|
Post by billmcelligott on Mar 15, 2010 8:32:54 GMT
It is a puzzlement to me, as a UGLE Mason, why there is so much emphasis on these various terms. I just do not hear the terms used.
I have just done a search of these terms in the UGLE, BOC, here are the results
clandestine = none fringe = 4 references all to do with regalia Irregular = 10 references only 2 which refer to Lodge or Grand Lodge traditional = 0 Alternative = 5 references none to GL's or Lodges
There are 2 Paragraphs using the word irregular which is one to do with 'a Grand Lodge' and another to do with 'a Lodge.'
You see it has been my observation that these words are used mostly on the internet and play little or no part in Grand, Provincial or any Lodges under the UGLE banner.
I further say that the vast majority of UGLE Freemasons either do not know there is any other Freemasonry or just do not care.
Now this is no reflection on any other Masonic authority, it is just a statement of facts as I observe them.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Mar 15, 2010 10:15:35 GMT
I agree to an extent with Bro Bill that these terms are used more on Internet Fora, but I have also had them spoken to me face to face on a few occasions. Now I do not like Political Correctness and the banning of some words as is of course now the case in day to day life, However, there is a perjorative aspect to "irregular", and "clandestine" although "fringe" is fairly innocuous to be honest. For that reason I prefer Traditional and Alternative.
|
|
Nosameerf
Member
Masonic Saturday Night Fever!
Posts: 74
|
Post by Nosameerf on Mar 15, 2010 10:47:02 GMT
I can't stand the use of the words, 'profane' and 'cowan'.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Mar 15, 2010 11:22:30 GMT
I just see that it produces some very strong reactions and leads to the assumption that this diversification is created by UGLE and the terms do not derive from there.
Indeed Great Queen Street has recently held an exhibition of female Freemasonry. It accepts that there are other forms of Freemasonry, although I have never sensed an affection for Co Masonry, maybe because they feel it takes members away from its own Lodges, but nobody has ever actually said that to me. There have been a number of occasions where we have been informed that we must not join a particular group, as well as keeping our membership of UGLE.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Mar 15, 2010 11:27:57 GMT
The difficulty is that those two words are in the Rituals, well in some workings anyway. "Profane" comes from Latin and means "Outside of the Temple" which of course a non-Mason would be. "Cowan" is a word that I have only come across in a Masonic context and in some explanations means an untrained Mason, I suppose these days we would call then "Cowboys" as in "Cowboy Builder, Plumber, Electrican" etc. The other meaning I have heard is "evesdropper", someone who listens in to Masonic proceedings but has not been Initated as a Mason.
Are they insulting? I suppose it comes down to intent yet again. I cannot see them being struck from the Rituals but possibly "non-mason" is a less perjorative term for non-ritual use. As an example the word "Cripple" is still seen in some old Masonic Books as being one of the type of person not permitted to be made a Mason. This prohibition has long since gone and I know several Masons who have a physical disability. In polite speech we would no longer refer to such people as "cripples".
|
|
Nosameerf
Member
Masonic Saturday Night Fever!
Posts: 74
|
Post by Nosameerf on Mar 15, 2010 11:31:40 GMT
I saw the dictionary definitions, but on some forums, these words are used like a swearword and when used like this, I find it boring.
|
|
|
Post by goatrider on Mar 15, 2010 13:16:50 GMT
'fringe' (this one still cracks me up ;D ) . We are out on the fringe. Location, location, location.
|
|
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 15, 2010 16:12:40 GMT
'fringe' (this one still cracks me up ;D ) . We are out on the fringe. Location, location, location. That makes me laugh even harder! ;D ;D ;D Thanks for giving me my first pre-coffee smile of the day.
|
|
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 15, 2010 16:22:35 GMT
I can stand it, though I have yet to hear or see it applied in real or internet life, excepting one occasion. ::)I have found no need for them in daily usage, except a friend of mine has a last name of Cowan. ;D I can't stand the use of the words, 'profane' and 'cowan'.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Mar 15, 2010 19:46:55 GMT
It is amazing how a word can invoke so many different responses depending in how it is delivered! None of the words quoted are very offensive in thier own right but in the hands of a writer with a point to prove can be very unpleasant!
Mike Martin on the first page uses the term 'Fringe' freemasonry, there is nothing insutling about this term but you have to ask what does he mean by 'fringe'. Where is the line drawn between 'fringe' and not fringe?
Now we could use the book 'Beyond The Craft' as a 'line in the sand' so to speak and call all those orders within the book 'non fringe' and all those not in it 'fringe' you would then have a start! However if we did that we would have 2 Orders (St Thomas of Acon and Pilgrim Preceptors) that have many times more members than The August order of Light and The Baldwyn Rite on the 'Fringe' yet AOL and The Baldwyn Rite not so!
Or does he mean Recognised UGLE Masonry as not on the 'Fringe' and Not UGLE recognised as 'Fringe'?
My point is Mike did not use the word in an insulting way which I think we can all see, so in my opinion he is entitled to use it without fear of offence! Those who use it as a weapon that would be another story!
|
|
|
Post by goatrider on Mar 15, 2010 21:31:33 GMT
Those who use it as a weapon that would be another story! Who and what are you talking about? I guess I'm a little confused and don't understand the weapon aspect at all.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Mar 16, 2010 9:02:40 GMT
Those who use it as a weapon that would be another story! Who and what are you talking about? I guess I'm a little confused and don't understand the weapon aspect at all. I am not referring to anyone in particular and if you really dont understand what I mean I am almost in disbelief. But here goes from an English view; If you go to a football game with your best mate, when you meet in the pub you may greet him with "How are you you old b*****d?" And it would be in a non-offensive way (Although I appreciate some would still find it rude but it happens) You walk down the road and see some rival supporters chanting abuse at you, so you retaliate with "You B******s!" The use of the same word in two different ways, one as a friendly greeting (albeit rude) One as a a gesture of anger (weapon).
|
|
|
Post by goatrider on Mar 16, 2010 13:34:56 GMT
The use of the same word in two different ways, one as a friendly greeting (albeit rude) One as a a gesture of anger (weapon). The concept of "regularity" is a way of describing the relationship of the practices, as well as the differences, between guilds. This fact exists. It struck me last evening while watching an episode of "Blade the Immortal" (animé about a Japanese Ronin) that even competing groups of martial arts practitioners adopt similar standards based on various levels of differentiation. In this example, two particular schools were discussing their common origins and philosophies, yet one school of fighting disapproved because of how they were using their swords, and so they killed everyone in the other school. In this instance, they literally were using weapons, and although it was depicted as fiction, it has a basis in actual practice. We need to come to terms that there are differences between how various groups of Masonry have come to be, that there are differences in how they practice the Craft, in philosophy, and that there is so much rivalry between the various groups involved, that certain words are used to describe this relationship. Just because a few moderators or members on a particular forum wish to pretend that we are one big masonic family does not change how others that are not here view this issue. We who are here, can choose to avoid this issue in the interests of being polite, but it doesn't negate its existence.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Mar 16, 2010 13:37:31 GMT
But if we close our eyes and wish hard enough...
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 16, 2010 16:22:44 GMT
The use of the same word in two different ways, one as a friendly greeting (albeit rude) One as a a gesture of anger (weapon). The concept of "regularity" is a way of describing the relationship of the practices, as well as the differences, between guilds. This fact exists. It struck me last evening while watching an episode of "Blade the Immortal" (animé about a Japanese Ronin) that even competing groups of martial arts practitioners adopt similar standards based on various levels of differentiation. In this example, two particular schools were discussing their common origins and philosophies, yet one school of fighting disapproved because of how they were using their swords, and so they killed everyone in the other school. In this instance, they literally were using weapons, and although it was depicted as fiction, it has a basis in actual practice. We need to come to terms that there are differences between how various groups of Masonry have come to be, that there are differences in how they practice the Craft, in philosophy, and that there is so much rivalry between the various groups involved, that certain words are used to describe this relationship. Just because a few moderators or members on a particular forum wish to pretend that we are one big masonic family does not change how others that are not here view this issue. We who are here, can choose to avoid this issue in the interests of being polite, but it doesn't negate its existence. OK, then my question is why perpetuate this way of thinking? What does it lead to? Martial arts is a great example. Look at Bruce Lee. He broke all conventions. He taught who wanted to be taught. This meant non-Chinese and even women. He was attacked with fervor and almost lost his life for doing it but he kept on keeping on. As a result even though he taught for a very short time and died very young he remains arguable the most influential martial artist ever. A lot of people follow the status quo and good for them. At the same time it is the revolutionaries that history remembers. Love and Light,
|
|
|
Post by letterorhalveit3 on Mar 16, 2010 16:33:52 GMT
I can't stand the use of the words, 'profane' and 'cowan'. What is it about them that bothers you? Profane comes from the latin pro fanum, meaning "outside the gate" or "outside the door" and so simply means someone who has not been properly initiated or admitted through the Western Gate. A cowan, in Masonic terms, is some who attempts to gain access to the secrets of Masonry by passing themselves off as a Mason and entering the Lodge under this pretense. This is in contrast to the Masonic use of the term "eavesdropper" which is someone who attempts to hang about outside the Lodge or hide themselves within it (in a clock perhaps?) to learn its secrets.
|
|
|
Post by goatrider on Mar 16, 2010 16:46:59 GMT
OK, then my question is why perpetuate this way of thinking? What does it lead to? Martial arts is a great example. Yes, it is a good example, because just as there are many different styles of fighting, similarly there are differences between the various traditions of Freemasonry. Therefore part of the answer is that it allows us to make distinctions. Let me ask a different question: don't you think that over the years the Western/Eastern Mysteries have lost much of their Traditions? If Freemasonry, or anything else is special, then why water it down? For instance, the various rituals contain various "quaint" phrases. Why not just jettison that old-fashioned lingo? However, one reason not to do this is precisely the fact that that its language in fact contains and conceals that which has been handed down..."from time immemorial". One can read the Old Charges and discover important clues regarding the meanings behind some of our teachings; they are cleverly disguised, but the inclusion of a certain name or places--even if not historically accurate--will lead the observant where they're supposed to go. I'm a member of the ASSR; in my jurisdiction the rituals have been changed around so much, and in some instances been completely replaced by one-dimensional plays that--although they may be modern--do nothing to perpetuate the wisdom that's now been lost to modern generations of Masons, and it is a shame that there are those who are ashamed of what they perceive as "paganism". Everything is there for a reason. There are those of us who may be sentimental old fools, but are aware of the rich traditions in Freemasonry that have survived entire nations; why weaken that which has made us strong? Anyway, Magusmasonic, this is only a single viewpoint. I understand that there is a line of thinking that wishes to combine, to distill, and to attempt to extract the "best" out of what Freemasonry has to offer. Yet, in my own mind, often the baby is thrown out with the water.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 16, 2010 17:02:16 GMT
OK, then my question is why perpetuate this way of thinking? What does it lead to? Martial arts is a great example. Yes, it is a good example, because just as there are many different styles of fighting, similarly there are differences between the various traditions of Freemasonry. Therefore part of the answer is that it allows us to make distinctions. Let me ask a different question: don't you think that over the years the Western/Eastern Mysteries have lost much of their Traditions? If Freemasonry, or anything else is special, then why water it down? For instance, the various rituals contain various "quaint" phrases. Why not just jettison that old-fashioned lingo? However, one reason not to do this is precisely the fact that that its language in fact contains and conceals that which has been handed down..."from time immemorial". One can read the Old Charges and discover important clues regarding the meanings behind some of our teachings; they are cleverly disguised, but the inclusion of a certain name or places--even if not historically accurate--will lead the observant where they're supposed to go. I'm a member of the ASSR; in my jurisdiction the rituals have been changed around so much, and in some instances been completely replaced by one-dimensional plays that--although they may be modern--do nothing to perpetuate the wisdom that's now been lost to modern generations of Masons, and it is a shame that there are those who are ashamed of what they perceive as "paganism". Everything is there for a reason. There are those of us who may be sentimental old fools, but are aware of the rich traditions in Freemasonry that have survived entire nations; why weaken that which has made us strong? Anyway, Magusmasonic, this is only a single viewpoint. I understand that there is a line of thinking that wishes to combine, to distill, and to attempt to extract the "best" out of what Freemasonry has to offer. Yet, in my own mind, often the baby is thrown out with the water. I would say that rituals are changing all the time. The UGLE not to long ago changed their rituals in order to remove the penalties. The AASR in the USA has always been distinctly different from the French original in the REAA. The MRF has tacked on a Chamber of Reflection to Preston-Webb and it was never there in the first place. I personally tend to lean toward the original form of the rituals. That doesn't mean I don't like the others. One thing always remains though and in my experience the most important piece. The cadence of the rituals. This is the real magick, the skeleton of the rituals so to speak. When you speak of traditions what do you mean? Some would say that the use of a 100 year old chair or a collapsible top hat is traditional. I could care less about either of those things. 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 16, 2010 17:11:50 GMT
"A lot of people follow the status quo and good for them. At the same time it is the revolutionaries that history remembers."
And forget. There are literally TONS of revolutionaries that failed and are now not remembered, and revolutionaries sometimes have the bad habit of becoming dictators when they win. Hitler was unquestionably a revolutionary. As was Pol Pot. As was Mao.
True Revolutionaries that do well do it not out of personal self-aggrandizement. Those are the revolutionaries that make the positive changes. If one's purpose is to be remembered in history, how pathetic is that? Do the right thing with integrity. That is the mark of a true revolutionary.
It is easy to see the oldest extant material and exposures and see that much of what was still is, and it is easy to see that a requirement of belief in a higher being was there from the very beginning from the available manuscripts. The recent differences and your personal opinion are of little import. Masonry is still the same. When it goes too far afield, it ceases to be Masonry in anything but name. Just as Pike infers, some things remain hidden and will always be so to those who do not understand, as much as they claim to.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Mar 16, 2010 17:28:00 GMT
We need to come to terms that there are differences between how various groups of Masonry have come to be, that there are differences in how they practice the Craft, in philosophy, and that there is so much rivalry between the various groups involved, that certain words are used to describe this relationship. Just because a few moderators or members on a particular forum wish to pretend that we are one big masonic family does not change how others that are not here view this issue. We who are here, can choose to avoid this issue in the interests of being polite, but it doesn't negate its existence. I agree with this and thought that was what I was saying! It is the acceptance that differences are there no matter how much we do not like or believe in them that is important. To try to constantly ridicule some of them while accepting others is surely not correct? Do we really have no faith in the intelligence of every member of this board to think and learn for themselves, and more importantly to come to the decision that is correct for them to accept what they wish too accept? The comment left soon after your post part of which I quoted above is another example of unnecessary sarcasm. Nearly everyone on this Forum knows exactly how a certain member feels about another, yet this member always finds it necessary to just have a little dig, the more concealed the dig is the cleverer it looks, it must be really gratifying to be able to do this, to us who have to moderate it is just another eyes in the head moment.
|
|