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.

 

As Requested: Alex Kennedy's Masonic Origins Research Paper.

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Pre-script: This is a cut-and-paste of the text of my paper, and so there are no footnotes or bibliographical information. If you are curious about the provenance of a quote or other information, please contact me by U2U. For safety's sake, please assume that none of the ideas in this paper are my original work.


In his book “Serendipities: Language and Lunacy,” Umberto Eco refers to Thomas Aquinas’ solution to “the question of that which is more powerful, more convincing, more constructive: the power of the king, the influence of wine, the charms of woman, or the strength of truth.” As I am sure you are all aware, Aquinas comes to the conclusion that as the truth affects the speculative intellectual faculties – the directing component of the being – the truth is the most powerful of these. Eco states that

“[s]uch then is the force of truth. But experience teaches us that often the imposition of truth has been delayed, and its acceptance has come at the price of blood and tears. Is it not possible that a similar force is displayed by misunderstanding, whereby we can legitimately speak of the force of the false?”

Eco then goes on to discuss how misunderstandings such as Christopher Columbus’ underestimation of the circumference of the Earth – despite scholars of the time knowing full well that the Earth was much larger than Columbus imagined – can lead to significant changes in behaviour, and thence to significant changes in society.
One-third of the foundation of our order is Truth. Yet much of what has been written about our history and origins, on close inspection, is found to be specious, or at very least scholarship of very poor quality. Those who have written this work, of course, are not to be considered blameworthy; it may be that they have let their excitement and dedication overcome their critical faculties.
What is more interesting to me than the failings of certain authors, however, is the degree to which these historical explanations are accepted, and indeed believed proven, by brethren of the Craft. I find it impossible to believe that any significant fraction of my brethren would accept these arguments as literally true unless there was a very strong emotional and spiritual reason for believing in them. Indeed, it is my opinion that a number of the myths we hold about the origin of our order function on a symbolic level, providing us with exemplars of behaviour and moral and philosophical frameworks through which to view our Work, while simultaneously suggesting goals for our future. In a very real sense, our myths control our actions. The “force of the false” has been a great motivating factor to us, but we, who have such great experience dealing with symbolism as something to be interpreted rather than the literal truth, would do better to recognize the difference between literal and symbolic history. We must walk a tightrope, comprehending and valuing the symbolic meaning of our allegories while simultaneously understanding the difference between fact and conjecture.
This paper will briefly analyse some popular and symbolic “Freemasonic origin myths:” our supposed direct descent from the Knights Templar, the theory of a synarchic complex dedicated to preserving the bloodline of Christ as presented in “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,” and the “king-making” theory of “The Hiram Key.” Also, I intend to comment on the “reptoid” theories of David Icke and indicate how they use symbolic ideas literally in order to attack Freemasonry.

The Templars

In one of Eco’s fictional novels, “Foucault’s Pendulum,” the cynical Jacapo Belbo states that “[t]here are four kinds of people in this world: cretins, fools, morons, and lunatics.” Of these,

“[t]he lunatic is all idée fixe, and whatever he comes across confirms his lunacy. You can tell him by the liberties he takes with common sense, by his flashes of inspiration, and by the fact that sooner or later he brings up the Templars.”

Many brethren who are not lunatics, however, are fascinated by the idea of Freemasons being descended from the Knights Templar. Who would not want to be associated with the ideal of chivalry, the dashing man of God who will not retreat unless outnumbered three-to-one, but who is also friendly with his Muslim enemy? What kind man can avoid the lure of honour and nobility? What intelligent man can avoid the lure of a secret religious knowledge, inherited perhaps from the Assasins or the Sufis? What egalitarian man can avoid the desire to be associated with a group that was martyred by a cruel alliance between spiritual and earthly tyrrany, and whose Grand Master died because he would not dishonour his own fidelity?
Indeed, this is a powerful call… but how much of what is written above is in fact true of the Templars? In his book “The Templars,” Piers Paul Read paints a very different – but not unsympathetic – picture. The author in this eminently well-researched work presents the Templars as frequently illiterate soldiers of the Pope, who were brave fighters, but truly unsophisticated.

“[…] he ‘is not a trained speaker, his argument is simple and unskillfully delivered, repeating again and again: “we are defenders of the Holy Church”, and emphasizing the danger to Europe from the Muslims…’ – an image that matches almost exactly the impression we gain over the centuries from [Grand Master] James of Molay. But this lack of sophistication does not exclude a certain sanctity. The high regard for the Templars of the Franciscan, John Peckham […] suggests a high standard of holiness in the Order”

Indeed, the body of Read’s work suggests a dedicated group of devout fighting men, as we might expect to see among our modern armed forces.
As Peter Partner states in “The Murdered Magicians: The Templars and their Myth,”

“The unromantic truth is that the Templars of the Middle Ages made not the slightest attempt to build the Temple of Wisdom, unless that Temple is defined as that of the Catholic Church […] In the Holy Land the Templars had been brave soldiers but rather short-sighted politicians, who in no way conformed to the high standards which their nineteenth-century admirers ascribed to them. The most striking characteristic of the medieval Templars was their ordinariness; they represent the common man, and not the uncommon visionary.”

