Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Freemasons: Evil secret society or misunderstood nice guys...
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Before, whilst, and after he was in a Lodge. I haven't seen any evidence that he was a Master of a Lodge, or even in a Lodge. He surely could have been, but I've seen no evidence.
You have seen no evidence. You dont believe he was a member of hammersmith lodge? Are you on the level? surely you can go and look at a old manual from the stated year which lists all lodge officers? You have a bank robber and a mass murderer in a lodge and you never bothered to check it out or ask anyone in the masons?There is no law requiring police officers in the UK to declare their membership in Freemasonry, or forbidding them from establishing a lodge. And the bill you link was never passed into law, the only question I would therefore put to Chris Mullin is why does he now think he couldn't get support from his own party to curtail civil liberties in the UK.
the rules of the masons are not the law of the land either but Masons follow them.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/police-want-judges-and-mps-to-reveal-masonic-links-too-1316095.html
The pressure on police officers has increased with a new demand from the Police Complaints Authority that police officers be compelled to disclose Masonic membership in a register open to public scrutiny.You certainly have a right to know (from the politician) who is financing his campaign, but for the record no Masonic organisation in Ireland has ever financed or supported a political candidate, as we do not involve ourselves in politics. You have no right to know if a person, organisation, or company has a meeting with a judge or policeman.
Or to know if a politician had a meetng or correspondence with a policeman? Tryng to influence the police isn't worth knowing about? Funny how a minister just resigned over it then isn't it? No more worth knowing about than a murderer in a Lodge?Indeed.
Indeed meaning the lodge has secrets.I gave you an honest answer,
No you didnt. You avoided answering about what level you are.
Because it is a secret.
Oh so you are a mind reader too? I didn't expect you would answer even though you stated if you were asked nicely you would have done so. I have not been anything but nice to you. i I have up to this point made any personal attacks or insults then please care to list them?just not the one you wanted.And a policeman, civil servant, or judge, as members of the civil power, would be required to give their 'rank' only in the course of carrying out their duties,
REQUIRED TO! You are not required to. You are being asked to be honest and forthright. If in a conversation a policeman said to me in a public place "im in the police" and i said "really what is your job" I would expect him to say where he works and whether he is over other people there e.g. I am over a fraud squad.not in general conversation. A member of a private organisation is not under any such obligation.
I didnt suggest you were obliged to tell me anything. I suggested that the openness honesty and forthrightness oath seems to be in the closet and the secrecy thing seems to be out.I suppose if you were a county counciller they would have to tell you, even if they sniggered whilst they did it. But since I don't have to tell you, why you want to know can be an issue if that's what interests me.
No you don't have to tell me but the masons here claimed it is all above borad and on the level.
For the record then; the number of degrees is not a secret either from Masons or anyone else. But we don't have to tell anyone.
I know. You also haven't which is even more informative.
Back to the state secret civil service mentality. If peopel dont know wher the toiulet is it isn't my job to tell them. Not a very outgoing organisation are you? couldn't yu be charitable and tell me ?No, it proves you need to provide a compelling argument.
Your own words seem to demonstrate you wont say unless you were compelled to do so by someone like Frederick of Prussia.Oh dear. Well, it's not an attack on you, simply an effort to understand your motivation.
1. How?
2. How?
Already answered in the message.All oaths are important; they're oaths. But swearing a new oath does not mean you can foreswear a previous one so one can't overrule another.
any potential loyalties Masons might have, based on their vows to support fellow Masons, should be transparent to the publicI didn't say you were offensive, I said I might have told you if you'd asked nicely.
Would you have? I don't believe you would and stating "might" is just obfuscation.No it's not a secret. And a 0.27 second search on google will tell you that "Under the United Grand Lodge of England, there are 330,000 Freemasons, meeting in 8,644 Lodges. There are separate Grand Lodges for Ireland (which covers North and South) and Scotland, with a combined membership of 150,000. Worldwide, there are probably 5 million members."
Well given I could get it from Google you are obviously right about it not being a secret. But you have admitted other things ARE secret.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
No, the Masons won't accept a member whose stated purpose is to attack the Masons. It's a fairly well accepted principle in most organisations; we shouldn't take a snake to our our bosom lest it bite us.So the masons wont accept seekers after truth who are ctitical thinkers and will point out any corruption or manipulation in the masons?
Your point is deliberately misleading. The BNP are not the Nazi Party. A more apt analogy would be; should people have to join the Nazi Party if they wish to discover its' motivations and disclose them to the world. The answer is yes, otherwise they are simply engaging in hearsay. If you're asking can people be critical of an organisation, the answer is yes of course. But the less you know about it, the less likely it is that your criticism is accurate, or even truthful. To know the most about Freemasonry, you must be a Freemason.You seem not to understand analogy I asked : Should people have to join the BNP before they can criticise Nazism? I asked it because you suggested peopel who haven't joined Masons have not right to criticise it.
Leaving aside your own personal little obsessions, this thread is now 30 pages, and a lot of it is comprised of Freemasons answering questions quite openly...Does anyone find the secrecy and reluctance to answer questions is visible from Masons?
That is right; as I've said I've seen no evidence. And surely you don't think I'm going to go to the UK, find the Lodge, ask them for access to their records, and check the list of officers in the 1970s in order to prove a conspiracy theorists claim? If you want to present the claim, then present the evidence. But nice try at moving away from the fact that he was a criminal before and after he was believed to be a freemason.You have seen no evidence. You dont believe he was a member of hammersmith lodge? Are you on the level? surely you can go and look at a old manual from the stated year which lists all lodge officers? You have a bank robber and a mass murderer in a lodge and you never bothered to check it out or ask anyone in the masons?
That's true; are you trying to claim that if someone chooses to follow one set of rules they must follow all sets of rules? I suspect most Christians will object to Hindu dietary laws, and scientists will have major issues with 7th day adventist rules, and will we drive on the right or left side of the road? There's rules for both...the rules of the masons are not the law of the land either but Masons follow them.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/police-want-judges-and-mps-to-reveal-masonic-links-too-1316095.html
The pressure on police officers has increased with a new demand from the Police Complaints Authority that police officers be compelled to disclose Masonic membership in a register open to public scrutiny.
