|
Post by sid on Mar 13, 2010 22:28:30 GMT
Papus is an important link in a long chain of Masonic tradition when it comes to the Egyptian Rites that goes all the way back to the 1730's. Seeing how that is the tradition myself and many embrace all over the world I find him to be very important. I find Yarker, Wescott and Reuss to be important too. Especially Yarker ;D Love and Light, I like Yarker very much. I have some papus material, and have read some Reuss, but I personally prefer Yarker to either of them. I also like A.E. Waite, Manly Palmer Hall, and C.W. Leadbeater . I enjoy quite a few of the Theosophists, including Besant and esp. Blavatsky. I thought Pike had some things of interest, yet I do not entirely agree nor disagree with him or anyone that I have read. I always approach any Masonic writer with the understanding that just because they wrote it, I am under no obligation to agree with it. I also will not ignore a writer simply because they are a 'fringe' (that term makes me laugh out loud! ;D) Mason. What about: The Meaning of Masonry by W L Wilmshurst [1922] I still have to read any of his books thus far. A friend of mine translated some of his work into German.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 13, 2010 22:49:45 GMT
I like Yarker very much. I have some papus material, and have read some Reuss, but I personally prefer Yarker to either of them. I also like A.E. Waite, Manly Palmer Hall, and C.W. Leadbeater . I enjoy quite a few of the Theosophists, including Besant and esp. Blavatsky. I thought Pike had some things of interest, yet I do not entirely agree nor disagree with him or anyone that I have read. I always approach any Masonic writer with the understanding that just because they wrote it, I am under no obligation to agree with it. I also will not ignore a writer simply because they are a 'fringe' (that term makes me laugh out loud! ;D) Mason. What about: The Meaning of Masonry by W L Wilmshurst [1922] I still have to read any of his books thus far. A friend of mine translated some of his work into German. Great book. Highly recommended. Love and Light,
|
|
|
Post by mike on Mar 13, 2010 23:21:43 GMT
Could anyone be so kind as to define what they mean by 'fringe masonry'. What is it? Non-UGLE recognized. Not even close! There is plenty of Masonry out there which is neither fringe or recognised by the United Grand Lodge of England. Nosa, it is just a term used to describe orders that describe themselves as Masonry but which do not follow the tradition known within Masonry at the beginning of the 18th Century, ie development from the medieval operative Stone Masons' craft. So for example the OP's "Egyptian" Masonry would be described as "fringe" due to its focus on and claimed lineage to Ancient Egypt. When people leave the emotion (and point scoring) out of these things it is all actually very straight-forward. Mike
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 14, 2010 0:19:38 GMT
All of the Egyptian Rites are Hiramic. If some consider them "fringe" and that is there prerogative.
A lot of people don't like Papus, Ruess, Yarker but that dislike has no effect on their legacies.
Love and Light,
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Mar 14, 2010 0:22:15 GMT
I like Yarker very much. I have some papus material, and have read some Reuss, but I personally prefer Yarker to either of them. I also like A.E. Waite, Manly Palmer Hall, and C.W. Leadbeater . I enjoy quite a few of the Theosophists, including Besant and esp. Blavatsky. I thought Pike had some things of interest, yet I do not entirely agree nor disagree with him or anyone that I have read. I always approach any Masonic writer with the understanding that just because they wrote it, I am under no obligation to agree with it. I also will not ignore a writer simply because they are a 'fringe' (that term makes me laugh out loud! ;D) Mason. What about: The Meaning of Masonry by W L Wilmshurst [1922] I still have to read any of his books thus far. A friend of mine translated some of his work into German. Yes, that was one of the first purely Masonic books I read, and it's still on my shelf. I recall enjoying it very much. It was given to me by my dearly-loved lodge mentor before I became a MM.
|
|
Nosameerf
Member
Masonic Saturday Night Fever!
