkey's ass if you go to the moderators. You can go to Grand Lodge for all I care. The fact is that you are a bullsh!tter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


You constantly say I'm putting masonry in a "bad perspective" and how's that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody likes a fanatic. Especially when they put their views across not caring how other people react to them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


I MADE A JOKE, not Masonry. I DON'T HAVE THE SAME OPINIONS AS OTHERS, not Masonry. You should know that right? "Brother".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you could read you would see that I thought that the joke was trivial.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


As for you arc, man you have become real cool, I feel sorry I'd never let women into the "fraternity" because honestly (and what these 2 chumps won't admit) is there is NO good reason to omitt women.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sentence, more than any other, confirms my suspicions about you.

FreeMason,

Leave arc alone ... I'm sure sexist remark's aren't permited. Your stepping out of line again bud.

arc is da bomb!

Edited due to my lack of interest in further bothering with Hammer.

Get over yourself and grow up. You are such a baby.

[Edited on 18-3-2003 by Mogus]

e-nonymous Fm was a better poster than ull ever be and where did he step outta line. its not ur place to correct ppl and tell them when they are outta line

FM got banned before by doing the same thing he is doing again as hammer. Just reminding him of that. He's very shor tempered and volatile. Need's to be improved upon cuz obviously the rule's mean crap to him. He doesn't feel they apply to him and half his post's were all crap theory easily debunked by other's ... All I've posted were comment's or what I thought .... I'm not stupid enough to post something like FM does without me even knowing what I'm posting about ...

But, it's not my place to argue over FM's fault's with you ... so any reply that would continue on as an argument will be ignored. Rule's are rule's and it's already a known fact that FM doesn't believe they apply to him here ....

I tought that this thread falled in the abyss of ATS.

No, In fact, This Square is call the solar square. You can tranmute all letters by numbers and you will jave alway the same result (XV = 15). The solar numver in alchemy.

The lodge of great orient freemasons initiation cursus is based on the three alchemy secret :
The Philosopher stone (A legend stone : If you touch this stone, say the legend, science will have no secret for you = Prescience)

the source of youth (A miracle source in a britain magic wood (BrocÈliande). If you drink his water you will always stay young and healty. Merlin tomb is i, this wood)

the transmutation of lead into gold (An alchemy formulae, The key should be in this square, but I really dont know how to change lead into gold... )

Maybe I'll soon write a thread about alchemy.
But a famous italian alchemist (Parelcese) had wrote the secrets of alchemy on an emerauld table.
This table really exist, but it keep hide by freemasons...

Freemasonry is indeed a society with secrets, but this square is not one of them. It has been widely used for centuries in folkmedicine and other organized and unorganized ritual systems.

Please bear with me here. The meaning of cryptic writings in antique languages is often expounded on by people who know nothing about the language itself. People will look up the words in a dictionary, or take the meanings on faith from someone else, and then try to translate the writing while ignoring the grammatical markers the words contain. They ignore them because they don't know they are there. At least, this is my experience with native English speakers, because our language has lost most of its inflections.

If you are bored by this sort of thing, just skip the stuff between the lines:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sator is in the nominative or vocative case. One of its meanings is "sower". Authors such as Vergil and Cicero also used it to mean "begetter" or even "creator". For instance, Cicero uses it in the phrase caelestum sator as a euphemism for Jupiter. Less commonly, it has had the meaning of "author".

Tenet is the present indicative, third person singular form of the verb teneo. Its basic meanings are: to hold, to have, to keep. In the most basic sense, it describes the physical act of holding something in the hand or in the mouth, etc. However, it is frequently used with meanings that are derived from its most basic sense. For instance, it can mean: to control, to guard, to maintain, to retain, to restrain, etc. It could be translated then as: "He/She/It holds/is holding/does hold."

If Opera is a noun, it is definately singular, but it could be in the nominative, ablative, or vocative case. Its basic meanings are: service, exertion, labor, work. Used in the ablative, it oftens means "through the agency of".

Opera could be a verb, too. In this case it is in the imperative singular form of the verb opero. The basic meaning of opero are: to work, to labor, to toil. By extension, it has been used to mean "to devote oneself to" and "to produce by working". In a religious sense, it has been used to mean "to serve the gods." As an imperative, some translations could be: "Work!", "Produce!", "Worship!".

Rotas is the accusative plural of rota, which does mean wheel.

Arepo is related to the verb repo. Repo is the first present indicative, first person singular, of the verb. Translated it means: "I creep." It could also mean "I crawl." The closest related word I know of or have been able to find is adrepo. This word is a combination of ad, which means in, into, towards, etc., and the word repo. Adrepo means "I crawl/creep up on." It is common to drop the "d" from ad when making a word like this, so whoever first created this square simply omitted the 'd' from adrepo so it would fit in the square.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sooooo...

Latin is an inflected language, so while word order can be used in Latin to place emphasis or to imply relationship, word order in Latin is largely unimportant. We have the words:

Sator tenet opera rotas arepo.

This could be one or more sentences depending on the relationship of the words.

I think we are safe to say Sator has to be the subject of a sentence. Rotas has to be the direct object of a sentence.

Taking them in order, we might get:

The/A sower/creator/begetter holds/controls/maintains. I crawl/creep up on the wheels through exertion/labor/work/service.

Taking them out of order:

Sower/Begetter/Creator, work/produce/worship! He/She/It holds/controls/maintains. I crawl/creep up on the wheels.

Or:

Sower/Begetter/Creator! It holds/controls/maintains through exertion/labor/work/service. I crawl/creep up on the wheels.

Or:

Work (i.e. a creation)! The sower/begetter/creator holds/controls/maintains the wheels. I crawl/creep up on.

Or .....

What is my point?

Because this bit of writing exists outside any larger context, the number of possible translations are many. And not one of them is any more valid than all the others. Even the speaker and audience are not definite. The speaker could be a god talking to his creation, or a worshiper talking to a god, or someone talking to a sower or a sower talking to his work, etc.

There are really only two things we can be sure of here:
1. the speaker "creeps/crawls up on" something;
2. someone/thing "holds/controls/maintains something".

Oh, I guess we also know that someone/thing is doing something to/with "the wheels". Not really much to go on, is it?

It is possible that the one true meaning has been passed down orally, in secret, from person to person in one or more associations, societies, etc. If so, there would be no way to prove it was the one true meaning after so much time had passed.

It is also possible that such organizations might have historical documents which they believe prove the meaning they assign is the one true meaning. Without supporting evidence gained by scientific study and scholarship by neutral third-parties, this sort of proof is really no proof at all. In this instance, if a member of this kind of organization chooses to believe in the documents, then it becomes a matter of faith.


(Stepping up on soap box)

So, please, whether you believe in secret societies or not, whether you believe in magic or not, don't accept simplistic translations as valid support for anyone's theories. Even if they support what you feel to be the truth, make sure you maintain your intellectual integrity by requiring a complete explanation of these kinds of translations from languages you don't understand.

Or understand that you are accepting a meaning handed to you by an authority you trust, and that that is not an intellectual act, but an act of faith. In which case, if you pass the meaning on, be honest and let people know that you are not giving them hard facts, but articles of belief.

(Stepping down from soap box)

[Edited on 30-4-2004 by glee]

[Edited on 30-4-2004 by glee]

n/m

[Edited on 1-5-2004 by enomus]