|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 31, 2010 13:22:37 GMT 10
The Education Dilemma (Steinmetz, pp.10 & 11):What facts, theory or doctrine does the Grand Lodge expect the Committee on Masonic Information to inculcate? The Grand Lodge has not said. Obviously, it is not to teach what is in the ritual, for that is already thoroughly taken care of. What is the Grand Lodge's authorized and approved version of the history of Freemasonry? It has none, except what is found in the ritual. What is the Grand Lodge's interpretation of the symbolism of Freemasonry? It hasn't any, except the ritual. What is the doctrine of the Grand Lodge about the philosophy, religion, or principles of Freemasonry? Obviously nothing, except what is already taught in the ritual. Therefore, if your committee circulates any information at all, it must be in addition to, subtraction from, or modification of the only authorized doctrine of Grand Lodge, viz., the ritual. Hence, we have the anomaly of a Committee officially and solemnly authorized to disseminate unauthorized materials. California Grand Lodge Proceedings for 1947. Page 206. in George H. Steinmetz, The Lost Word Its Hidden Meaning, 1953, Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, New York
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 31, 2010 19:44:20 GMT 10
Zanelli's Pragmatism:What is needed now, is to concentrate on the three distinct divisions of masonic ritual – the first two degrees; the third; and the Royal Arch – and work out the history of each as a separate entity. In that way we may start to unravel the complex structure that is Freemasonry. To attempt to imagine the first, second, third and Royal Arch as an integral whole historically, is inaccurate and will only tend to confuse – unless you prefer fairy tales…
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 31, 2010 19:58:42 GMT 10
Carlile's Proof!? (p.iii):The late Godfrey Higgins once observed to me, without explanation, that there were but two Masons in England — himself and the Duke of Sussex. I put in a claim to be a third. He asked me to explain, on the condition that he was not to commit himself by any observation. I did so, as here set forth. He smiled and withdrew. The secret is now out. Richard Carlile, Manual of Freemasonry, c.1825, Reeves & Turner, London
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 2, 2010 0:53:49 GMT 10
Piatigorsky's Ubiquitous Form and Structure (p.272):In its form and structure the text of the Masonic Manual strictly follows the almost ubiquitous general pattern of the world’s ritual instructions. Recently I staged a curious though quite elementary, experiment. I made a copy of a couple of its pages, deleted all references to Freemasonry, replaced them with xs, ys and zs, and showed this piece of text to several scholars, asking them (after having established that none of them had anything to do with Masonry) for their opinion on its origin and character.
The first, Professor D., an authority on Zoroastrian religion, said: “This is very similar to a late, and rather degenerate version of a certain group of Medieval Zoroastrian rituals.”
The second, Dr. C., a specialist in Tibetan religion and northern Buddhism, remarked: “The form is absolutely the same as that of the classical Sogshods (Buddhist Tantrist Ritual Manuals) of the seventeenth or eighteenth century. More than that, some passages even look as if they were literally translated from the Tibetan.”
The third, Professor E., a renowned orientalist, returned it to me with a cynical laugh, saying: “The text from which you claim to have extracted these pages does not exist. You must have faked it since it is far too standardized and common to all religions to be genuine.” Piatigorsky's Masonic Unseriousness (p.348):...an external observer cannot help feeling that not only from the point of view of the world outside the Lodge must its ritual be seen as nonsense, but that Masons themselves could not help seeing it as nonsense if they were to put themselves in the place of those from outside. That is where "Masonic unseriousness" begins, in that unavoidable ambiuity of the relation of Masons to their ritual: the Ritual is objectively the basis of their unseriousness — although subjectively they are deadly serious about it — as well as of the whole institution. Without the Ritual Freemasonry would simply be another Rotary Club or Society of Oddfellows. With its Ritual it is comparable to Buddhist tantrism — and in this respect more religious than the Church of Scientology, Quakerism, or even the Low Church. Alexander Piatigorsky, Freemasonry: The Study of a Phenomenon, 1999 (org. 1997 as Who's Afraid of Freemasons?), The Harvill Press, London
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 2, 2010 3:15:56 GMT 10
Masonry is useful to all men: to the learned, because it affords them the opportunity of exercising their talents upon subjects eminently worthy of their attention; to the illiterate, because it offers them important instruction; to the young, because it presents them with salutary precepts and good examples, and accustoms them to reflect on the proper mode of living; to the man of the world, whom it furnishes with noble and useful recreation; to the traveller, whom it enables to find friends and brothers in countries where else he would be isolated and solitary; to the worthy man in misfortune, to whom it gives assistance; to the afflicted, on whom it lavishes consolation; to the charitable man, whom it enables to do more good, by uniting with those who are charitable like himself; and to all who have souls capable of appreciating its importance, and of enjoying the charms of a friendship founded on the same principles of religion, morality and philanthropy
To every Mason, there is a God — One, Supreme, Infinite in Goodness, in Wisdom, Foresight, Justice and Benevolence; Creator, Disposer and Preserver of all things. How, or by what Intermediates, Powers or Emanations He creates and acts, and in what way He unfolds and manifests Himself, Masonry leaves to Creeds and Religions to inquire