Oh by the way, that 'new demand' was in 1996. There must have been huge support for it, just like with Chris Mullin.
Funny how having conclusively lost your argument you try to associate it with a different subject in order to give it the appearance of validity. How does a public servant exerting undue influence over another public servant relate in any way to your overwhelming desire to be told how many 'levels' there are in Freemasory?Or to know if a politician had a meetng or correspondence with a policeman? Tryng to influence the police isn't worth knowing about? Funny how a minister just resigned over it then isn't it? No more worth knowing about than a murderer in a Lodge?
I've never said lodges have no secrets. Don't you have any secrets? I think most people have secrets. Probably most organisations. Certainly most companies. Definately most churches. I don't think having secrets per se is a very big issue is it?Indeed meaning the lodge has secrets.
I answered honestly, knowing your question was intended to lead. And as I said, my 'level' in Fremasonry is not secret, you've simply given me no reason to tell you what it is. Still.No you didnt. You avoided answering about what level you are.
Because it is a secret..
Oh so you are a mind reader too? I didn't expect you would answer even though you stated if you were asked nicely you would have done so. I have not been anything but nice to you. i I have up to this point made any personal attacks or insults then please care to list them?
I'm being asked by you to be honest and forthright, to you, about something you're interested in. What reason do I have for satisfying your curiousity? You might expect a policeman in conversation to tell you what part of the police he worked in, and even what 'level' he is, but even as a public servant he would be under no obligation to tell you, and in my experience of Irish Gardaí, he'd certainly ask you 'why do you want to know?'. You wouldn't have to tell him, of course, and he wouldn't have to answer you. And let's be honest, he probably wouldn't.REQUIRED TO! You are not required to. You are being asked to be honest and forthright. If in a conversation a policeman said to me in a public place "im in the police" and i said "really what is your job" I would expect him to say where he works and whether he is over other people there e.g. I am over a fraud squad.
I don't recall anyone saying there was an openness honesty and forthrightness oath. And even if there was (there isn't) I can openly, honestly, and forthrightly say ' I am a Freemason. I know what degree I have attained, and what other degrees there are. I am not obliged to keep that information secret. I'm not telling ISAW unless he gives me a good reason'.I didnt suggest you were obliged to tell me anything. I suggested that the openness honesty and forthrightness oath seems to be in the closet and the secrecy thing seems to be out.
You may be thinking of what PaintDoctor said;
I'm being entirely honest with you ISAW; your hamfisted attacks on Freemasonry do not make me want to tell you all about the fraternity that I enjoy being a member of.PaintDoctor wrote:2. I will be upright (honest) in my dealings with all men.
Indeed, but none of them said we'd tell you everything you wanted to know just because you asked.No you don't have to tell me but the masons here claimed it is all above borad and on the level.
So if we don't tell you you're free to make up whatever you want? That's not informing you, it's just freeing you to fantasise. I'd say we are a moderately outgoing organisation. As for charity, well, can you satisfy me that you are worth bestowing charity upon?I know. You also haven't which is even more informative.
Back to the state secret civil service mentality. If peopel dont know wher the toiulet is it isn't my job to tell them. Not a very outgoing organisation are you? couldn't yu be charitable and tell me ?
That would be difficult since he's been dead for over 200 years. So I'll make it easy; a compelling argument will be an elegant sufficiency.Your own words seem to demonstrate you wont say unless you were compelled to do so by someone like Frederick of Prussia.
N.B. For those readers of the thread wondering how Frederick the Great came into the discussion, ISAW is demonstrating his mastery of Wikipedia where you can 'discover' the King of Prussia was a Freemason.
No, I asked you how your questions could provide the evidence you suggest, but to go further, since your questions are predicated on the responses you anticipate, aren't your questions only an attempted trap to 'prove' that, whatever the response, there must be something further that 'proves' the respondant doesn't have all the facts?Already answered in the message.
Why?any potential loyalties Masons might have, based on their vows to support fellow Masons, should be transparent to the public
OK I would and will if I feel the the question is put in such a way as to make me want to answer it.Would you have? I don't believe you would and stating "might" is just obfuscation.
Yes, other things are secret. But it wouldn't be in the least bit interesting to you if they weren't would it? So we provide a service for people like you, who would otherwise be unleashed to interrogate councils about public toilets and policemen about their levels. It's charitable, in a way...Well given I could get it from Google you are obviously right about it not being a secret. But you have admitted other things ARE secret.0 -
-
-
No, the Masons won't accept a member whose stated purpose is to attack the Masons. It's a fairly well accepted principle in most organisations; we shouldn't take a snake to our our bosom lest it bite us.
to expose any lies or deceit or crime. surely that is a worthy cause.Your point is deliberately misleading.
No it isn't . I was not trying to mislead anyone. That is a lie. so much for "honesty" levels of masons. I am not trying to purposefully mislead anyone here and if you claim I am then prove it or withdraw the accusation!The BNP are not the Nazi Party. A more apt analogy would be; should people have to join the Nazi Party if they wish to discover its' motivations and disclose them to the world. The answer is yes,
the answer is no! It was you who mentioned the snake metaphor. One should not have to join the Nazi party in order to expose their principles.otherwise they are simply engaging in hearsay.
How many people do you know hoe were members of the Nazi party? If you don't know any how do you know the WWII Holocaust Happened? If you accept it happened is the evidence for it only from members of the Nazi party?If you're asking can people be critical of an organisation, the answer is yes of course. But the less you know about it, the less likely it is that your criticism is accurate, or even truthful. To know the most about Freemasonry, you must be a Freemason.
Which is only reenforcing the secret nature of Masonry!"Leaving aside your own personal little obsessions, this thread is now 30 pages, and a lot of it is comprised of Freemasons answering questions quite openly...
