The Masons

a reply to: Air0x

So, as a user of the Internet (it's a series of tubes, you see) - let me introduce you to something called Google.

Good God, is this thread serious?? Are you HONESTLY saying you've not done a single amount of your own investigation into Freemasonry? It isn't "secret", nor is it a secret society. We just have a few things we don't talk about publicly.

At our heart, we're a bunch of charity-focused guys who enjoy a drink and the company of other good chaps. That's it, really.

All this crap about running the world, secret powers and knowledge - pure Hollywood, mate. It's nothing like that.

Hell, go to your local lodge and ask - they will be happy to discuss.

Or....are you posting here because you want (and hope) to get a certain discourse started along the former lines of hidden powers, secret arts and universal knowledge kept from the public? :/

originally posted by: Emma3
a reply to: Air0x

Their secrets are not even disclosed to the initiates, it's only when the member reaches certain degrees that they start telling him what is really about. If you want to know, read "morals and dogma" from Albert Pike or "the secret teachings of all ages" by Manly P Hall.

There is nothing secret in any of these books.

If you talk about the fact that they both refer to a concept called "Lucifer" to describe the darkness-dispelling power of the intellect and that you consider it means they worship Satan, know that it is a common modern misconception many Christians are doing, despite the word Lucifer being used many times in the Bible to describe John the Baptist and the Christ, and which is, to avoid confusion for the layman reader, translated only as "the morning star" in modern Bibles. But make no mistake, the original texts used the words lucifer or heōsphoros.


At some point in the Bible is was also used sarcastically to mock the hybris of a Babylonian king, and because of that a plethora of ill-informed Christians perpetuate the myth that Lucifer means Satan despite all erudite warning that is a mistake made out of ignorance

"The exposition of this passage, which some have given, as if it referred to Satan, has arisen from ignorance: for the context plainly shows these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians." - Calvin
Luther also considered it a gross error to refer this verse to the devil.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Huzzah a lodge is five mins away gonna check it out.

originally posted by: noonebutme
All this crap about running the world, secret powers and knowledge - pure Hollywood, mate. It's nothing like that.

As much as I like masons, as much as it is not really helping to keep denying that in at least some countries the members of masonic lodges were at the front line of a series of societal changes that were enforced to bring forward a more progressive agenda when old-school Christian morals were the main socially accepted reality.

They are not ruling the world in secret, but they do certainly have politicians and notables in their ranks, and they discuss topics that were usually considered to be the exclusivity of the Christian morality. Discussions that had and have much influence on the personal opinions of the people deciding what laws will be proposed and voted in the political institutions of the world.


Again, not saying it's bad, it's the democratic process and I'm glad the politicians who are also masons have ethics and the greater good in mind, but to deny it happened or is happening (but much less than before) also sounds like cognitive dissonance.

originally posted by: JUhrman
As much as I like masons, as much as it is not really helping to keep denying that in at least some countries the members of masonic lodges were at the front line of a series of societal changes that were enforced to bring forward a more progressive agenda when old-school Christian morals were the main socially accepted reality.

Then said people were not, in fact, Masons in the real sense as that goes against the very principles of Freemasonry. And which countries are you talking about? Which lodges were at the front lines of which societal changes? Please tell me as I'm unaware.

They are not ruling the world in secret, but they do certainly have politicians and notables in their ranks, and they discuss topics that were usually considered to be the exclusivity of the Christian morality. Discussions that had and have much influence on the personal opinions of the people deciding what laws will be proposed and voted in the political institutions of the world.

Again, the discussion of politics within a lodge is strictly forbidden, as is "doing favours" for your fellow brother. If people ARE doing that, then they are not Masons in the real sense. My lodge adheres to these principles, as I suspect all other lodges in the UK do.

Again, not saying it's bad, it's the democratic process and I'm glad the politicians who are also masons have ethics and the greater good in mind, but to deny it happened or is happening (but much less than before) also sounds like cognitive dissonance.

Well, I suspect some individuals do this, and said individuals may be Masons, but that does not then suggest Masonry is at the heart of these auspicious changes. Masonry is very clear on all this - and I have never seen it nor have I heard of anyone who's known someone, who's known someone, where it has happened. I think this sort of mentality is perpetuated by those who are not part of it and those who fear it.

Ok, my post got removed because I was just quoting this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
saying it was a great post (one line post). Sorry about that.

I was thinking of saying all of that, but it was not worth it since that member had already posted it, so I just wanted to highlight it. There you go.

a reply to: noonebutme

You seem to have misread me. I'm not saying they were openly discussing politics (even if it's only since 1850 that you can't officially discuss politics in the lodges of the largest Belgian obedience)

I'm saying they were discussing philosophical, ethical and social topics that would later be the subject of laws by the power of the governing bodies.

