The Freemasons

robroy1234

Well Null., there are good and bad people in every organisation, and freemasonry is no different. But, all of us masons writing in this forum do so on our own behalf and none of us speak for the Grand Lodge or for any other mason. My own opinion on freemasonry, is my own and that opinion may not be shared by other masons or other people. We can only tell people what we do not do, for instance, there is no satanic or devil worshipping going on, there is no interference in politics domestic or international, there is no dabbling in economic affairs of state, there is no discussion on religion, and there is no business deals going on. That is all from first hand knowledge and experience. It is up to other people to believe what they want to believe. I cannot force other people to accept what I say, but I will expect them to respect my right to be a member of any organisation that I feel fit to join. Here in Ireland freemasonry is rather a relaxed, enjoyable organisation...with the toasting, a tipple and some pretty bad, old jokes...

nullzero

robroy1234 wrote: »

Well Null., there are good and bad people in every organisation, and freemasonry is no different. But, all of us masons writing in this forum do so on our own behalf and none of us speak for the Grand Lodge or for any other mason. My own opinion on freemasonry, is my own and that opinion may not be shared by other masons or other people. We can only tell people what we do not do, for instance, there is no satanic or devil worshipping going on, there is no interference in politics domestic or international, there is no dabbling in economic affairs of state, there is no discussion on religion, and there is no business deals going on. That is all from first hand knowledge and experience. It is up to other people to believe what they want to believe. I cannot force other people to accept what I say, but I will expect them to respect my right to be a member of any organisation that I feel fit to join. Here in Ireland freemasonry is rather a relaxed, enjoyable organisation...with the toasting, a tipple and some pretty bad, old jokes...

Thats all fair enough.
But the point I was making is that we're being asked to accept what you're saying at face value.
You're most probably telling truth but as far as your anecdotal evidence being some sort of de facto version of how the organisation operates, I'm assuming that you can see how that could be seen as insufficient as proof of Freemasonry being 100% "clean" in the eyes of any objective observer.

Yitzhak Rabin

A money making group.

nullzero wrote: »

Why?
I'm still undecided to be honest. Why should I take the word of members of the Freemasons? Can I take it from the handful of Freemasons on this forum that every Freemason is a good honest person and that no groups of Freemasons have ever done anything wrong?

If some independent group did a comprehensive evaluation of all Freemasons and their finding proved the Freemasons here to be correct I'd accept it.
I don't think it's unfair for anyone to want more than the say so of members of the very organisation being discussed to prove it to be completely beyond reproach.

But thats not what I asked you.

No one here has claimed that every single freemason is a good person, or that no freemason/group of freemasons haven't done anything bad in the past. What would be disputed though is if someone did something bad, that it was because of freemasonry that they did it. Any organisation with millions of members past and present is going to have a couple of bad apples. Its a statistical certainty, and doesn't neccesarily reflect badly on the group as a whole.

What I asked you though is why you think the truth lies 'somewhere in the middle' of what real, knowledgeable actual freemasons say and what BB who, frankly, hasn't a clue, say?

robroy1234

Null - I could bestow all the chief virtues that believe in and cite famous freemasons as well as denounce a few of the bad ones, etc., but in all your vision of freemasonry will differ to mine. I have no way to explain to you how a fruit may taste, that is something to which you have to experience yourself. I have been involved in athletics for 25 years, I know what running a 4 minute mile is like, I can describe it and explain the physiology, but nothing can make you understand the feeling of running that fast than to do so yourself. Now as much as I have been competing in athletics there has always been the problem of drug taking in the sport, all because of a few athletes take drugs doesn't mean that every athlete does.
If we are to be looked at with suspicion, then why not look at other groups such as the Anglo-Irish Golden Circle, or the Knights of St. Columba. We are only treated as such because the Vatican denounced freemasonry in the 19th Century and that is because the Vatican sees itself as the only moral force on the planet. Since then books from people like The Brotherhood by Stephen Knight has painted a dark picture of us. Suffice it to say, the charges against us, in that we practice all sorts of satanic rituals etc., are extremely ridiculous and I know of no such practice.

Brown Bomber

A group to make contacts.

enda1 wrote: »

Doesn't sound so different to going to mass really. And they're all up to that too, the feckers!

So your saying that people like Aleister Crowley and Manly P Hall would have been regular visitors to their local parish?

Brown Bomber

A group to make contacts.

hooradiation wrote: »

I fail to see how.

They are public servants. The answer to whom their "Master" should be is in their description.

(I'm aware that "master" is an ambiguous term - masterchef, masterclass etc)

robroy1234

Brown Bomber - do these public servants bow down to the Golf Club Captain and Secretary?
There is not one politician in Ireland that I know off who is in the freemasons, yet how many of them have Golf Club memberships, as well as bankers, businessmen, civil servants etc., Notice that every major Golf Club have conference facilities etc., More deals are made on the golf links than anywhere else. You have never even mentioned anything about Brian Cowen meeting and playing golf with Sean Fitzpatrick the day before he announced the bank guarantee scheme.

If you want me to admit to something that we are supposed to be doing - then you are barking up the wrong tree. I used to work in the civil service in Dublin long before becoming a Mason, and there has never been any contact or undue influence with the Grand Lodge of Ireland or any mason. But, my supervisor did share the same membership with other supervisors and ministers with certain golf clubs.

I have nothing against golf, but I too can build up quite a substantial conspiracy theory based upon membership of golf clubs - such as the K-Club, or St. Andrews.

Owen

Just to clarify - no man bows to another in Masonry.

robroy1234

Brown Bomber - what do you want us to admit to? That we practice devil worship? influence politicians? it doesn't matter what we say or do, you have a definate mindset to disregard it. It is up to you to decide for yourself whether you agree or not. I too can pull up all sort of nasty characters from different organisations to prove a point.

If I say that there is no such immoral, illegal or unethical things going on in the lodge, who are you to contradict me? I have not contradicted you in what you have written, but you have not given me the same respect.

hooradiation

A money making group.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

They are public servants. The answer to whom their "Master" should be is in their description.

You claimed this is "an affront to a free democracy", the above does not explain the previous claim.

You seem to be making the mistake that if they refer to somoene as "Master" within a given context (this is assuming the original claim is true) then that extends to all contexts.

Would someone who refers to their partner as "Master" in the confines of the bedroom also be an affront to a free democracy if they were also a public servant or can you accept that people can and do compartmentalise their lives especially when it comes to the professional and private?

nullzero

yekahS wrote: »

But thats not what I asked you.

No one here has claimed that every single freemason is a good person, or that no freemason/group of freemasons haven't done anything bad in the past. What would be disputed though is if someone did something bad, that it was because of freemasonry that they did it. Any organisation with millions of members past and present is going to have a couple of bad apples. Its a statistical certainty, and doesn't neccesarily reflect badly on the group as a whole.

What I asked you though is why you think the truth lies 'somewhere in the middle' of what real, knowledgeable actual freemasons say and what BB who, frankly, hasn't a clue, say?

That's not what you asked me?
What did you ask me? What are the specifics I missed when your post read exactly and I quote; "Why?"?

You could have read my other posts where I qualified what I said but I can repeat it if you like.
We've had a few Freemasons here giving their opinions. I made the point that members of the organisation that is under scrutiny saying the organisation is in no way corrupt or corruptable isn't exactly the best form of evidence.
It's kind of like having a member of a political party saying that the party is completely above board when rumours of corruption abound.

Why should anyone take the word of a Freemason when they say Freemasonry isn't in any way corrupt when we wouldn't accept similar testimony from a member of any other organisation in similar circumstances as acceptable proof?

I don't have any vendetta aginst the masons, but I find it laughable to think that I should be expected to take a masons word for things on this subject when clearly the are not in any position to be in any way objective.

nullzero

robroy1234 wrote: »

Null - I could bestow all the chief virtues that believe in and cite famous freemasons as well as denounce a few of the bad ones, etc., but in all your vision of freemasonry will differ to mine. I have no way to explain to you how a fruit may taste, that is something to which you have to experience yourself. I have been involved in athletics for 25 years, I know what running a 4 minute mile is like, I can describe it and explain the physiology, but nothing can make you understand the feeling of running that fast than to do so yourself. Now as much as I have been competing in athletics there has always been the problem of drug taking in the sport, all because of a few athletes take drugs doesn't mean that every athlete does.
If we are to be looked at with suspicion, then why not look at other groups such as the Anglo-Irish Golden Circle, or the Knights of St. Columba. We are only treated as such because the Vatican denounced freemasonry in the 19th Century and that is because the Vatican sees itself as the only moral force on the planet. Since then books from people like The Brotherhood by Stephen Knight has painted a dark picture of us. Suffice it to say, the charges against us, in that we practice all sorts of satanic rituals etc., are extremely ridiculous and I know of no such practice.

You're missing the point in fine style.
I don't give a damn what you do in your meetings.
I made the point that it is not logical for anyone to simply take the word of a Freemason on these issues and leave it at that.
I really have no agenda against the Freemasons, I was simply making a point about the way the disccussion went in this thread where we have reached a point where we have Freemasons saying "Well I'm a member and that's not true".
We're discussing the possible workings of a secret society, by defenition any member here wouldn't say anything to incriminate themselves or the order. And whilst your comments are welcome and informative, no one in their right mind would accpet tham as conclusive proof.