Handwaving argument and sweeping statement. What was revealed by Masons in this thread which people could not learn anyway elsewhere?That is right; as I've said I've seen no evidence. And surely you don't think I'm going to go to the UK, find the Lodge, ask them for access to their records, and check the list of officers in the 1970s in order to prove a conspiracy theorists claim?
dont you have manual listing all the officers in all the lodges?
Don't you have a library in Dublin with copies of the older manuals?If you want to present the claim, then present the evidence. But nice try at moving away from the fact that he was a criminal before and after he was believed to be a freemason.
It seems this is the sequence
He was a criminal before entering the lodge. He enter and was supported by members who knew he was a criminal, members with police connections who protected him.That's true; are you trying to claim that if someone chooses to follow one set of rules they must follow all sets of rules?
No I'm suggesting Masons follow a set of rules which are SECRET. Secret oaths.
Secret words.
Do you want me to list them and you can deny if all and say you never heard these words?Oh by the way, that 'new demand' was in 1996. There must have been huge support for it, just like with Chris Mullin.
Having introduced an "old rule
" banning some members of the pubnlic service from being masons and subsequently lifting it.Funny how having conclusively lost your argument you try to associate it with a different subject in order to give it the appearance of validity. How does a public servant exerting undue influence over another public servant relate in any way to your overwhelming desire to be told how many 'levels' there are in Freemasory?
There is a hiostoric record of links between public servants and Masons. If you list the Judges who were masons I would suggest NONE are from lower orders.I've never said lodges have no secrets. Don't you have any secrets? I think most people have secrets. Probably most organisations. Certainly most companies. Definately most churches. I don't think having secrets per se is a very big issue is it?
Secret oaths! Rules to be keptIn order to preserve peace and harmony no private piques or quarrels must be brought within the door of the Lodge, far less any quarrels about Religion or Nations or State Policy, we being only, as Masons, of theCatholick Religion , above mentioned, we are also of all Nations, Tongues, Kindreds and Languages and are resolved against all Politicks [printed in the original in Gothic letters] as what never yet conduced to the welfare of the Lodge nor ever will. This charge has been always strictly enjoin'd and observ'd; but especially ever since the Reformation in Britain or the dissent and secession of these Nations from the communion of Rome.I answered honestly, knowing your question was intended to lead.
You had no idea where the question was going. And I already gave you reasons as to why I might ask it (which are not required for you to give an honest and full answer).
You come her saying Masonry is open honest and not a secret society but when I ask you "how many degrees" or "what degree are you" you reply mind your own business. It is people like you who came here saying Masons are open and honest.And as I said, my 'level' in Fremasonry is not secret, you've simply given me no reason to tell you what it is. Still.
so noe it is "Im quite happy to tell yo all about Masonry" but when asked abot how naydegree or what degree you are you refuse to answer.I'm being asked by you to be honest and forthright, to you, about something you're interested in. What reason do I have for satisfying your curiousity? You might expect a policeman in conversation to tell you what part of the police he worked in, and even what 'level' he is, but even as a public servant he would be under no obligation to tell you, and in my experience of Irish Gardaí, he'd certainly ask you 'why do you want to know?'.
He might if I just walked up to him and asked. But if he came into a public forum saying "Im a Garda. the Gardai are not there to threaten you. We all have a job to do and I think the Gardai have a bad image. You should not feel in any way threatened by them. feel free to ask me questions about the Gardai and Ill do my best to answer them in an open and honest way.
Now I am not going to ask such a Garda "can you tell me the owner of the following car registration numner and where he lives" But suppose i asked him "what rank are you and for what branch of the police force do you work?" I would not expect him to say "mind your own business" or "Why do you want to know" I would expect him to tell me.You wouldn't have to tell him, of course, and he wouldn't have to answer you. And let's be honest, he probably wouldn't.
He would be doing a bad PR job for the police if he announced the p[olice are freindly guys and not a secret society if when asked his rank and branch said "mind your own business"I don't recall anyone saying there was an openness honesty and forthrightness oath. And even if there was (there isn't) I can openly, honestly, and forthrightly say ' I am a Freemason. I know what degree I have attained, and what other degrees there are. I am not obliged to keep that information secret. I'm not telling ISAW unless he gives me a good reason'.
I gave you TWO but suit yourself. I didn't expect you would say it.Indeed, but none of them said we'd tell you everything you wanted to know just because you asked.
I never said you should tell me everything I wanted to know but knowing your degree and how many degrees there are in your rite I would expect. Maybe you have to be given a sign before you tell me ?
So if we don't tell you you're free to make up whatever you want? That's not informing you, it's just freeing you to fantasise. I'd say we are a moderately outgoing organisation. As for charity, well, can you satisfy me that you are worth bestowing charity upon?
above all people were equal even non masons. Now you are judging who deserves what!That would be difficult since he's been dead for over 200 years. So I'll make it easy; a compelling argument will be an elegant sufficiency.
N.B. For those readers of the thread wondering how Frederick the Great came into the discussion, ISAW is demonstrating his mastery of Wikipedia where you can 'discover' the King of Prussia was a Freemason.
Not exactly! I didn't get it from Wikipedia but from the same place as , DEMOLAY-HIRAM ABIFF, MICHA, MACHA, BEALIM, and ADONAI
I could have begun at the other end and mentioned BOAZ, JACHIN and SHIBBOLETH, MAIIA BONE, MACHABE-N, MACHBINNA and TUBAL CAIN
Need i list all the words in between.? There is a longish list.
For anyone interested in a list of degrees:
http://www.100megsfree2.com/jjscherr/scherr/Freemasonrydegrees.htmNo, I asked you how your questions could provide the evidence you suggest, but to go further, since your questions are predicated on the responses you anticipate,
They aren't. Apparently though you can't know about degrees through which you have not progressed since you havent progressed through them. and i can't know them either if I have not unless I have access to such information from someone who has progressed through them.aren't your questions only an attempted trap to 'prove' that, whatever the response, there must be something further that 'proves' the respondant doesn't have all the facts?
No, but I freely admit that is something I want to explore. If for example you are a lower
degree than a criminal or group of them in the masons then you would not be knowledgeable of their connections. If you are not at least a lodge Master you can't reveal what that position might have to do with facilitating the criminal Noye referred to.Why?