So where does our ideal Templar Knight, the wise mystic soldier whose order fathered Freemasonry, come from? Partner traces the idea back to a speech by the Chevalier Ramsay in 1736. Ramsay was unsatisfied with an order that came from common people, even if they were skilled labourers. “[H]e gave Freemasonry a fictitious crusading parentage,” and thus tried to “[…] suggest that the Freemasons had access to ancient wisdom […] connected with the Old Testament patriarchs and the builders of the Temple” and “[…] ancient rites and lore […] purified and legitimized by their transmission through the Christian Crusaders.”
In hindsight, we can easily ascribe Freemasonry’s deep knowledge of and insight into ancient religious Mysteries to the intelligence and learning of those relatively contemporary gentlemen who wrote our rituals and described our philosophy. But as it has been said that a prophet is never recognized in his own country, perhaps he also cannot be seen in his own time.
But we have retained into the present time the belief that we are descended from the Templars and that the Templars were unique mystics. Speaking of speculation about the Templars, Read states that

“Intriguing though such speculations may be, they betray by their use of language the lack of a plausible historical foundation: ‘the answer would seem to lie…’; ‘it seems very likely that…’; ‘it is known that…’; ‘could well have…’; ‘it seems certain that…’ ‘After some research,’ writes Andrew Sinclair in his book The Discovery of the Grail, ‘these fantasists put forward a hypothesis. Was Christ or the Grail buried under a mountain in the south of France? Did Jesus marry Magdalene and provide the blood line of the Merovingians? Within a few pages, the assertion becomes the actual, the idea is changed into the proof’,”

but this statement applies equally well to many theories of Freemasonry’s origin.
Let us consider John Robinson’s “Born in Blood.” There can be no doubt that Bro. Robinson was one of the most respected researchers in the field of Masonry. The purpose of this paper is not to provide a full critique of this work; but if we look closely, we see that all of Bro. Robinson’s arguments are circumstantial. For example, he argues that Freemasonry must have originally come from France, because the term “Tyler” sounds like the French “tailleur,” (cutter) which more closely resembles the function of that office. Bro. Robinson implies that the original Masons must have been heretics fleeing from the Church because our penalties conform to penalties for heresy. He makes a connection between the legend of Hiram Abiff and the death of Jaques de Molay. He implies that the symbol of the Square and Compasses is derived from the Seal of Solomon (despite the fact that the angles are wrong). This deluge of circumstantial correspondences is of course compelling, but there is no chain of evidence – if we wish to prove, for example, that Napoleon was a Corsican, we would do much better to find a birth certificate indicating where he was born than to say he liked Corsican cuisine and fashion.
If his the arguments for the connection between the Knights Templar and Freemasonry are so tenuous, why is the belief in the connection so tenacious? I would suggest that the myth of descent from the Templars provides us with exemplars of behaviour, and a framework or paradigm through which to view our actions. That this is the case is indicated by the way we mythologise the Templars themselves: to us, they have a secret knowledge, they have a religious understanding separate from that of the Catholic Church, they obtained esoteric wisdom from the East, particularly through the Muslims, they were the finders of some secret treasure or knowledge under the Temple of Jerusalem, and they died for liberty of conscience and religion, fighting representatives of earthly and religious tyranny. Does this not sound like what we wish to be? Anyone who has come to understand the depth of Freemasonry has discovered that there are secrets taught by our Craft which cannot be communicated – not necessarily because they are secret, but because they are inherently ineffable. Likewise, many of these secrets are religious in nature. We strongly believe in fighting tyranny, and we ourselves have been the victims of condemnation by the Catholic Church. Even the discovery of something under the Temple of Jerusalem can be interpreted symbolically as the recovery from the depths of our being of the spiritual philosopher’s stone, as represented by the Masonic acronym VITRIOL. It is my belief that in interpreting this historical theory symbolically rather than literally, we gain greater understanding – whereas if we accept it literally, it has greater power over us, constraining us to a single way of thinking and encoding our actions. This can occur with less laudable mythologies as well.

Guardians of the Bloodline

With the publication of “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,” we see a much less reputable type of scholarship. Emblazoned across the front of the revised 1996 version is a bright yellow banner calling it “[t]he shocking international No. 1 bestseller,” “revised and updated with explosive new discoveries” (emphasis mine). The book spends comparatively little time discussing the origin of Freemasonry, but seems to imply that Freemasonry is a part of a large group of secret societies under the control of the Prieure de Sion. In this book we see considerably worse scholarship than in “Born in Blood.” The authors rely on material put into the Bibliotheque National by an unknown person or persons, which disappears and reappears at extremely convenient intervals, and which is not even necessarily part of the official catalogue of that library. They recall Psalm 118:22 and Matthew 21:42, but rather than accepting the traditional, straightforward reading of these passages (the first being the thanks of an individual not accepted by the authorities or his enemies but later found victorious or important, and the second relating Jesus to that description) they instead hint darkly that because Masons speak often of corner stones and keystones, we, or our “superiors” in the Prieure de Sion, must literally and physically posses Jesus or his bloodline in some way.
This work does not have very much worth as scholarship, but the ideas it presents have an indubitable symbolic strength. This myth of Freemasonry also implies the existence of a religious secret, but adds the ideas of a religious and political power possessed by us, but also our subjugation to a more powerful order; this myth does not promote martyrdom for equality, but rather implies that one of the duties of Freemasonry is to replace the existing power structure of Europe with one based on the Merovignian Dynasty (or, in this worldview, the Dynasty of Christ). This myth deadens somewhat the personal responsibility of Freemasonry, as we were created only to serve the interests of others. Also, it counteracts the egalitarian tendency present in Freemasonry, not only by making us servants, but also implying that among Freemasons there are those with greater or lesser claims to our privileges, and secret directors of our actions (this is a theme which will also appear in anti-Masonic theories). Once again it is obvious how accepting this idea as literal history will have a huge effect on the behaviour of individual Masons and on the destiny of the order as a whole. If we believe that we exist only to serve “unnamed superiors,” many of us will no doubt feel a strong urge to move toward the interior, where those who truly rule and truly understand are to be found. Rather than building our destiny as Masons, we will seek guidance from others and surrender our responsibility.