The countries I talk about are at least France and Belgium where Freemasonry was and still is a powerful philosophical counter-power to the more traditional Christian views. I don't know about the details in UK or US, I admit, and it's probably a bit different.

It's certainly not thanks to hardcore Christians that we have progressive laws regarding same-sex marriage, abortion, gender equality or assisted suicide in here (and I say this as a Christian), and at least a few politicians have made very thinly veiled allusions that it wasn't unusual to discuss such ethical topics in lodges, and that it helped them to find a satisfying consensus and to write just laws, without hurting religious sensibilities too much.

Again, I'm not talking about today where lobbying is the main medium to influence the governing bodies of the world, but before that, lodges were a place where anyone would be allowed to discuss topics that would have you labelled a "heretic" by the Christian dogmas of the time, without fear of being judged.

As such, lodges have always been seen here as places free from the influence of the Church, influence which was extending to the government too thanks to strong popular support. That's one of the main reason why many free-thinking politicians have decided to join lodges here, to discuss these important social topics without the weight of religious traditions on their shoulders.

I know it's a bit different in the US where religion is still very important so many masons are also Christians. But here, historically, free-masonry has always been considered as a secular counter-power to the incredible influence of the Vatican over people's moral views.

Actually, most lodges here and in France don't even require Masons to believe in a higher power and the immortality of the soul. This was removed from their status around the end of the 19th century.



With all this, it doesn't surprise me AT ALL if some hardcore Christian fundamentalists consider that Freemasons are satanists conspiring in secret to push forward a liberal agenda.

It doesn't make it right, but I can at least understand how they reach such conclusion in their twisted logic. The only mistake that they make is that there isn't a Masonic consensus on all these topics, that they are simply discussed between people of different sensibilities, religious people included. If a politician is also a Mason and decides to vote in favor of same-sex marriage after a discussion on this very topic within his lodge, it's still his personal choice and belief, not the one of the lodge.

a reply to: Emma3
Well, his post was full of errors. As was your previous one about us "hiding our secrets".

originally posted by: JUhrman
a reply to: network dude

The only person who shared with me to have had contact with masons was also suggested (not asked) to join a lodge. It was in the context of her work that it happened and she felt a distinct corporatic vibe in this suggestion.

This kind of behavior might be an exception in the US, but in Belgium it's much less the case and it's not a big secret that a great deal of the politicians and magistrates are also Freemasons.

That being said, I still not consider the organization as nefarious, and the possibility to talk in private and secret that the lodges offer can still be found in other places anyway.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but a girl can't become a Freemason in a recognized lodge, so I don't know why a recognized lodge would ask a women to join a fraternity . Please correct me if I misinterpreted your comment.

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but a girl can't become a Freemason in a recognized lodge, so I don't know why a recognized lodge would ask a women to join a fraternity . Please correct me if I misinterpreted your comment.

I don't know what is a "recognized lodge", but they are definitely at least a few masonic obediences in Belgium and France which are open to both genders, or even to women alone. I think it's a good thing.

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but a girl can't become a Freemason in a recognized lodge, so I don't know why a recognized lodge would ask a women to join a fraternity . Please correct me if I misinterpreted your comment.

I don't know what is a "recognized lodge", but they are definitely at least a few masonic obediences in Belgium and France which are open to both genders, or even to women alone. I think it's a good thing.

According to masonicinfo- A recognized lodge is a lodge that meets the qualifications of Freemasonry and "adhere to the same principles and 'landmarks' as the body which does the recognizing."

Here is a link/source to a better explanation from an actual Freemason www.masonicinfo.com...

The lodge that tried to recruit your friend who's a woman are more than likely not recognized and are one of the many groups who claim to be Freemasons. Anyone can start a group and claim they are Freemasons but being a member of some of those groups can hurt/erase a persons chances of becoming an member of a recognized lodge. Many unrecognized lodges do recruit.

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but a girl can't become a Freemason in a recognized lodge, so I don't know why a recognized lodge would ask a women to join a fraternity . Please correct me if I misinterpreted your comment.

I don't know what is a "recognized lodge", but they are definitely at least a few masonic obediences in Belgium and France which are open to both genders, or even to women alone. I think it's a good thing.

There are tons of unrecognized lodges out there and many of them are scams. I've seen quite a few founders of those lodges try and confuse people who wish to become members by making it seem like they are a recognized lodge. I believe people like to call these lodges "Progressive Freemasonry", I'm pretty sure they allow woman and atheists into their lodges

a reply to: nancyliedersdeaddog

The obediences I talk about certainly aren't scams. They are indeed more progressive obediences in a more progressive country. It's the 21st century, man only freemasonry make it look as archaic as the Vatican.

If being a recognized lodge means getting the blessing of a few conservative dudes in London or Washington then of course some French speaking lodges will never get this blessing.

But if it means being recognized by other important obediences and being a part of a large network of lodges, then they are certainly recognized.

The world and history of freemasonry is complex and what is tradition in one country might not be in another.