Why what? Why am I asking or whay am i trying to trap you? Who is asking leading questions now?OK I would and will if I feel the the question is put in such a way as to make me want to answer it.
Suit yourself. I already answered the first half about numbers of degrees. If you don't want to admit what degree you are then keep that secret to yourself.Yes, other things are secret. But it wouldn't be in the least bit interesting to you if they weren't would it? So we provide a service for people like you, who would otherwise be unleashed to interrogate councils about public toilets and policemen about their levels. It's charitable, in a way...
If the Masons werent secret I might be interested in observing all their curious rites in public. funny how half of the population of the world will never see them isn't it? Boys will be boys i guess.0 -
-
-
-
-
Why should masons have secret ways of recognising each other?
It harks back to the origins of Masonry. Originally when a stone worker wanted to go to work on, say a new Cathedral, there were 2 methods of testing his work. The first was to give him a block of stone and see what he could make from it. This cost time, and money - especially if he screwed up. By forming a guild, and having passwords given to Masons of paticular skill, they could arrive to the site, give the password, and immediately they would be recognised as either an apprentice, fellow craft, or master mason. Because they worked so hard to get to those levels, and they had their reputations at stake, the passwords and gestures were always kept secret in case some dodgy apprentice wanted to get a master masons wages.
We still use them today, but purely out of tradition. And men like to do funny handshakes. Seriously.What is the purpose in it?
If there was a purpose, it's long since eroded. Ireland isn't huge, and when you go to Meetings, it's always the same faces over and over again. You'll get the odd visitor from some other Lodge who's in town shopping with the wife and wants to kill an hour to save his sanity, but the odds are that he'll know someone you know, and the handshakes/passwords are just again a silly formality for the sake of doing a handshake again because he's already known as a Mason. In other countries, it's the same.do masons protect of favour other masons over other people ?
Maybe a long time ago in the past (Circa 250/350 years) but not in a derrogatory sense. By helping, lets say my plumbing goes in the morning, I could spend all day pouring through the golden pages, or I could call my friend who's a mason and a plumber. It's not that I'll get it any cheaper, but I know him and trust him - he joined the order to be surrounded by honest people, and so did I.
If people do use the order for any ill gains, they get booted out pretty damn quickly. The rest of us find that pretty disgusting.do they make oaths regarding such commitments?
Not really. There are some ridiculous oaths which go back YEARS and seem silly. That you'll protect the chastity of your friends daughters, but again, try an enforce that in this day and age - it'd look suspect with old men following around teenage girls to nightclubs Some oaths are there to be taken seriously - like being honest, like obeying the laws of the country you're in, like not telling the passwords and handshakes (But purely out of the traditional sense as detailed above).
But I promise you there isn't even the opportunity to discuss global takeovers of governments and corporations, the poisioning of waters, etc. We're all too busy playing dress up!0 -
Yes you supplied a definition for Secret Societies, and I demonstrated how that definition does not apply itself to Freemasonry.
the definition I supplied:
Secret societies are those organizations which completely conceal their rules, corporate activity, the names of their members, their signs, passwords and usages from outsiders or the 'profane.' As a rule, the members of these societies are bound to the strictest secrecy concerning all the business of the association by oath or promise or word of honour, and often under the threat of severe punishment in case of its violation. If such secret society has higher and lower degrees, the members of the higher degree must be equally careful to conceal their secrets from their brethren of a lower degree.
And you say that does not apply to Freemasons
The names of your officers are available only to those with the manual. There is no public register. The names of all members isn't available at all and the Masons have challenged any attempts to make it a requirements under law.
How much do masons have in bank accounts and what is it spent on?
- Not available
Secret masonic signs and passwords - not available.
Oaths and promises - apart form entry degree - not available
Higher degrees of masons have secrets that lower degrees don't know and are kept from them.
so how is my definition shown to be untrue again?The neccessity to be wealthy is also incorrect, I know plenty of Freemasons who are not well off, and a few who are unemployed.
How many masons in total are there . How many do you know who are not wealthy who are master or above?The oath attributed to a Royal Arch Mason is simply not true, to my certain knowledge a Royal Arch Mason does not swear to "assist a companion Royal Arch-Mason, when I see him engaged in any difficulty and will espouse his cause so as to extricate him from the same whether he be right or wrong."
Ok I accept that you are being honest about this to your knowledge and I withdraw the assertion. the ceremony has however been criticised by christian groups. Also, there are several examples form history I am sure which show masonic involvement in intrigue andf the original ceremony might have been altered. But as it it secret will we ever know. Well I guess i could find out but Masons want to be secretive about it.
I seem to have found a copy of the ceremony on the net. Should i post it and you can confirm it and I will admit it doesn't have the above oath. there are other criticisms of it however. But then I don't expect a Mason to reveal that this is the actual ceremony. which sort of proves my point.As above; I've demonstrated how the definition you supplied doesn't apply to Freemasonry.
Really? Care answer the above questions regarding the definition then?
And care to anwer if I post the source material to the actual Right you wil lconform that
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will employ a Companion Royal Arch Mason in preference to any other person of equal qualifications,
I furthermore promise and swear, that I will assist a Companion Royal Arch Mason when I see him engaged in any difficulty, and will espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, whether he be right or wrong."
Isn't part of that ceremony?
Tell you what ill post the whole ceremony page by page if you want and yo can tell me which parts are inserted? How about that?So people who don't do what you want threaten you?
[/quot]
what I mentioned was : about " non threathening and not being secretive" You have snipped out secretive and all other things considered, going by that oath anyone who favours a mason over another person is a threat when it comes to getting a job if one ius not a mason.The Laws & Constitutions, and Calendar, are available for purchase from any Masonic Hall in the country, by any member of the public. Or you could stop into Trinity College, where I'm sure you'll find every copy ever published.
