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.
Originally posted by stalkingwolf
First that of race. The Old requirement that a candidate be freeborn of a free Mother.
It is my understanding that only a few GLs still enforce this and that overall
it is very close to being removed.
Now comes my question on this point.
As I recall Masonry as a whole disassociated with GL of France back in the
1800 or early 1900s because they did away with the " belief in a supreme being" requirement or something along that line.
Could this same avenue not be used with those who insist on the continued
practice of racism? if this clause were to be removed there is still no reason
PH Masons or F&AM Masons are compelled to join other lodges is there?
Second, that of requiring a candidate to be in possesion of all his limbs.
I realize that this probably dates to a far distant time when the members
may have been predominantly of a military order or group. I also realize that
it is no longer actively practiced, but it is there.
the Third area or " Bone of Contention" is the "penalties" spoken of in the
Blue lodge Rituals. Again I realize, as do most people, that they date from
a far gone (but maybe not that far and returning) time when simply doubting
the"revealed truths of the church" could cost you and your family all your possesions and your lives. I also understand that these penalties are not
vows to be inflicted on another as is commonly stated but invited onesself for
betrayal of trust. Just as an aside here for myself I think they are rather easy
for the crime indicated. to me you can do nothing worse than betray a trust.
it took me several years to understand this but i finally did.
could it not be stated, something like these oaths are in rememberance of
a time when.....?
Originally posted by stalkingwolf
First that of race. The Old requirement that a candidate be freeborn of a free Mother.
It is my understanding that only a few GLs still enforce this and that overall
it is very close to being removed.
Now comes my question on this point.
As I recall Masonry as a whole disassociated with GL of France back in the
1800 or early 1900s because they did away with the " belief in a supreme being" requirement or something along that line.
Could this same avenue not be used with those who insist on the continued
practice of racism? if this clause were to be removed there is still no reason
PH Masons or F&AM Masons are compelled to join other lodges is there?
Second, that of requiring a candidate to be in possesion of all his limbs.
I realize that this probably dates to a far distant time when the members
may have been predominantly of a military order or group. I also realize that
it is no longer actively practiced, but it is there.
the Third area or " Bone of Contention" is the "penalties" spoken of in the
Blue lodge Rituals. Again I realize, as do most people, that they date from
a far gone (but maybe not that far and returning) time when simply doubting
the"revealed truths of the church" could cost you and your family all your possesions and your lives. I also understand that these penalties are not
vows to be inflicted on another as is commonly stated but invited onesself for
betrayal of trust. Just as an aside here for myself I think they are rather easy
for the crime indicated. to me you can do nothing worse than betray a trust.
it took me several years to understand this but i finally did.
could it not be stated, something like these oaths are in rememberance of
a time when.....?
i must not have gotten that far yet. again thanks.
In Morals and Dogma,