All the best in the Freemasons, I'm sure you're a lovely guy and you're involved in all sorts of good works.

robroy1234

You could ask me whether I have taken performance enhancing drugs in athletics, I can answer No, and yet you can still not believe me. I don't know what you want us to say.

robroy1234

Null - the problem here is that whatever my personal opinion is on freemasonry, it does not represent what other freemasons or the organisation position. No Mason can state on behalf of the lodge on matters outside of freemasonry. Therefore politics, religion, economics, medicine etc., is not in the domain of freemasonry and therefore none of these subjects are mentioned.

You have all right in the world to question us, our motives and what we say, in as much as we can question other people in their chosen activities.

nullzero

robroy1234 wrote: »

You could ask me whether I have taken performance enhancing drugs in athletics, I can answer No, and yet you can still not believe me. I don't know what you want us to say.

Null - the problem here is that whatever my personal opinion is on freemasonry, it does not represent what other freemasons or the organisation position. No Mason can state on behalf of the lodge on matters outside of freemasonry. Therefore politics, religion, economics, medicine etc., is not in the domain of freemasonry and therefore none of these subjects are mentioned.

You have all right in the world to question us, our motives and what we say, in as much as we can question other people in their chosen activities.

I don't want you to say anything in particular.
I'm simply stating that the testimony of a Freemason in regards to a discussion about Freemasonry is useful, but ultimately isn't of much use if an objective decision is to be made on the issue.
You're too close to the organisation to be able to be unbiased.

Like I already said, I'm sure you're all probably up to nothing, I'm just highlighting how anyone reading this thread shouldn't simply take your word for it that the organisation is completely above board.

robroy1234

True, You can't take anyone's word for it, and yes I am very much close in the organisation, in the same way as you can't take a politician's word or a banker's. But, you do however have an unique situation here on this forum, in that you have a few masons who do not know each other stating pretty much the same thing. Now, I cannot talk on their behalf as that is not my place to do so, but what I can state is that there is no dodgy going-ons or dealings within the particular lodge that I am a member. I cannot vouch for anyother lodge in this country and I definately cannot say anything about other lodges in foreign countries.

I can only state quite categorically about my involvement in freemasonry, whether other people can interpret something different from what I tell them, that is entirely up to them. We do have a system in place that regulates the functions of each lodge throughout the country, and that is the working of the provincial lodges. Each provincial lodge have officers that visit the lodges, firstly for the representation of the provincial and grand lodge, and secondly to ensure that the lodges adhere to the laws, rules and regulations.

I am very much aware of what went on in the UK a few years ago, and certain events that went on in certain lodges and with certain members. The United Grand Lodge of England initiated a system to crackdown on any illegality, immoral, unethical behaviour by members and lodges. But, bear this in mind - even though we are all freemasons, the Grand Lodge of Ireland and all the lodges within its authority are separate and independent of the United Grand Lodge of England. So our system and governance is entirely different. The same applies to the US and to any other nation.

squod

A group to make contacts.

robroy1234 wrote: »

I can only state quite categorically about my involvement in freemasonry, whether other people can interpret something different from what I tell them, that is entirely up to them. We do have a system in place that regulates the functions of each lodge throughout the country, and that is the working of the provincial lodges.

These include orange order lodges?

robroy1234

We have absolutely nothing to do with the Orange Lodge or any of its constituents. There is a tendency to confuse freemasonry with the orange lodge, that is because the orange order copied parts of freemasonry in very much the same way as Knights of St. Columba. The major differences include that freemasonry accepts men who believe in the Supreme Being, regardless of how one addresses that Supreme Being (God, Allah, Jehovah etc.,) whereas the orange order you have to be a certain type of protestant. In Freemasonry we obey and follow the laws of the land to which we reside in, and that we are loyal citizen to our country, the orange order is strictly a British Unionist institution. Freemasonry has always been aloof and distant from politics both national and international and will never interfere with politics, economics, medicine etc., whereas the orange order is a political entity with a political agenda.
There are many more differences and a few similarities, but personally I have no time or patience for such organisations as the orange order and their association with the troubles and violence.

Owen

squod wrote: »

These include orange order lodges?

Oh FFS, you're posting in these threads long enough to know they've nothing to do with us. Anyone can use the word Lodge. Lots of B&B's do around the country.

robroy1234

I think that is a perfectly reasonable question, considering the wording, and the regalia. The same would apply also to the Knights of St. Columba and other such organisations. We can only stipulate that we are not and never will be political organisation.

Owen

I don't think it's a reasonable question at all, Squod's been in far too many of these threads before to know the answer he was going to get to that question, in other words, he's trolling.

Yitzhak Rabin

A money making group.

nullzero wrote: »

That's not what you asked me?
What did you ask me? What are the specifics I missed when your post read exactly and I quote; "Why?"?

You could have read my other posts where I qualified what I said but I can repeat it if you like.
We've had a few Freemasons here giving their opinions. I made the point that members of the organisation that is under scrutiny saying the organisation is in no way corrupt or corruptable isn't exactly the best form of evidence.
It's kind of like having a member of a political party saying that the party is completely above board when rumours of corruption abound.

Why should anyone take the word of a Freemason when they say Freemasonry isn't in any way corrupt when we wouldn't accept similar testimony from a member of any other organisation in similar circumstances as acceptable proof?

I don't have any vendetta aginst the masons, but I find it laughable to think that I should be expected to take a masons word for things on this subject when clearly the are not in any position to be in any way objective.

You're still not answering the question.

I'll try and repeat it in a simpler way for you.

I understand that you don't want to accept that the freemasons on this thread are telling the truth. I'm not sure why, but you don't, fair enough.

Why would that then lead you to the conclusion that the truth about freemasonry lies somewhere between what the people who know what they are talking about say, and what BB says, that we are a racist, subversive terrorist organisation?

If you want me to make the question even more simple I can try.

Ellis Dee

A friend of mine (actually more a friend of my wife's) became a Mason a few years ago. It rather astonished me, because he is really cool, well-educated, speaks several languages, loves the good life, good food, culture and travel - and is about as gay as it gets. As if that wasn't enough, he's a Catholic to boot, at least nominally.:D

Hardened old atheist that I am, I couldn't figure out why he wanted to get involved with a crowd of religious nutbars, but what he has told me has since changed my opinion of the Masons quite a bit. It seems they are not at all denominational, because all they ask of members is that they believe in some kind of supreme deity - even a vague idea of a "Great Universal Spirit" would do, it seems. Indeed, my friend believes that even I - slightly further towards the provisional wing of atheism than even Richard Dawkins - might just about scrape in if I tried.:)

The members of his lodge (in London) include the usual 57 varieties of Christians, in addition to Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and what are you having yourself ...

They recently put a lot of their efforts into collecting a stack of money to fund a new lifeboat after one was badly damaged.

In other words, I've revised my view of Freemasonry and now believe that what it's largely about is grown men taking part in childish (but fun) rituals, funny handshakes and a lot of fundraising for good causes.

Definitely nowhere near the head of my "must be exterminated" list!;)

Brown Bomber

A group to make contacts.

yekahS wrote: »

and what BB says, that we are a racist, subversive terrorist organisation?.

Woah there yekahs - I said the KKK were "racist" The Illuminati were subversive and P-2 were terrorists.

Wolfe Tone

A money making group.

This has reminded me to go visit the lodge in Dublin, its supposed to be very interesting.

Yitzhak Rabin

A money making group.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Woah there yekahs - I said the KKK were "racist" The Illuminati were subversive and P-2 were terrorists.

Yes, but you tried to make out that these groups are masons.

Yitzhak Rabin

A money making group.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

This has reminded me to go visit the lodge in Dublin, its supposed to be very interesting.

Definitely worth a visit. Its a very interesting building.

You can take a virtual tour here

Brown Bomber

A group to make contacts.

PaintDoctor wrote: »

I don't think it's a reasonable question at all, Squod's been in far too many of these threads before to know the answer he was going to get to that question, in other words, he's trolling.

I can only speak for myself but Robroy has done far more than anyone to make me consider my position of masonry thus far. He seems to be able to see it from a non-masonic perspective. Anti-masonry, for want of a better word is almost as old as masonry itself so I am sure the charges placed against it's practictioners are found terribly obnoxious and tiresome by members especially if it is as claimed that masonry is based on tradition and morals. However, masons are supposed to be good men made better, right? I don't think the best way to correct any assumed misinformation is the hyper-sensitive, ultra-defensive, hysterical and aggressive attitude that's been on display here. To my eyes it only adds to the creeping doubts of fanatical masons and cult like devotion to the craft.

Robroy on the other hand seems more prepared to give the warts n' all version within the parameters of protecting the various secrets.

Brown Bomber

A group to make contacts.

yekahS wrote: »

Yes, but you tried to make out that these groups are masons.

Well this is what I said. Quite the opposite in fact.

I'm not saying the Klan/Illuminati/P-2 are the same as regular masonry just that they are evidence of the dangers of freemasonry which is vulnerable to be used as a vehicle for these "violent racists" and so on.

Yitzhak Rabin

A money making group.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Well this is what I said. Quite the opposite in fact.

Fair enough, charge withdrawn.

So I take it that you agree that freemasonry is a benign organisation, and a force for good?