Thanks for that Ill do it. HAve you a reference and in what library in Trinity will i find it? and hove you a reference in Early Printed Books in the Berkeley?You could actually write to the lodge in Hammersmith and ask them for a list of their officers. They might give it to you if you ask nicely.
i doubt they would as i have doubted you would. and I was not nasty to you when I asked.Actually the definition you gave was You can review it in post #434 if you've forgotten. Since Freemasonry does not completely conceal its' rules, corporate activity, or the names of its' members, Freemasonry does not conform to your definition.
"not completely" isnt enough! If you have rules EVERY rule should be known. You should not have secret rules regualtions if you are an open organisation. Ill accept you can keep the names of members as should every organisation bt onny because of internet nutters stalkers and mainly mass mail and junk mailers and marketers and NOT because of secrecy.Can you provide any example of an organisation which has accepted as a member a person whose stated intend is to attack the organisation because the person believes they will expose lies or deceit or crime?
Yes. Groucho Marx and any club! But I wasn't suggesting people who are biased. I was suggesting people who have open minds who will vow to expose any lies deceit or self serving they witness.If a stranger came up to you and asked to be adopted into your family because he believed you were engaged in lies deceit and crime, and he intended to demonstrate this in your family, would you adopt him?
If my "family" was an open religion like Christianity and the person was honest and open i think they would have to or they are not living up to their own standards!Indeed it is; you are trying to play on a sense of outrage that a Minister should pressure a Garda, and associate that outrage with the fact that no one has told you how may 'levels' there are in Freemasonry, or what 'level' they are, as if the two are connected when they patently are not. That is misleading.
Here is wher the point first came up:
you stated:no Masonic organisation in Ireland has ever financed or supported a political candidate, as we do not involve ourselves in politics. You have no right to know if a person, organisation, or company has a meeting with a judge or policeman.
I took that up and suggested that influencing the police was something that people do have a right to know and something which apparently masons have a history of. the example of given Noye and Hammersmith lodge is only one. But even if they didn't influence the police it would not look good for example if all the senior members of anything were associated with any club, even if it was golf, soccer, gentlemens' club, cricket etc. It suggests collusion.
Here is where I drew the example of the possibility of masons influencing the police being parallel to a minister influencing the police :
[quote http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64668208&postcount=430]
Or to know if a politician had a meetng or correspondence with a policeman? Tryng to influence the police isn't worth knowing about? Funny how a minister just resigned over it then isn't it? No more worth knowing about than a murderer in a Lodge?
I was not trying to Mislead anything and you are a liar if you say so!The BNP are still not the Nazi Party.
some might argue that but so what?And I didn't say one should have to join the Nazi party in order to expose their principles, I said yes, people have to join the Nazi Party if they wish to discover its' motivations and disclose them to the world.
And the difference is? In once case they have to join in the other they have to join!
In one case they "expose the principles of the Nazi party" but in the other they " disclose the motivations of the Nazi party." Who wa it made accusations of misleading now?It's in the bit you quoted. If you want to expose their principles, you're still going to have to obtain an unimpeachable source for their principles; the BNP aren't really good enough are they?
theys just like saying "if ther is a criminal in the masons and he is exposed he is on his own" and then following up with "but hes isn't a Mason anymore we chucked him out"
Only AFTER he was publically exposed when masons knew about him beforehand.
Also very high ranking masons apparently HAVE left MASONRY AND RARE CRITICAL OF IT.
Actually. i drew an analogy You raised the point about influencing the police not I!Again as you've lost your argument you try to shift and associate with another emotive and unrelated topic.You have no right to know if a person, organisation, or company has a meeting with a judge or policeman.
You have no right to judge me or anyone. Who made you judge and jury? I am as I am. Let objective standards measure my argument and not your opinion.How can you possibly associate the Holocaust with your desire to criticize Freemasonry?
You suggested one should be in the BNP or the Nazi Party to be "unimpeachable" with respect to providing evidence of the "secret" Nazi plan to kill people in death camps.
But one would not have to join the Nazis to expose such a plan. Similarly one should not have to join the Masons to become conversant with any masonic "secrets" or "secret plans"
to expose them.Well, no, it reinforces the principle that a theory most be backed by evidence. To know the most about physics, you must be a physicist. But that doesn't mean physicists have a secret nature.
Some certainly did! Newton was very secretive , a heretic, and maybe even a Mason
Well given Masonry only begins about 1717 he probably wasn't one then Ill give you that!
Ill accept a senior Mason who leaves or a Senior Scientologists who quits is a better source on "experience" but you don't have to join Scientology to criticise their "secrets" either.'Handwaving argument and sweeping statement' is a reference to what exactly?
To the exact quote preceding it!this thread is now 30 pages, and a lot of it is comprised of Freemasons answering questions quite openly...
That is a sweeping statement. the thread in Christianity on Creationism is over 1,000 pages and 20,000 messages. Many creationists are being honest there. But the fact the thread is long and they say creationists answered fully the question proving the world is only six thousand years old and all other queries as well is a sweeping statement and a handwaving argument!And why would anything be revealed by Masons in this thread which people could not learn anyway elsewhere? This is not a 'satisfy you local conspiracy theorists curiosity' thread. It's 'Freemasons: Evil secret society or misunderstood nice guys... ', and most of the Freemasons on the thread will be leaning towards the latter.
i.e. some won't be leaning that way?
I have no problem with whatever silly ceremionies you want to keep secert. Quite the opposite in fact which is why I didnt post them up to now. If you want to have secret words and signs then that I suppose is acceptable to a point. I have in the past been critical of other things like scientology say. Members in Scientology pay to progress. If masons paid to get higher degrees then I would think that is a problem. By "pay" I also mean "give a donation". If signs were used to identify allegience in public or if masons "took over" or even influenced certain other orginasations lijke the police government banks etc. I would have a problem with that.
A similar structure the Orange Order with the same "secret ceremonies" had huge influence in Irish politics and business.I'm afraid not, maybe we're not quite the world dominating organisers you think. But, for the sake of it, if I did have a personal copy of a list of all the officers of all the lodges that have ever existed in the world, I still don't think I'd feel compelled to obtain for a conspiracy theorist the evidence he wants to back up his hypothesis. Although, if it was easy to read, I might just have a peek to satisfy my own curiousity.