Posts: 74
|
Post by Nosameerf on Mar 14, 2010 16:39:50 GMT
Nosa, it is just a term used to describe orders that describe themselves as Masonry but which do not follow the tradition known within Masonry at the beginning of the 18th Century, ie development from the medieval operative Stone Masons' craft. Thanks Mike, that actually explains some things to me that I have been thinking about. Much obliged, Nosa
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Mar 14, 2010 17:10:27 GMT
I have to say I do not like the terms "Irregular", "Clandestine", or "Fringe" when applied to Freemasonry which does not comply with the UGLE format. I prefer "Alternative" though I have no problem with the differentiation in to "Anglo-Saxon" and "Francophone" , UGLE being considered by many to be the "Leader" of the former group, and Masonic Bodies such as my own = Le Droit Humain, GOdF, GLdF etc belonging to the latter.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 14, 2010 18:19:30 GMT
I have to say I do not like the terms "Irregular", "Clandestine", or "Fringe" when applied to Freemasonry which does not comply with the UGLE format. I prefer "Alternative" though I have no problem with the differentiation in to "Anglo-Saxon" and "Francophone" , UGLE being considered by many to be the "Leader" of the former group, and Masonic Bodies such as my own = Le Droit Humain, GOdF, GLdF etc belonging to the latter. Bro.Steve, People are going to say what they want to say. If it makes them happy let them have at it. Either way it changes nothing, that's the key to remember IMHO. Love and Light,
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Mar 14, 2010 18:56:04 GMT
Indeed so, Bro Brad. Some people could turn "Good Morning" into a declaration of war by their tone and intent.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 14, 2010 19:11:16 GMT
Indeed so, Bro Brad. Some people could turn "Good Morning" into a declaration of war by their tone and intent. That's right Bro.Steve. Take it from someone who knows, the more they talk even if it is horrible and negative the more strength you'll gain from it. I no longer think it is a coincidence that when the nastiest stuff is said about me I get the most inquiries. I used to get physically nauseous over this stuff but hey, whatever works, works ;D Having a pragmatic outlook helps get you though the BS. That's my take anyway. Love and Light,
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Mar 14, 2010 20:37:44 GMT
I have to say I do not like the terms "Irregular", "Clandestine", or "Fringe" when applied to Freemasonry which does not comply with the UGLE format. I prefer "Alternative" though I have no problem with the differentiation in to "Anglo-Saxon" and "Francophone" , UGLE being considered by many to be the "Leader" of the former group, and Masonic Bodies such as my own = Le Droit Humain, GOdF, GLdF etc belonging to the latter. I have to say that these labels have little meaning to me as a member of a U.G.L.E.-recognized lodge (what a pain it is to write that every time). My obligations are my obligation, not anyone else's. I will stand to them as I see fit with little concern of the insult that may be garnered by those who did not, and could not, take MY obligations. Those from 'recognized' lodges, I suppose, can be draconian, yet those from alternative lodges can be just as bad the other way. We can converse and learn from each other. There are many ideas presented, and the only ones I take exception to are the ones that feel like they may be designed to take advantage of others for self-aggrandizement or financial purposes. If no one is injured that did not agree to it, I am for the freedom of individuals and individual groups to take care of themselves as they see fit. Which does not exclude me or anyone from offering an agreeing or dissenting opinion. In P.M.s, individuals have contacted me as well about certain groups, and I offer caution in approach and sometimes my opinion when relevant. We can't stop fools from walking into the water, but we can instruct them to be cautious.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 14, 2010 21:12:17 GMT
I have to say I do not like the terms "Irregular", "Clandestine", or "Fringe" when applied to Freemasonry which does not comply with the UGLE format. I prefer "Alternative" though I have no problem with the differentiation in to "Anglo-Saxon" and "Francophone" , UGLE being considered by many to be the "Leader" of the former group, and Masonic Bodies such as my own = Le Droit Humain, GOdF, GLdF etc belonging to the latter. I have to say that these labels have little meaning to me as a member of a U.G.L.E.-recognized lodge (what a pain it is to write that every time). My obligations are my obligation, not anyone else's. I will stand to them as I see fit with little concern of the insult that may be garnered by those who did not, and could not, take MY obligations. Those from 'recognized' lodges, I suppose, can be draconian, yet those from alternative lodges can be just as bad the other way. We can converse and learn from each other. There are many ideas presented, and the only ones I take exception to are the ones that feel like they may be designed to take advantage of others for self-aggrandizement or financial purposes. If no one is injured that did not agree to it, I am for the freedom of individuals and individual groups to take care of themselves as they see fit. Which does not exclude me or anyone from offering an agreeing or dissenting opinion. In P.M.s, individuals have contacted me as well about certain groups, and I offer caution in approach and sometimes my opinion when relevant. We can't stop fools from walking into the water, but we can instruct them to be cautious. I agree with your post and I would also like to ad, we shouldn't assume everyone is a fool. ;D I get hit with the "financial" accusation all the time. yet no one can produce a single shred of evidence to support this claim. the claim itself is hurtful. Just like when someone accuses someone else of rape. It could be totally fabricated, but isn't some damage done? I have also been accused of duping poor souls as well. Even though if you read through www.lodgenapoleon.com the fact that we are unrecognized, self created and independent couldn't be anymore clear. To this day there has been no "former" Post-Modern Freemason or any other direct associate of mine who has ever complained. Back to my point. People will say what they say regardless of facts. In my experience on forums a lot of the time ( not all the time ) it matters less what the facts are, it matters who is posting them. That's a shame but it is what it is. One can curse the tide or one can build a house out of the way of it. It is our choice what direction to take. Love and Light,
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Mar 14, 2010 21:24:15 GMT
Message removed by author under protest.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Mar 14, 2010 21:27:41 GMT
As a member of what you might term "A NON UGLE-Recognised Lodge" I cannot see where the pain comes from writing a simple description. As others far more eloquent than myself have put it, your Lodge is "Regular" if you have to use that expression in the context of your Freemasonry just as mine and for example those of GOdF and GLdF are "Regular" within mine. The term is therefore somewhat redundant but can nevertheless be used by some as an insult to other Masonic Systems and for that reason I dislike it.