The Ritual of King-Making

In “The Hiram Key,” we see something of a combination between the opinions seen in “Born in Blood” and “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.” The final conclusion of the authors of this work appears to be that the rituals of Freemasonry are connected to the ancient Egyptian ritual of king-making, and that two separate Christs hoped to use this ritual to establish a kind of theocratic duoarchy in Israel. This work has very interesting ideas, but simultaneously terrible scholarship. This book appears to be the canonical example of the “idea become […] proof” mentioned earlier. For example, the authors state that “[…] the more [they] looked, the more [they] came across theories about the real motives of the Templars […]” for being in Jerusalem and vaguely near the Temple Mount, that an “Israeli archaeologist” (of no further description) found a tunnel under the Temple mount (although nothing about the tunnel is described other than the fact that it was over 30 m. long), and that “[…] items that can be positively identified as Templar artifacts […]” (the reader would no doubt like to know how they were identified as Templar artifacts, but he or she will be disappointed in this hope) were found somewhere under the surface of the Temple mount. Despite the paucity of this evidence, six pages (and no more evidence) later we are informed that the authors “[…] now knew that the Templars had painstakingly excavated the ruins of Herod’s Temple […].” The authors then use a very whittled-down version of some of the ideas presented in “Born in Blood” to associate the Templars with Freemasonry.
The idea that the ritual of Freemasonry is connected to pre-Judaic king-making ceremonies shares some features with the myths already discussed. Pre-eminent is the idea of a religious secret, and a connection to a more primal, basic religion. As I have mentioned before, I feel that this motif is essential to any symbolic explanation of the origin of Freemasonry, because of the nature of the Masonic experience. But the idea that the rituals of Freemasonry in some sense bestow religious and temporal power or status on the initiate is tremendously interesting, symbolically. It reconfirms the idea that Freemasons need not to submit to tyranny, and that we have a right to self-determination in matters of conscience, just as does the myth of descent from the Templars. On the other hand, the myth that each Mason is in a sense a “King” does not necessarily require us to extend the same freedom of conscience to non-Masons. It can easily be seen how dangerous this belief might be if taken too literally.
No matter how dangerous some of these historical theories may be if taken seriously, however, they will never be as vicious as those propounded by anti-masons.

Cold-Blooded and Alien

David Icke is a retired soccer player who faces a world which must be profoundly terrifying. The following is a quote from a post on one of his web pages (not by Icke himself, but by a contributor)

“The supreme shrouded secret of Freemasonry has been one thats endurance has been secured due to its undocumentation, as well as concealment from many thirty-third degreer's ; reason being that the thirty-third degree is split in two, and only certain ones make it to the portals which quickly progress downward, to the underground bases which house the Reptilians. ALL MASONIC LODGES CONTAIN SHAFTS WHICH LEAD TO E.T. UNDERGROUND BASES.”

Icke, like the authors of “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,” believes that Freemasonry is controlled by an overarching organization, although to Icke it is the “Illuminati,” a development of the Adam Weishaupt’s Bavarian Illuminati. To Icke, the reptilians are blood-drinking monsters, much like in the science-fiction series “V.” They are responsible for the assassination of J.F.K. and Princess Diana, and many of the British Royal Family are reptilians.
It is easy to laugh at this kind of framework for understanding the world, but this theory of Masonry’s origin has a symbolic meaning as well. We cannot deny that many of the individuals responsible for change in governmental systems have been Masons. I have no doubt that you are all aware that most of the Founding Fathers of the United States were Masons, and that that country was initially modeled on Masonic principles. Our country’s first Prime Minister was a Mason. The second man to walk on the Moon was a Mason, and carried the banner of his Scottish Rite valley with him.
We all know very well why this is – because Masonry is often able to improve men, and because it teaches men to take the welfare of their community to heart. But for someone who knows nothing of our teachings, this preponderance of Masons in positions of power can seem sinister. To someone who feels that life has treated them unfairly, or who cannot understand the workings of their own society, it may seem that those in charge must have very different values – alien values. It is a short step from believing that those in charge are acting like cold-blooded animals to believing that they actually are cold-blooded animals. And if an individual believes that those in power are taking advantage of those beneath them, it is a short step to believe that the powerful are actually robbing the weak of their life’s essence.
There is no mistaking it – even this kind of belief, if taken literally, if not understood as a symbol, has tremendous power.

The Future

It seems obvious that we must take great care in the symbolic histories we choose to relate, but it would be unwise to eliminate them simply because they are unproven. Our best approach is not to discard this tradition of our order, but to embrace it, and to employ these mythical symbols to further our understanding of our order and its destiny. Just as we can take Santa Claus as an example of generosity, jollity, and kindness, or Superman as an example of heroism and might, we can take the mythical Templars as an example of Chivalry, tolerance, bravery, honour, and fidelity. Even better would be to employ these aspects in the creation of a Masonic Ideal. As Peter Partner states,

“Motzart’s noble Masonic opera, The Magic Flute, holds out the vision of a Temple of Reason and Nature presided over by the ruler-seer, Sarastro. If the Temple of Sarastro is ever to be built, and if man is to live in some state of Motzartian harmony, it may be on the principles in which the Freemason ideal has had a part, but it will not be based on the ideals of the [literal] medieval Templars.”

Indeed, we may look forward to the day when a Mason will be able to say to himself, “where I come from is Masonry, and that is an honour. Where I am going, is Masonry, and that is a noble challenge. Through it all, I will wear the greatest title a man can have – brother.”