Ill admit i havent seen the primary material myself.
All i want is a source doccument on Hammersmith at the time referred to. If you give me a reference as to where to find it in which Trinity Library (The Berkeley I guess) Ill go and locate it and you will have to trust me when I tell you the list. I was referring to the Masons own library. It seems to me Masons in spite of the ritual are not wholly conversant with their owen history and how to find source material on it. I am surprised at that.
It seems this is the sequence He was a criminal before entering the lodge. He enter and was supported by members who knew he was a criminal, members with police connections who protected him.That is not presenting evidence, that is repeating a hypothesis.
I gave the evidence earlier:
Cameron being a small-time drug dealer who owed Noye money. However, it suited the purposes of both the prosecution and the defence not to mention this during the trial.
in this book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewer%27s_Rogues,_Villains_and_Eccentrics
and here: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20001008/ai_n14520163/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/nov/12/ukcrime.tonythompson
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/noyes-tangled-web-of-corruption-721292.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/7283183.stm
http://www.bernardomahoney.com/rrmurders/articles/noyee.shtml
It doesn't give a good appearance to promote such a person. Sinn Féin have has similar problems and you wouldn't want the Masons compared to the IRA would you?That's not what you said, you said , it's in post #430. I think you know you were caught out so you're tring to change the direction.
And I submit you think wrong! WHAT are you accusing me of lying about or tyroing to mislead. Care to quote it?Well, if Masons follow a set of rules which are SECRET. Secret oaths. Secret words. How can you list them? Either they're secret or not; if you can list them they're not secret because you know them, if you can't list them how do you know they exist at all?
Wrong! if i go to a magician and ask him "how did you make the lady disappear" He ight say "can you keep a secret" and When I answer yes he might say "so can i" unless i am another magiucian int he magic circle that is. But ALL stage magicians will admit it is just a trick. no paranormal force is involved. Now if a number of magicials in the magic circle (lists of which are readily available ) owned properties and bank accounts and were also on the boards of state companies and banks and were judges and senior police officers i would have a problem with the magic circle.Are you saying that at any time there was a law banning members of the public service from being Freemasons? Have you evidence?
Yes as far as I know.
http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/prescott15.html
This act, `An act for the more effectual suppression of societies established for seditious and treasonable purposes; and for the better preventing treasonable and seditious practices',[iv] to give its full name, was, almost by accident, to form the mainstay of the relationship between freemasonry and the state in Britain for nearly two hundred years, until its repeal by the Criminal Justice Act of 1967.
....
It also defined as an unlawful combination and confederacy `every society, the members whereof shall...be required or admitted to take any oath or engagement...' Societies were required to admit members `by open declaration at a public meeting of such society'. Every society was required to keep a book containing the names of all its officers, committees and members, which was to be open to inspection by the entire membership. Membership or support of any society which breached these regulations would be a criminal offence. Magistrates acting on the word of a single informer could impose summary fines on offenders; where offenders were indicted by jury and tried in a higher court, the punishment was transportation.
Ironically introduced to keep the Irish from rebelling
I had thought they were forced the past to declare membership if they were judges and that is was later overturned. Here is my source
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/politics/57381.stm
But I cant find the reference to it coming into law so I withdraw it. I know the baathists in Iraq banned them but that isn't saying much except they viewed Masons as a threat. well they also viewed both Al Qaeda and democracy as a threat.I'll allow that public servants across the world are welcome to join Freemasonry, and some do. If you found a list of the Judiciary who were Masons, I would be certain that all of them that actually were Masons were 1st degree Masons, and that some probably took further degrees, so by necessity they ALL are 'from lower orders'.
I am very surprised at that idea that judges are only first degree. . Obviously you are not in the public service. But ill accept your opinion form your own experience until I find conflicting evidence.
You are telling me the following person was no more than first degree mason?:
Peter Julian Millett, Baron Millett was born on 23 June 1932.1
Peter Julian Millett, Baron Millett was invested as a Privy Counsellor (P.C.) in 1994. He held the office of Lord Justice of Appeal between 1994 and 1998.1 He held the office of Lord of Appeal in Ordinary in 1998.1 He was created Baron Millett, of St. Marylebone in the City of Westminster [U.K. Law Lord] on 1 October 1998.How does that, or a public servant exerting undue influence over another public servant, relate in any way to your overwhelming desire to be told how many 'levels' there are in Freemasory?
I know you will say this guy is a conspiracy theorist but
http://www.chick.com/catalog/books/0193.asp
Do you deny the claims he makes regarding the following oaths p. 93-in the third degree ritual, the candidate swears:
I will keep a worthy brother Master Mason's secrets inviolable, when communicated to or received by me as such, murder and treason excepted
In the Royal Arch degree of the York Rite, even that small qualification is summarily removed. The candidate swears that:
I will keep all the secrets of a Companion Royal Arch Mason (when communicated to me as such, or I knowing them to be such), without exceptions.
At this degree, The candidate also swears that:
I will not speak evil of a Companion Royal Arch Mason, behind his back nor before his face, but will appraise him of all approaching danger, if in my power.
Finally, in the Royal Arch Degree, the candidate promises to:
...employ a Companion Royal Arch Mason in preference to any other person of equal qualifications.
Well, as far as I know the oaths aren't secret, and there are rules to be kept. And to forestall your excitement, whilst the oaths aren't secret, I didn't say I'd tell you what they are. Just that I can if I want. And your quotation is sort of similar to a rule in Freemasonry previously alluded to which precludes the discussion of religion or politics. The sharp eyed will note that the quote couldn't come from a Masonic Lodge as Freemasonry is open to many religions, not just Catholicism, or even Christianity.
[/quote]
and the knowledgable will note that there are Islamic and other lodges as well as christian ones.
There are even womans lodges. http://www.easternstar.org/
by the way how many black men in your lodge? are you aware of any in other lodges which have white men?Oh I think I did. And your reasons were half baked and ill conceived, nowhere near good enough for me to give an answer.