It is for each individual Mason to discover the secrets of Masonry, by reflection upon its symbols and a wise consideration and analysis of what is said and done in the work. Masonry does not inculcate her truths. She states them, once and briefly; or hints them, perhaps, darkly; or interposes a cloud between them and eyes that would be dazzled by them. "Seek, and ye shall find," knowledge and the truth
It is of greater antiquity than other orders and associations; but it is not so old as to give it the superiority once supposed; for it is now certain that there were no Degrees in Masonry two hundred years ago; and that the Master's Degree is not more than one hundred and sixty years of age
But those who framed its Degrees adopted the most sacred and significant symbols of a very remote antiquity, used centuries before the Temple of the King, Solomon, was built, to express to those who understood them, while concealing from the profane, he most recondite and mysterious doctrines in regard to God, the universe, and man
The progress of society and civilization being perhaps more certainly indicated by the ascent of woman on the social scale, than by any other circumstance or symptom, the coöperation of your sex is indispensable to Freemasonry in carrying into execution its plans, and aiding the onward progress of the human race
It is the motionless and stationary that most frets and impedes the current of progress; the solid rock or stupid tree, rested firmly on the bottom, and around which the river whirls and eddies: the Masons that doubts and hesitate and are discouraged; that disbelieve in the capacity of man to improve; that are not disposed to toil and labor for the interest and well-being of general humanity; that expect others to do all, even of that which they do not oppose or ridicule; while they sit applauding and doing nothing, or perhaps prognosticatingAlbert Pike(1809 — 1891) Above all things let us never forget that mankind constitutes one great brotherhood; all born to encounter suffering and sorrow, and therefore bound to sympathize with each other Jim Tresner, Albert Pike: The Man Beyond the Monument, Scottish Rite Research Society, 1995, M.Evans and Co., New York
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 15, 2010 8:37:27 GMT 10
Those who speak of irregularity are forced to throw a veil over their own origins and do not forget they were the irregular yesterdayPapus, a.k.a. Dr. Gérard Anaclet Vincent Encausse, 1865 / 1916, (Martinist founder) N.B., quoted from an uncorroborated, doubtful source
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 15, 2010 9:11:07 GMT 10
Those who speak of irregularity are forced to throw a veil over their own origins and do not forget they were the irregular yesterday Obviously this is an allusion to the establishment of the Premier Grand Lodge (PGL). While accused of innovations and their authority over other masons at the time being clearly challenged by some, such as the Antients, their regularity of origin does not appear to have been an issue. For instance, we find a number of lodges of operative stonemasons among those joining the PGL. Moreover, as Bro. Christopher Haffner wrote ("Regularity of Origin", AQC, v.96, pp.113/5): Three proofs of an actual or intentional connection with operative origins on the part of English Masonry must now be considered. First is the visit of Dr. Desaguliers to Edinburgh in 1721 which proves that the operatives of Scotland recognized a speculative from England:Att Maries Chapell the 24 August 1721... The which day Doctor John Theophilus Des-Anguliers... late General Grand Master of the Mason lodges in England being in town and desirous to have a conference with the Deacon, Warden, and Master Masons of Edinr, which was accordingly granted, and finding him duly qualified in all parts of masonry, they received him as a Brother into their Societie. Secondly, the earliest records already seem to indicate an intention to continue the operative Craft. In his 1723 Constitutions, Anderson shows his intention to relate operative and speculative Masonry, whilst in ‘Concerning God and Religion’ he is prepared to adopt what is ‘now thought more expedient’ and he is still operative in character when he refers to:The master, knowing himself to be able of Cunning, shall undertake the Lord’s work as reasonably as possible, and truly dispend his goods as if they were his own; not to give more Wages to any Brother or apprentice than he really may deserve. Both the Master and the Masons... shall be faithful to the Lord, and honestly finish their Work, whether Task or Journey; nor put the Work to Task that hath been accustom’d to Journey. Thirdly, to show that this transition was recognized on the operative side as well, there is the example of the stone found in the foundations of the Bank of England when it was demolished in 1930. This bears the inscription:Mr. Thomas Dunn... Mr. John Townsend } Masons Anno Masonry 5732 Ld. Montacute G. Master Anthony, 6th Viscount Montague, was Grand Master in 1732. Poole, in his edition of Gould’s The History of Freemasonry (Vol. II, p. 189) writes: ‘we have here evidence of the tacit recognition, for which we have no known parallel of the “continuity” of descent from Operative to Speculative Masonry, the significant [sic] of which, especially in London, would be difficult to overestimate.’
Examples could be multiplied at length. Our claim to be ‘regular’ or real masons lies in our connection with our operative past. For this it is necessary for each Grand Lodge to be able to prove succession back to one of the original Grand Lodges of the British Isles.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 29, 2010 7:23:40 GMT 10
Garibaldi's "Call to Arms": [/center][/quote] E.E. Stolper, "Garibaldi: Freemason", AQC, v.102, pp.1/23
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 4, 2010 7:18:51 GMT 10
Anderson's First Charge, "Concerning God and Religion":Ancient Charges of a Free-Mason: Extracted From The Ancient Records of Lodges beyond Sea, and of those in England, Scotland, and Ireland, for the Use of the Lodges in London
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Aug 5, 2010 6:49:31 GMT 10
|
|