Now I am prepared to accept Brethren of other GLs, Gos etc as being such although we may not be able, owing to the rules of our respective Governing Bodies, to visit each others Lodges. I extend this to Bro Brad and his Masonic Orders although I would not for example wish to be told what I could or could not eat or be banned from having an alcoholic drink after a Meeting etc. so they would not be for me.
As to "Obligations" these one needs to square with one's own value system and possibly one's religious beliefs and that is for each individual to judge according to their "Light" and personal conscience. I am not bound by your Obligations nor are you by mine.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 14, 2010 21:43:08 GMT
As a member of what you might term "A NON UGLE-Recognised Lodge" I cannot see where the pain comes from writing a simple description. As others far more eloquent than myself have put it, your Lodge is "Regular" if you have to use that expression in the context of your Freemasonry just as mine and for example those of GOdF and GLdF are "Regular" within mine. The term is therefore somewhat redundant but can nevertheless be used by some as an insult to other Masonic Systems and for that reason I dislike it. Now I am prepared to accept Brethren of other GLs, Gos etc as being such although we may not be able, owing to the rules of our respective Governing Bodies, to visit each others Lodges. I extend this to Bro Brad and his Masonic Orders although I would not for example wish to be told what I could or could not eat or be banned from having an alcoholic drink after a Meeting etc. so they would not be for me. As to "Obligations" these one needs to square with one's own value system and possibly one's religious beliefs and that is for each individual to judge according to their "Light" and personal conscience. I am not bound by your Obligations nor are you by mine. I agree Bro. Steve. Just an FYI: only three out of fourteen lodges threw in on the health initative. Amognst Post-Moderns you would be the majority Love and Light,
|
|
Augur
Member
Travelling salesman. Roamin' profit.
Posts: 184
|
Post by Augur on Mar 14, 2010 21:44:53 GMT
Well, as has been stated time and time again on this board - 'clandestine' and 'irregular' are terms that are relative. It's purely jurisdictional and there can be many reasons for the label being applied. If you're not interested in masonic communication with a body that considers you one of these, why would you care? To them it's a factual statement that they don't consider you or your group Masonic for one reason or another. Some here like to call U.G.L.E. Masonry 'malecraft' in some bizarre attempt to qualify, condescend towards, or marginalize what, in truth, takes up well over 90% of the Masonic landscape. I don't care. People betray their biases and ignorance with their actions. Let them. There are worst names applied to masons and masonry of all types and I don't see anyone getting too upset about that, and rightfully so. If you decided to get upset at every name or title or label that was applied to you that you disliked you'd never get wink of sleep between your fits of outrage. "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." - Eleanor Roosevelt Back to my point. People will say what they say regardless of facts. In my experience on forums a lot of the time ( not all the time ) it matters less what the facts are, it matters who is posting them. That's a shame but it is what it is. Well, the background and reputation of an individual is important in how you decide to view what it is they have to say. Someone with a history of fairness, intelligence, even-handedness and depth of understanding is going to have their words taken at face value far more often than someone with a long history of speaking falsehoods or slander, having a criminal record, or a habit of threating violence and arson towards those they disagree with. And rightfully so.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 14, 2010 21:55:40 GMT
Well, as has been stated time and time again on this board - 'clandestine' and 'irregular' are terms that are relative. It's purely jurisdictional and there can be many reasons for the label being applied. If you're not interested in masonic communication with a body that considers you one of these, why would you care? To them it's a factual statement that they don't consider you or your group Masonic for one reason or another. Some here like to call U.G.L.E. Masonry 'malecraft' in some bizarre attempt to qualify, condescend towards, or marginalize what, in truth, takes up well over 90% of the Masonic landscape. I don't care. People betray their biases and ignorance with their actions. Let them. There are worst names applied to masons and masonry of all types and I don't see anyone getting too upset about that, and rightfully so. If you decided to get upset at every name or title or label that was applied to you that you disliked you'd never get wink of sleep between your fits of outrage. "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." - Eleanor Roosevelt Back to my point. People will say what they say regardless of facts. In my experience on forums a lot of the time ( not all the time ) it matters less what the facts are, it matters who is posting them. That's a shame but it is what it is. Well, the background and reputation of an individual is important in how you decide to view what it is they have to say. Someone with a history of fairness, intelligence, even-handedness and depth of understanding is going to have their words taken at face value far more often than someone with a long history of speaking falsehoods or slander, having a criminal record, or a habit of threating violence and arson towards those they disagree with. And rightfully so. Well, I will say that I don't care about the U.G.L.E's definition of much. They do what they do, good for them. I also do not have a criminal record (even a clean as a whistle driving record) so you can say what you want on that. I would not automatically dismiss someone based on criminal record (unless they should still be in prison for a violent offense) but hey, everyone sooner or later needs to prove their merit. Love and Light,
|
|
Augur
Member
Travelling salesman. Roamin' profit.
Posts: 184
|
Post by Augur on Mar 14, 2010 22:10:33 GMT
I also do not have a criminal record (even a clean as a whistle driving record) so you can say what you want on that. I would not automatically dismiss someone based on criminal record (unless they should still be in prison for a violent offense) but hey, everyone sooner or later needs to prove their merit. Well, I was speaking in general terms. I don't know what kind of record you do or don't have, in all honesty - and I don't care. However, if someone was applying to my Lodge I would care. And the type of offence, obviously, would be of great import. Mind you, so would the age of the charges or record and how the individual has led their life since the infraction. Really though, I was merely stating that these things will colour how someone is going to initially either trust, or be prone to scepticism about, what someone has to say in a public forum. Someone can be completely untrustworthy in their background and agenda but still be factually correct on a point or points, just as someone who's just and upright in their life and actions, or even a devout scholar in their field, can be guilty of bias or error at times. It's not about 100% dismissal or acceptance at face value - either is foolhardy. It's about tendencies and the amount of trust you're going to place in an individual given what you know about their history.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Mar 14, 2010 23:52:34 GMT
As a member of what you might term "A NON UGLE-Recognised Lodge" I cannot see where the pain comes from writing a simple description. As others far more eloquent than myself have put it, your Lodge is "Regular" if you have to use that expression in the context of your Freemasonry just as mine and for example those of GOdF and GLdF are "Regular" within mine. The term is therefore somewhat redundant but can nevertheless be used by some as an insult to other Masonic Systems and for that reason I dislike it. I *might* say that, but I am not likely at all to say that. I do not go around saying that lodges outside my system are ' 'irregular' or 'clandestine' or 'fringe' (this one still cracks me up ;D ) . When I say 'regular' someone seems to want to take umbrage to it, although the term is older than any of us here have been alive, and has its useful purposes. Yes, I wanted to visit your lodge (as many lodges who are of a different body than mine would hopefully do), you would likely require that I oblige your internal government. I would have no problem agreeing to this, and would not be insulted in the slightest that you would not allow me to enter. In fact, I would respect your wishes and your body more than if the Master did not ensure your lodge was properly tiled. To my semi-adequate recollection, the only thing I have said on the matter is I once told someone I did not recognize him as a Mason. That has nothing to do with anything but a personal opinion, and is not regulated by my GL, Lodge, or any other authority than my own conscience. My conscience is clear. Now I am prepared to accept Brethren of other GLs, Gos etc as being such although we may not be able, owing to the rules of our respective Governing Bodies, to visit each others Lodges. I extend this to Bro Brad and his Masonic Orders although I would not for example wish to be told what I could or could not eat or be banned from having an alcoholic drink after a Meeting etc. so they would not be for me. I am likewise prepared to accept brethren from other GLS or GOs &c. although I would not, could not, and should not allow them into my tiled lodge. I do this with NO regrets. At all. I think we are both on the same page here, excepting the fact that I reserve the right to determine if someone is worthy to have extended to him or her my Masonic friendship. Even in my own order, I reserve that right. As to "Obligations" these one needs to square with one's own value system and possibly one's religious beliefs and that is for each individual to judge according to their "Light" and personal conscience. I am not bound by your Obligations nor are you by mine. It is exactly true; and not even the brothers within my order are bound by my obligations. I took them, I agreed to take them of my own free will and accord, and strength unfailing, I will stand to them. That is all. It wouldn't be Masonry if I could not extend it to the world at large and even moreso to those with integrity from other bodies with a positive and progressive mindset. I do not think you and I disagree as much as all that on these matters, and do not think we are all that disparate in our Masonry.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Mar 15, 2010 6:30:06 GMT
Augur Ref Some here like to call U.G.L.E. Masonry 'malecraft' in some bizarre attempt to qualify, condescend towards, or marginalize Augur it is just a simple use of Language - Any Masonic lodge that only admits Men - are Malecraft - Not just UGLE Any Masonic lodge that admits Men and Women are Co-Masonry of mixed Masonry.. It is not a big deal but just a convenient use of words - as in - In Co-Masonry it is not important which gender the Master of the Lodge is - where as in Malecraft it can only be a Man - quite simple and not at all offensive.
|
|