I sincerely hope that most masons do not consider that there is only one correct rite which is of English descent and that anything else is considered a scam. That would be a very #ty opinion for masons to have.

Thinking about it I do understand now why there are so many schizms in freemasonry. It's really the part about it I like the less, and which in a sense is also plaguing the Church. That inability to reform itself internally, staying stuck in an outdated tradition, pushing progressive thinkers to become dissidents.





Edit: I see now the link you posted about being recognized. The lodges I mentioned are, according to that definition, recognized within and without their own obedience. I don't know how familiar you are with freemasonry in other countries than anglo-saxon ones, but there are many different lodges following different rites, belonging to different obediences. They are as much "masonic" as your typical Scottish or York rite lodges. Continental freemasonry has an history and validity of its own, whether it pleases or not English and American masons.

Organizations such as Le Droit Humain (DH), Co-Masonry, International Free & Accepted Masons (IF&AM), Humanitas, the Grand Lodge of the United States, and many (but not all) Grand Orients (GO), along with miscellaneous others all operate outside the recognition of the large body of Freemasonry and while there are some who choose to affiliate with these bodies for personal reasons, they should be aware that the organizations which they join - although patterned (in a few cases, very closely) after Freemasonry - are simply not recognized as such by the large body of Masons nor will they be welcome to share Masonic communication with the 4-6 million Masons world-wide. (Please see our additional page titled "What about Women" in Masonry and don't miss our page on FAKE MASONRY!)

That's what I thought, really an anglo-saxon centric and exclusive view, labeling anything out of their control sphere as "unrecognized" and even fake.

Really the way to go for a so-called humanist organisation! Clearly not better than anyone claiming "your god is false mine is the only one".
So if my personal beliefs are that women and men should be equal in Freemasonry, and that spiritual beliefs are a personal matter and not a pre-requisite for joining, I can only choose between between denying my beliefs to fit in a 6 million people organization or to go f* myself and join a "fake freemasonry" group. Wow, "recognized freemasonry" just lost a lot of credibility in my mind, not that they care since they seem to believe that their large number gives them the authority to know what's right.

a reply to: boymonkey74

well good luck! ((you won't need it))

Go in and have a chat. There should be cookies...I had cookies

Next thing I knew I was sponsored, travelled through the three degrees and raised...incredible experience

And don't you worry none about clout...One of the greatest ways I have heard the membership of Masonry described is...

"Garbagemen and Governors"

a reply to: nancyliedersdeaddog

Still reading about this "recognized" lodges stuff.

So apparently, only one French obedience out of 10 main ones (who, despite their differences, recognize each others as brothers and sisters) was recognized by the Great united lodge of England. Not even the largest one.

But the lodge of England stopped recognized it too in 2011. So basically, a country like France with a great masonic tradition has 0 "recognized" lodge in activity, since English masons decided to cut ties with their French brothers (who are probably seen as "too progressive").

Way to go English freemasonry, way to go



edit: still reading about this, apparently this is a common mistake to think there is a central masonic organization determining what lodges are regular and accepted through the world. The structures of the Masonic order are national, autonomous and have full authority over their territory. So all this BS about masonic recognition in the linked site is just that, BS. The Grand Lodge of England has f* all to say about how the Grand Lodge of France works and it's very hypocritical to call any lodge not recognized by the Lodge of England as "less valid" or even fake. But it's very indicative of a strong imperialistic and chauvinistic mindset of that type of freemasonry, which is very unwelcome in an organization claiming to make good men better all across the world.

a reply to: JUhrman

Come on it is the french lol

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: JUhrman

Come on it is the french lol

You may find it funny, but if this is the type of freemasonry you are willing to join, exclusive, chauvinistic, and being condescending to any lodge with different philosophical beliefs, I guess it's OK to make fun of the French.

a reply to: JUhrman

Regular freemasonry does not include women or atheist. So any group that does include them is irregular. That's not to say it won't teach you anything, just that it's not recognized by regular freemasonry. That may explain the being invited thing.

a reply to: network dude

The Grand Lodge of France is men-only and still considered irregular and unrecognized.

The more I read about this all the more it seems the world of Freemasonry is plagued with petty disputes and struggling egoes to determine which is the "truest order", with the Grand Lodge of England being the smuggest and most close-minded of them all. I'll side with all these smaller and unrecognized lodges and obediences in this fight. They were right to separate themselves from such a dogmatic organization.

Also she wasn't invited. She was suggested to apply.

a reply to: JUhrman

It takes a deep understanding of what freemasonry is, and what it represents to fully understand why changing anything is a bad idea. It's not something I expect any non mason to comprehend. If a woman wants to join freemasonry, then she must do so in an irregular lodge. And as long as they don't go looking for outside recognition, they would be very happy at their home lodge.

I suppose I could start a sorority and allow men to join. Not sure why, but it could be done.