Sure you could say that to any given reason! How about you give me a list of what you consider as a valid reason and we will see if I can find someone to satisfy it? I suspect you will not supply such a list as it may either show up the secrecy or only be applicable to people who want to be masons.I never said 'Masonry is open honest and not a secret society'. I will say Masonry is not a secret society, it's members are probably more honest on average than the membership of most other societies, and some of us are inclined to be open about subjects which we wish to share with others.
Please care to share with me your metric or "average honesty"?
I'm not asking you be honest. Im asking you be honest about Masonry!
Nor am i asking you to reveal harmless secrets. I am asking you to reval things considered suspicious such as oaths to protect members.And I haven't said 'Mind your own business', I've said I'll tell you if you can provide me with a compelling argument.
Having already done so I am asking you what you consider a good reason. And saying a "compelling argument" means you are FORCED i.e. compelled to do so. I shall not so instruct you or judge you. It is for you to decide. On your own head be it.I never said "Im quite happy to tell yo all about Masonry" but I'm happy to discuss Freemasonry with you.
And I refuse to answer because you haven't provided me with a compelling argument. Or even a vaugley interesting one.
this is why freedom of information was invented. People would go into an institution and they might wan't information on how many public toilets in the area. the official woudl ask "why do you want to know" . Usually if you said "my mother had a bladder problem but likes to walk a lot and needs to know where the nearest one is" they might give it to you but idf you said "I am a journalist doing an article on how the council invests its money" they might not . They protected the institution whether ot not the higher ups were corrupt. Under freedom of information it doesnt matter what they think they HAVE TO give you the information.He might, though I sincerely doubt it. And nobody posted on this forum "Im a Mason. the Masons are not there to threaten you. We all have a job to do and I think the Masons have a bad image. You should not feel in any way threatened by them. feel free to ask me questions about the Masons and Ill do my best to answer them in an open and honest way." I checked.
It is called paraphrasing. what they said amounted to the same thing. It was not a verbatum quote.Indeed, but if he asked why you wanted to know, and you got all shifty and kept changing your arguments,
I just pointed out the institutional mindset. Incidentally I am not out to destroy the masons but I don't like authoritarianism. If you think not answering "why do you want to know" is "shify" then I can't help you there. I have already pointed out that when I did give reasons the rely is "not a sufficient reason" anywhay but I don't have to give them anyway! Nor do yo uhaveto answer but there is the MAIN DIFFERENCE
I am not claiming that I am all open above borar and my organisation is no threath to anyone. YOU ARE the group claiming that. I dont have to prove anything . YOU DO.
ASking me a reason behind why I ask you is just shifting the burden of evidence.and alluded to the possibility that you believed the police force were the Nazi Party, or possibly the BNP, and that you intended to infiltrate them and expose their principles, lies, deceits, and crimes, he just might say mind your own business. He might even say, why don't you come with me and we'll have a chat somewhere quiet with other friendly police guys. But that's the police for you. Friendly.
I dont intend to infiltrate anyone! That is my point! Nobody has to inflitrate the Masons BNP Nazis Catholic clergy Fianna Fáil or anyone else to ask questions about them and expose what they see as something wrong with them!You know you didn't; [give reason for asking] I asked you to expand and you couldn't.
Liar!
I gave you TWO but suit yourself. I didn't expect you would say it.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64641309&postcount=411
What about the later jhugher levels of masonry about which you have no knowledge?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64658442&postcount=424
I already gave you two reasons in any case
1. It may provides evidence you are not secret.
2. I may prove that you are ignorant of higher levels.
THERE ARE TWO REASONS for starters. You are a liar if you claim I didn't give them!
By the way I also stated I didn't have to give any!You may expect it, but you shan't receive it until you give me a sign as you say. And the sign shall be a compelling argument.
I'm not sure I know exactly what you are getting at here. What if I was a poor orphan?
Or a poor widow? might you have some charity for me then?You're saying being equal is the same as being deserving?
Only of rights? Inalienable rights are not earned.A rich man and a poor man may be morally equal. But a poor man may be deserving of financial charity, a rich man may not.Well done on discovering the internet, it hasn't been around for that long. Interesting Degree list too, so I guess you've answered your own question of how many 'levels' there are? Unfortunately 'Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, Valley of Toledo' is not Irish Freemasonry but it's still interesting. Anyway... were you making a point here?
Actually ive since come across this.
http://www.cumbwestmasons.co.uk/main/orders.shtml
Pity you couldn't have supplied similar when I asked.
I have also come across the argument of 3 or 4 degrees and the idea that a 33rd degree
gives the wrong impression. to be honest I find the subject interesting.So, your questions can't provide the evidence you suggest.
Which ones?That's not exploring, it's fantasising. But if you were a lower degree than a criminal or group of them in the masons why would you would not be knowledgeable of their connections? They're not kept in boxes, people meet each other. And even a lodge Master couldn't reveal what that position might have to do with facilitating the criminal Noye referred to, if he wasn't the lodge master who facilitated Noye. And since that lodge master may not have existed, as you still haven't presented the evidence, it's pretty hard to say he knew anything at all!
One point is that Noye was a lodge master.You have to read the bit before my response:. So, why should any potential loyalties Masons might have, based on their vows to support fellow Masons, be transparent to the public?
What if they conflict with the public interest?Considerably more than half I should think. And more due to logistics than humour. Boys will of course always be boys, I hope.
I was refering to demographics. half being female. Hence the boys comment.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
PaintDoctor wrote: »It harks back to the origins of Masonry. Originally when a stone worker wanted to go to work on, say a new Cathedral, there were 2 methods of testing his work. The first was to give him a block of stone and see what he could make from it. This cost time, and money - especially if he screwed up. By forming a guild, and having passwords given to Masons of paticular skill, they could arrive to the site, give the password, and immediately they would be recognised as either an apprentice, fellow craft, or master mason. Because they worked so hard to get to those levels, and they had their reputations at stake, the passwords and gestures were always kept secret in case some dodgy apprentice wanted to get a master masons wages.
We still use them today, but purely out of tradition. And men like to do funny handshakes. Seriously.
