posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 04:56 PM
From the above work . . . .
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.
now is this REALLY what Hall wrote, or, is it more internet-drivel? Or, if he DID wrtie this, how should it be interpreted? If Hall was not a Mason
when he wrote this, where does he get all this from, and why does he write it as if he were an authority?
1.) Is he lying?
2.) Is he misunderstanding Masonry, since he himself, was not a Mason?
3.) Is this this true?
4.) Did he EVER correct his assertions when he became a Mason? Maybe he wrote a "revised" work?
Or, perhaps, Manly Hall was predisposed to conspiracty theories like so many other non-Masons? And . . . . he really didn't know what he was talking
about due to lack of evidence?
[edit on 12-9-2004 by LTD602]