[edit on 23-6-2004 by AlexKennedy]




posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 04:27 AM
link   
Quite an interesting read, although obviously pro-mason.
I have been researching the masonic order for some time now and have a few ideas which I would like to share.
First off my main reasons for not applying for membership in masonry lie in the constitution. (As I have learned it may be slightly different from one lodge to another but should be basically the same..??)

taken from the section titled : "6-Behaviour Towards A Strange Brother":
"..But if you discover him to be a true and genuine brother, you are to respect him accordingly; and if he is in want, you MUST relieve him if you can, or direct him how he may be relieved. You must employ him some days or else recommend him to be employed. But you are not charged to do beyod your ability; only to PREFER A POOR BROTHER AND A GOOD MAN AND TRUE BEFORE ANY OTHER PEOPLE in the same circumstances."

I do not agree with this rule and believe that this one rule plays a huge part in explaining why so many stupid people are in charge, and why there are so many problems within our society.

My second gripe with the masonic constitution lies in the following:

"A Mason is a peaceful subject to the civil powers wherever he resides or works, and is never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of the nation, nor to behave himself undutifully to inferior magistrates. He is cheerfully to conform to EVERY lawful authority; to uphold on every occasion the interest of the community, and zealously promote the prosperity of his own country."

My interpretation of the above paragraph is scary. Because if you do not agree with the laws of the land you cant do much about it. Say as a Mason with M.S. or a similar medical condition I wanted to smoke marijuanna to help my condition. This would be against masonic doctrine because it is against the laws of the land ( as i understand it).

The following are Masonic offences;
(i)Conviction for a crime;
(ii) Any act which may have a tendancy to bring discredit on the craft;
(iii)Conduct unbecoming a Mason

Thirdly the above offences seem very vague -- to the point that you can easily be removed from Lodge membership by brethren that do not want you as a member. Doesnt seem fair to me, but I still need to read further on the proceedings etc.

Fourth -- I have known a few masons -- some I would probably trust with my life, others I definatly would not. I have read "the work". Although I know you Masons cannot "refer, or allude to existence in the presence of any person who does not hold or has not held the rand of Senior Deacon or some higher rank in a properly Constituted Lodge", I just thought I should mention that as it is an importand part of understanding masonry - I can offer proof, but I am sure Masons would rather i didnt :p. It seems to me that Masonry is in itself not an evil establishment, but it is made up of men. And men, without fail have proven themselfs faulty when it comes to handling power and authority. True power has been shown to truly corrupt the most honourable of men. So in my opinion, Masonry will never be a truly good institution untill the race of men evolves on its own.

I would like to hear what some actual Masons have to say about this, and their interpretation of the constitution. Also I would like to know if I can get in trouble for having read the work and/or having a copy of it (or any other masonic documents) while not a Mason. Also I would like to know if the Constitution is generally public information or not.







[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS
I would like to hear what some actual Masons have to say about this, and their interpretation of the constitution.


OLMGITNHFTWS, you are aware that Alex is an 'acutal Mason' aren't you!?

benjj



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Lol - I guess i should have been clearer.. I would like to hear what masons have to say about what I wrote and about the constitution ...



[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS
taken from the section titled : "6-Behaviour Towards A Strange Brother":
"..But if you discover him to be a true and genuine brother, you are to respect him accordingly; and if he is in want, you MUST relieve him if you can, or direct him how he may be relieved. You must employ him some days or else recommend him to be employed. But you are not charged to do beyod your ability; only to PREFER A POOR BROTHER AND A GOOD MAN AND TRUE BEFORE ANY OTHER PEOPLE in the same circumstances."

I do not agree with this rule and believe that this one rule plays a huge part in explaining why so many stupid people are in charge, and why there are so many problems within our society.
I have not heard of this rule before. The first part of helping a brother in need I have heard of and agree in helping your fellow man. Now, I personally would not choose a mason over a non-mason in my company just based on the fact he was a mason. (Yes, I have my own company) you have to consider experience and the job as well. But, being a mason displays the type of character they are. But, people are people after all. Now, if a brother asked for help, I would do my best to help. It also states do what you CAN do.



"A Mason is a peaceful subject to the civil powers wherever he resides or works, and is never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of the nation, nor to behave himself undutifully to inferior magistrates. He is cheerfully to conform to EVERY lawful authority; to uphold on every occasion the interest of the community, and zealously promote the prosperity of his own country."
My interpretation of the above paragraph is scary. Because if you do not agree with the laws of the land you cant do much about it. Say as a Mason with M.S. or a similar medical condition I wanted to smoke marijuanna to help my condition. This would be against masonic doctrine because it is against the laws of the land ( as i understand it).

First off.... There is no big brother watching anyone. What is a mason? A mason is supposed to upright and upstanding with high values and morals. If someone is a rapist, murderer, abuser, traitor, etc etc...They really do not fit the mold of a mason right? Well, think about it. We agree that we follow the laws and try to make the world a little but better place/


The following are Masonic offences;
(i)Conviction for a crime;
(ii) Any act which may have a tendancy to bring discredit on the craft;
(iii)Conduct unbecoming a Mason

Thirdly the above offences seem very vague -- to the point that you can easily be removed from Lodge membership by brethren that do not want you as a member. Doesnt seem fair to me, but I still need to read further on the proceedings etc.

This basically follows the answer written above. If two people have a problem between themselves in a lodge, the excuse themselves from the lodge and they work it out as mature grown men. This is not a daycare or preschool. Although people are people, you will seldom see this. In my lodge, everyone is very mature even during debates or disapreements. The harmony is tried to be kept.


Fourth -- I have known a few masons -- some I would probably trust with my life, others I definatly would not. I have read "the work". Although I know you Masons cannot "refer, or allude to existence in the presence of any person who does not hold or has not held the rand of Senior Deacon or some higher rank in a properly Constituted Lodge", I just thought I should mention that as it is an importand part of understanding masonry - I can offer proof, but I am sure Masons would rather i didnt :p. It seems to me that Masonry is in itself not an evil establishment, but it is made up of men. And men, without fail have proven themselfs faulty when it comes to handling power and authority. True power has been shown to truly corrupt the most honourable of men. So in my opinion, Masonry will never be a truly good institution untill the race of men evolves on its own.

Ok, the Senior Deacon stuff I have never heard of. If a man is a Master Mason, then there are no problems with anything. The ceremonies and learnings are kept secret for a reason. 1st, they are our internal business. Just like you would prefer I did not ask you for your personal like hsitory. Also, there are many many not SECRET organizations that do not tell what happens behind their closed doors. IE: Stock meeting, Hospital Staff meetings, ... Any sector you can think of. As Masoney is a learning process what is the point to give the answers at the end. They will only confuse the person. It is good to take in one part at a time and to learn things in a proper order. This is also the masonic way it is done. So, if someone does not like it, then there are many other organizations out there that they may want to follow. Yes, Freemasonry and everyother organization is in the world is run by humans. What else is there to say about this? We want to try to make our lives and this world a bit better place and to enjoy the company of other men that feel the same way. Are there corrupt Masons? Probably. Are the Corrupt Priests? Probably Are the corrupt social workers? Probably Are there corrupt (place anything here) Probably. If that s your thought, then you should never join and group or organization and just stay by yourself. Now, does that make sense?



I would like to hear what some actual Masons have to say about this, and their interpretation of the constitution. Also I would like to know if I can get in trouble for having read the work and/or having a copy of it (or any other masonic documents) while not a Mason. Also I would like to know if the Constitution is generally public information or not.

There is no Big Brother watching and going after people. 2nd. If you were told about the masonic rituals and internal happening, then you should think about the person that told them to you. What about their moral or virtues. The made an oath to God, then they break it willy nilly. It would tell you alot about that person being trustworthy. Sorry if it sounds harsh, but I am a very straight person when giving my opinion. The constitution is not the same for every lodge or even Grand Lodge. The Grand Lodge makes the constitutions, then each lodge is free to change the wording or sules as long as it does not stray too far from the Grand Lodge.

[edit on 23-6-2004 by JCMinJapan]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 07:47 AM
link   
For the stuff you havent heard of or is different for your lodge - I guess I'll say that this is the lodge -- www.masons.sk.ca... - yes the grand lodge - and I quoted my sources directly. I figure you may have access to confirm the info.

Quote"First off.... There is no big brother watching anyone. What is a mason? A mason is supposed to upright and upstanding with high values and morals. If someone is a rapist, murderer, abuser, traitor, etc etc...They really do not fit the mold of a mason right? Well, think about it. We agree that we follow the laws and try to make the world a little but better place"

Ok so are you saying that the constitution is just a basis for masonry and not really strict? -- but more of a guide? And/or i guess how far does it get taken? For example have you ever been witness to, or heard of, a member getting kicked out or brought to masonic justice because of an arguable run-in with the law?

Quote"Are there corrupt Masons? Probably. Are the Corrupt Priests? Probably Are the corrupt social workers? Probably Are there corrupt (place anything here) Probably. If that s your thought, then you should never join and group or organization and just stay by yourself. Now, does that make sense?"

I guess you have a point there --I guess I'm just seing masonry as being associated with alot of power/money/important people etc.. moreso than most other organizations worldwide that I know of. Myb its just my own perception but I dunno.

Quote" If you were told about the masonic rituals and internal happening, then you should think about the person that told them to you"

Yuppers honestly I came upon this information mostly by my own doings -- the person(s) involved didnt really have much to do with it besides being somewhat friendly. Although the mason(s) involved in my acquisition of this info are/is morally challenged to say the least, and is a BIG reason why I will not persue membership. Also, in my opinion, I earned what I know about masonry -- through reading and reading and asking and asking. A lot of the information I have is public knowledge -- but what isnt is easy to keep a secret -- beacause theres nothing really bad or surprising in it. Basically I wanted this knowledge for myself and nobody else, and am content with respecting the secrets as long as I can find some more of them out :p

and to get back to these :
The following are Masonic offences;
(i)Conviction for a crime;
(ii) Any act which may have a tendancy to bring discredit on the craft;
(iii)Conduct unbecoming a Mason

But what is "conduct unbecoming a mason" -- what about polititians publicly getting caught in scams and still being masons? Is there a real definition of what this means? Or is it left up to each lodge and its members to define the meanings and judge each other?

TY for being so open about this
Honestly was worried about asking some of these questions.



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS
Ok so are you saying that the constitution is just a basis for masonry and not really strict? -- but more of a guide? And/or i guess how far does it get taken? For example have you ever been witness to, or heard of, a member getting kicked out or brought to masonic justice because of an arguable run-in with the law?

Well, I would say more of a guide personally. We do not have anything in ours saying you HAVE to hire a mason if he wants a job. I would not hire a Mason to be a programmer if he had no experience and was a plummer just looking for a job. I think that this also follow the `do what you CAN` can phrase. I could not hire him if I could not use him. Also, the Mason involved should see this point as well and would never accept that job offer. The masonic values go in both directions. Now, if I had two equally good programmers and one was a mason, honestly I would probably prefer the mason. To me, it says something of their morals and values. I am not saying the other person is not considered that, just my initial gut reaction. But, I am talking about two nice people, if a mason came in with a big attitude, then the other owuld have the job in a heartbeat.
Yes, I have sadly once been a witness to someone getting kicked out. Due to privacy and keeping internal matter private, I hope you understand that I will not go into it. But, the person 100% deserved to be kicked out of the organization and out of any organization. Now, to be kicked out would be a formal process at the Grand Lodge level.


I guess I'm just seing masonry as being associated with alot of power/money/important people etc.. moreso than most other organizations worldwide that I know of.

A lodge has many different members. Some have money, some barely make by on their salary. The rich members do not HELP OUT the poorer ones. Money is rarely brought up in my lodge. I know of course what they do for a living, but beyond that is their business. But, that is the good thing about the lodge. Is does not matter your station in life. We are all equal in a lodge. If the President of the US or even the Emporer of Japan sat in Lodge with me, we would be equal in the lodge. All stations in life are left at the entrance to the lodge.

A lot of the information I have is public knowledge -- but what isnt is easy to keep a secret -- beacause theres nothing really bad or surprising in it.

We are not really a Secret Society. Most of it is published like you said. It is open to the public. Now, we do have some secrets. But, why you may ask. Well, some of the rituals etc have been handed down through time and it is a tradition of the ancient bretheren to not give the `answers` until earned and we just uphold the traditions.


and to get back to these :
The following are Masonic offences;
(i)Conviction for a crime;
(ii) Any act which may have a tendancy to bring discredit on the craft;
(iii)Conduct unbecoming a Mason

But what is "conduct unbecoming a mason" -- what about polititians publicly getting caught in scams and still being masons? Is there a real definition of what this means? Or is it left up to each lodge and its members to define the meanings and judge each other?

I would say that these are open to interpretation. Now, you will not get kicked out for getting a speeding ticket or something like that. It would have to be something serious. Like I said above, it would have to go through a sort of formal proceeding to get kicked out. The charges would have to be pretty big.

[edit on 23-6-2004 by JCMinJapan]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 09:53 AM
link   
So, just to make it 100% clear for myself...

No-one has any comments on my paper?


That's OK, I'll just assume that means it's perfect, and nothing more can be said



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS
taken from the section titled : "6-Behaviour Towards A Strange Brother":
"..But if you discover him to be a true and genuine brother, you are to respect him accordingly; and if he is in want, you MUST relieve him if you can, or direct him how he may be relieved. You must employ him some days or else recommend him to be employed. But you are not charged to do beyod your ability; only to PREFER A POOR BROTHER AND A GOOD MAN AND TRUE BEFORE ANY OTHER PEOPLE in the same circumstances."

I do not agree with this rule and believe that this one rule plays a huge part in explaining why so many stupid people are in charge, and why there are so many problems within our society.


This is one of the so-called “Ancient Charges”, and was include in the Craft’s “Gothic Constitutions” of the middle ages. It was written when members of the Fraternity were still professional stonemasons, and technically means that no individual Lodge chartered under the Guild should hire a non-guildsman, when a Journeyman was available for work.


My second gripe with the masonic constitution lies in the following:

"A Mason is a peaceful subject to the civil powers wherever he resides or works, and is never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of the nation, nor to behave himself undutifully to inferior magistrates. He is cheerfully to conform to EVERY lawful authority; to uphold on every occasion the interest of the community, and zealously promote the prosperity of his own country."

My interpretation of the above paragraph is scary. Because if you do not agree with the laws of the land you cant do much about it. Say as a Mason with M.S. or a similar medical condition I wanted to smoke marijuanna to help my condition. This would be against masonic doctrine because it is against the laws of the land ( as i understand it).


This Charge is also controversial, but in its historic context, it refers to the members of the Masons Company of London who were re-chartered by William and Mary after the House of Stuart was overthrown in the Glorious Revolution. Members of the Company had taken oaths of loyalty to the new government as a condition of their Charter, and this Charge was intended to remind the Brethren that they were not to countenance Jacobinism.
This Charge is not Holy Writ, and our forefathers, who were Masons, did not hesitate to rebel against authority when it became corrupt.



The following are Masonic offences;
(i)Conviction for a crime;
(ii) Any act which may have a tendancy to bring discredit on the craft;
(iii)Conduct unbecoming a Mason

Thirdly the above offences seem very vague -- to the point that you can easily be removed from Lodge membership by brethren that do not want you as a member. Doesnt seem fair to me, but I still need to read further on the proceedings etc.


It is indeed vague. If a Brother is convicted of a felony, he is automatically expelled. If it is a misdemeanor, it depends on whether the crime was a violation of the “lex naturae”, or “moral law of Nature”. For example, if a Brother is caught moonshining, he can be convicted of a misdemeanor. But since moonshining does not itself violate a universal moral law, it is not unmasonic conduct, per se. But if a Brother’s actions bring shame on the Fraternity, he can be charged by he Craft with unmasonic conduct. It depends on the situation, and is handled on a case-by-case basis.


Fourth -- I have known a few masons -- some I would probably trust with my life, others I definatly would not. I have read "the work". Although I know you Masons cannot "refer, or allude to existence in the presence of any person who does not hold or has not held the rand of Senior Deacon or some higher rank in a properly Constituted Lodge",


I’m not sure what you mean. The existence of what? And what does the Senior Deacon have to do with it?


I would like to hear what some actual Masons have to say about this, and their interpretation of the constitution. Also I would like to know if I can get in trouble for having read the work and/or having a copy of it (or any other masonic documents) while not a Mason. Also I would like to know if the Constitution is generally public information or not.


All Masonic writings are public. As a basic rule of thumb, anything that is allowed to be written, is allowed to be read by anyone who wants to read it.
Each Grand Lodge has its own Constitution, which may be amended at any annual meeting by majority vote. The Ancient Charges that you’ve referred to are recognized out of tradition, but are not usually enforce, nor are they a part of the actual Constitution, which is more modern, and continually changed through amendments and new legislation passed at the Grand Lodge level.

Fiat Lvx.








[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Quote "I’m not sure what you mean. The existence of what? And what does the Senior Deacon have to do with it?"

HAHAHA now are u just following rulez or really dont know what I'm talking about? Any way the existence of "the work" is what I mean. I dunno bout the senior deacon thing either - its just what it says in this copy. Its from the lodge I mention above if u wanna confirm. I guess i did mis-type a bit -- should be "That I will not refer, or allude to its existence in the presence of any person who does not hold or has not held the rank of Senior Deacon or some higher rank in a properly Constituted Lodge"

And then whats the point of having a constitution if so many of the rules arent really rules and/or are open to bigtime interpretation? Simply for the sake of tradition? Doesnt make much sense to me ...

Quote "All Masonic writings are public. As a basic rule of thumb, anything that is allowed to be written, is allowed to be read by anyone who wants to read it."

HAHA ok well thats a straight up lie and you know it if you are a master mason.

All in all Im still kind of sceptical as I have read the stuff that tells "higher up" masons to spread disinformation among the lower ranks, and I'm pretty sure thats what ur mostly feeding me Masonic Light.


[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]


df1

posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
No-one has any comments on my paper?


As I have previously stimulated negative responses from masons with my remarks which was never my desire, I will comment reluctantly as a non-mason.

It appears that you are saying that modern masons have no concrete connection to the templars, egyptians or other ancients based on the evidence. And that these pre-masonic disiplines may well be based more on myth than fact. None-the-less you find that the nobleness of the these legends and associated symbology is something that is useful and worthy aspiration for a mason.

As for Ickes, he is not even worthy of your mention.
.


df1

posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS
And then whats the point of having a constitution if so many of the rules arent really rules and/or are open to bigtime interpretation? Simply for the sake of tradition? Doesnt make much sense to me...

The US constitution and rule of law is pretty much based on the same premise which is also subject to bigtime interpretation some of which I agree with and I some I do not. How is the masons constitution different?



Quote "All Masonic writings are public. As a basic rule of thumb, anything that is allowed to be written, is allowed to be read by anyone who wants to read it."

HAHA ok well thats a straight up lie and you know it if you are a master mason.

Given the technology of today and number of masons, it would seem that any great secret in print would quickly find its way to the copying machine and the web. Dont you think so?



All in all Im still kind of sceptical as I have read the stuff that tells "higher up" masons to spread disinformation among the lower ranks, and I'm pretty sure thats what ur mostly feeding me.

Not being a mason, but being open minded it appears that masons provide information to other masons according to the abilites of the person receiving the information. This is not to say different information is provided to different masons, but rather that different masons interpret the same information differently according to their individual capacity to understand the information. I do not feel a great masonic dictator tells all masons at different levels what to think, while I am sure guidance is provided when requested or where it is needed, but the final decision on what it all means belongs to the individual.

Any mason, please feel free to correcct me.
.



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link   


The US constitution and rule of law is pretty much based on the same premise which is also subject to bigtime interpretation some of which I agree with and I some I do not. How is the masons constitution different?


Well you would have to read it to see from my perspective -- and its much different from the U.S. constitution. I could post my copy if its ok with the masons but I dont know and wouldnt feel comfortable with it unless i was 100 percent sure.



Given the technology of today and number of masons, it would seem that any great secret in print would quickly find its way to the copying machine and the web. Dont you think so?


Nope -- find a copy of "The Work" and gimme the link. Or how about the constitution for the SK grand lodge mentioned above?.

I think I can pretty much agree with your last statement as maybe I was a bit harsh in my wording.


[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]


df1

posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS

Well you would have to read it to see from my perspective -- and its much different from the U.S. constitution. I could post my copy if its ok with the masons but I dont know and wouldnt feel comfortable with it unless i was 100 percent sure.

As I understand a constitution, it is nothing more than a set of laws, regulations, rules or what ever you choose to call them that govern an organization, government or business. Perhaps you find the rules of the masons bizarre or even outrightly wrong, but that these rules would float or change with times is normal. Perhaps different castes within the masons are treated differently than others, but OJ and Kobe are treated differently under US law because they have lots of dollars to obtain superior representation. We may not like it but we all know that it happens. Having not seen the document you reference, I am quite stumped as to what you are getting at.



Nope -- find a copy of "The Work" and gimme the link. Or how about the constitution for the SK grand lodge mentioned above?.

I think I can pretty much agree with your last statement as maybe I was a bit harsh in my wording.

You could have asked me to provide the web edition of the 1941 Sears catalog and I would have equal difficulty, but that does not make it a secret. It could well mean that nobody really cares about the catalog to have replicated it.

I began looking into the masons after reading mountains of anti-mason commentary and thus far I have not found anything to cause me to have a a darkly negative opinion of the masons. Either they are the most successful covert organization to ever walk the earth or they nothing other than seekers of knowledge and light as they represent. It seems like the later to me.

A page about Freemasonry
(est. October 1994 -- the World's Oldest Masonic Web-site)
web.mit.edu...

PS Review of Freemasonry The premier masonic online magazine made by Freemasons for Freemasons
welcome.to...
.



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS
HAHAHA now are u just following rulez or really dont know what I'm talking about? Any way the existence of "the work" is what I mean. I dunno bout the senior deacon thing either - its just what it says in this copy. Its from the lodge I mention above if u wanna confirm. I guess i did mis-type a bit -- should be "That I will not refer, or allude to its existence in the presence of any person who does not hold or has not held the rank of Senior Deacon or some higher rank in a properly Constituted Lodge"


I’ve never heard of such a thing. The “work” (as we call it) is the ceremonial initiation of a Candidate into the mysteries of Freemasonry. I’ve never heard of any Mason in the history of the world that denies its existence, and this leads me to believe that your source could possibly be inauthentic.


And then whats the point of having a constitution if so many of the rules arent really rules and/or are open to bigtime interpretation? Simply for the sake of tradition? Doesnt make much sense to me ...


You may have misinterpreted my meaning. The Constitution of the Grand Lodge is in full effect within the Grand Lodge’s jurisdiction. But the so-called Ancient Constitutions are not part of the actual Constitution. We preserve those documents from tradition, but they do not form a part of Masonic law; because they concern the governing of a stonemasons guild, they are outdated, and superceded by the Grand Lodge’s individual Constitution, which regulates the modern Fraternity.


Quote "All Masonic writings are public. As a basic rule of thumb, anything that is allowed to be written, is allowed to be read by anyone who wants to read it."

HAHA ok well thats a straight up lie and you know it if you are a master mason.


I take offense at your accusation that I am a liar, especially when you provide absolutely nothing to substantiate it.
All Masonic books are available to the public, and have always been available to the public. Period.
The only thing that is not available to the public is the actual Ritual, which is forbidden to be written.
Since anything written down is liable to fall into the hands of non-Masons, I will re-state, it is a rule of thumb that anything that is written down is done so assuming that non-Masons will read it. This is nothing but common sense.



All in all Im still kind of sceptical as I have read the stuff that tells "higher up" masons to spread disinformation among the lower ranks, and I'm pretty sure thats what ur mostly feeding me Masonic Light.


There are no authentic Masonic writings that tell “higher ups” to mislead anybody. There are no “higher ups” in Masonry. That is purely the invention of the anti-Masons.
To present “evidence” of such a ridiculous claim, they take out of context a half sentence from Albert Pike’s book “Morals and Dogma” (which consists of over 800 pages), and twist it to fit their feeble “theories”.
They would have us believe that Pike was giving instructions to “mislead” Masons of lower degrees. But of course, this theory is just plain stupid. If Pike was involved in some sort of secret conspiracy to do this, why would he publish it in a book? Wouldn’t he have kept quiet about?

But if we check Morals and Dogma, and read what he wrote in context, we see what he meant. Here, Pike says that those of the Blue Degrees are “intentionally misled” by false interpretations contained in the lectures. He says this was because Webb and Cross had no idea what the symbols meant, so they just invented stuff for them to mean when they wrote the lectures.
Pike then goes on to give what he considered the “correct” interpretation of Blue Lodge symbolism.

Now, whether Pike was right or wrong is a matter of personal opinion. BUT...Pike was attempting to correct what he thought was misleading his Brethren, not continue it. This is completely ignored by profane critics.

Fiat Lvx.



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   


this leads me to believe that your source could possibly be inauthentic.


You know as well as I there is no mistake. You are an outright liar. Period.

Maybe i should just say heck with it and post all my info. I wonder how bad I would be punished...
Anyway ...


[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 03:15 PM
link   


Given the technology of today and number of masons, it would seem that any great secret in print would quickly find its way to the copying machine and the web. Dont you think so?

then you go on to contradict yourself


You could have asked me to provide the web edition of the 1941 Sears catalog and I would have equal difficulty, but that does not make it a secret. It could well mean that nobody really cares about the catalog to have replicated it.

so no matter what I say you will argue it ..... pretty pointless hey ?

[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS



this leads me to believe that your source could possibly be inauthentic.


You know as well as I there is no mistake. You are an outright liar. Period.


Well, then, I'm a liar too, because I see NOTHING at ALL in my personal copy of the Book of the Work (in which the ritual is not written down, but rather represented by various symbols) referring to its not being mentionable to anyone other than a Senior Deacon or more senior officer.

Perhaps the liar is you? It's hard to tell. You keep blathering on about how you're going to reveal something online (and might I mention that you hijacked a thread which was supposed to be about my paper, above, to do it. Remember my paper? Has nothing to do with what you're talking about?) but you never do it. There is no "punishment" for revealing rituals and the like unless you are a Freemason -- in which case the punishment is expulsion. Pure and simple. You're acting like a paranoid or a jerk, one of the two. I would rather not have our rituals posted on the web, but it won't be the first time, and it won't be the last (if, in fact, what you have is actually our rituals. From the BS you're spouting about the S.D., I strongly suspect it isn't). The only thing holding you back is any morals you might posess that tell you it might not be right to post other people's secrets publicly. Your call.



posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 03:41 PM
link   
edit: Apologies to all

[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]


df1

posted on Jun, 23 2004 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLMGITNHFTWS



Given the technology of today and number of masons, it would seem that any great secret in print would quickly find its way to the copying machine and the web. Dont you think so?

then you go on to contradict yourself


You could have asked me to provide the web edition of the 1941 Sears catalog and I would have equal difficulty, but that does not make it a secret. It could well mean that nobody really cares about the catalog to have replicated it.

so no matter what I say you will argue it ..... pretty pointless hey ?

[edit on 23-6-2004 by OLMGITNHFTWS]


Joust with your windmill of choice. I wish you luck and victory.
.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join