Ok. seems reasonable. But it is suggesting a restricted practice if it favours people for certain jobs.If there was a purpose, it's long since eroded. Ireland isn't huge, and when you go to Meetings, it's always the same faces over and over again. You'll get the odd visitor from some other Lodge who's in town shopping with the wife and wants to kill an hour to save his sanity, but the odds are that he'll know someone you know, and the handshakes/passwords are just again a silly formality for the sake of doing a handshake again because he's already known as a Mason. In other countries, it's the same.
Thats what happens when tradition becomes ritual. the meaning is lost.
Some people however seem to crave ritual.Maybe a long time ago in the past (Circa 250/350 years) but not in a derrogatory sense. By helping, lets say my plumbing goes in the morning, I could spend all day pouring through the golden pages, or I could call my friend who's a mason and a plumber. It's not that I'll get it any cheaper, but I know him and trust him - he joined the order to be surrounded by honest people, and so did I.
Again that is fine for you. But what if it is the plumbing contract for the whole of FAS?If people do use the order for any ill gains, they get booted out pretty damn quickly. The rest of us find that pretty disgusting.
As did the rest of Sinn Féin? Or the rest of the Board of Anglo Irish Bank?Not really. There are some ridiculous oaths which go back YEARS and seem silly. That you'll protect the chastity of your friends daughters, but again, try an enforce that in this day and age - it'd look suspect with old men following around teenage girls to nightclubs Some oaths are there to be taken seriously - like being honest, like obeying the laws of the country you're in, like not telling the passwords and handshakes (But purely out of the traditional sense as detailed above).
Why preserve outdated oaths? And if there were oaths to "protect a brother" in the past then at some point the masoins were corrupt or conspiring. But to be fair that is judging the past on present standards. The United Irishmen were a conspiracy or the IRB or GAA by that standard.But I promise you there isn't even the opportunity to discuss global takeovers of governments and corporations, the poisioning of waters, etc. We're all too busy playing dress up!
the conspiracy theorists would say the higher ups control the policy and use the lower orders as footsoldiers. Look at the Orange Order comparison for example to see where it can go. who actually owns your buildings? Is it the Order higher up or could you all sell it
locally and divide the money between you? if the order owns property it has wealth and power.0 -
-
-
It shows SOME of the highest degree masons are listed. About 20 to 30 which tend to repeat. Maybe there are on 50 masons in Ireland.
Of the most senior levels, there are only a handful of Masons. It's not a conspiracy. The only reason there's a handful is that to become so senior, you must be a mason for a long time. If you join in your mid 30's, early 40's as most men do, you won't live long enough to get thereI got the impression that there are Mormon and other Lodges and even Black lodges. Am I wrong?
Anyone can use the word Lodge. The orange order does it, but that doesn't mean they're freemasons. We certainly don't recognise them. Likewise with the female Eastern Star lodges, or if there is an exclusive 'black' lodge - we wouldn't recognise that either, as we believe in equality of ALL men, not just one race or creed.There are those who claim the orange order and KKK have their roots in Masonry and the same symbolism is clearly there.
That's possibly the most insulting thing anyone has even written about Masonry. Jesus H Dapdancing Christ, cut it out.
furthermore masonry is in decline in Ireland and Public Relations are important to masonry so to that extent you DO have to prove something.
Masonry's actually on the up. There were a few new lodges opened in the last 10 years, there's a Past Master's Lodge opened in Cork which is having huge success, Tralee Lodge which meets in Kenmare (Confusing eh?) was reopened due to the popularity of Masonry in Kerry and having no Lodge down there. Nearly every Lodge in Cork has waiting candidates, and freshly joined members coming up through the ranks, the Lodge I was master of for the last years has 3 candidates waiting to join, and 2 members recently initiated.
In times of recession, people will join tennis clubs/language courses/Masonry/car clubs, anything so they can still have a social life without an extensive expense dangling around their necks.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
PaintDoctor wrote: »Of the most senior levels, there are only a handful of Masons. It's not a conspiracy. The only reason there's a handful is that to become so senior, you must be a mason for a long time. If you join in your mid 30's, early 40's as most men do, you won't live long enough to get there
Reasonable answer.Anyone can use the word Lodge. The orange order does it, but that doesn't mean they're freemasons. We certainly don't recognise them. Likewise with the female Eastern Star lodges, or if there is an exclusive 'black' lodge - we wouldn't recognise that either, as we believe in equality of ALL men, not just one race or creed.
Note the "blackball" states
http://bessel.org/masrec/phamap.htmThat's possibly the most insulting thing anyone has even written about Masonry. Jesus H Dapdancing Christ, cut it out.
What is insulting that the KKK and Masons have a common origin?
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/kkk.html
It was founded in Polaski, Tennessee, in 1866 by 6 Confederate officers. One of them, and the first Imperial Wizard of the KKK, was a former Confederate general and Freemason, Nathan Bedford Forrest.
... Albert Pike held the office of Chief Justice of the KKK while he was simultaneously Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite of Masonry, in the Southern Jurisdiction...
http://vulcanlodge.co.cc/?p=366The long and short of this convoluted tale comes squarely to rest on the odious claim that a “non-white man” can not be a Freemason.
It also explains the "public interest/good" or "out of the Public purse"argument I have madeIn the mean time, a civil filing by the Worshipful Master turned Plaintiff suggests that the Grand Lodge is in violation of its Non-Profit Status
Masonry's actually on the up. There were a few new lodges opened in the last 10 years, there's a Past Master's Lodge opened in Cork which is having huge success, Tralee Lodge which meets in Kenmare (Confusing eh?) was reopened due to the popularity of Masonry in Kerry and having no Lodge down there. Nearly every Lodge in Cork has waiting candidates, and freshly joined members coming up through the ranks, the Lodge I was master of for the last years has 3 candidates waiting to join, and 2 members recently initiated.
In times of recession, people will join tennis clubs/language courses/Masonry/car clubs, anything so they can still have a social life without an extensive expense dangling around their necks.
Sorry I'm basing my comment on this:
http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/IrishFreemasonry.htm0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement