|
Post by 0tt0 on Mar 22, 2010 4:53:14 GMT
Earlier there was question as to hijacking a thread and what that's all about...
...Consider your question answered. LOL.
Have at it, gentlemen, I've already been told to leave, so I will, but dont forget that even if you both are not "BROTHERS", feel free to conduct yourselves as if you were.
Arguing from opposite sides of the bridge is fine. Too much heat in the argument, and you burn that bridge. Burning bridges is a no-no. It's also called arson in the U.S. ;-)
|
|
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 22, 2010 5:10:39 GMT
Point well taken Otto. In all fairness, anything posted after you said you had no interest is not the reason you abandoned your search, and does not answer the question of what precisely caused you to do so. I have had it confirmed that there is indeed a T.O. lodge of Native Americans who wear black jeans and a leather vest in lieu of a tuxedo or suit, this is a true display of brotherhood. We ought not mistreat those among us who are financially challenged. This example does display a significant bit of what brotherhood is about, and is rightfully a partial reply to your question. It's not even that big a deal on its face, and I'm surprised it bothered anybody. It is a big deal under the surface, which is where Masonry lies. Yes, I know that someone hijacked this thread to all appearances after you gave your ultimatum. Just remember, every person is individual, and appearances can be deceiving. Even yours.
As to acting as brothers, I had many fights with my older and younger brother growing up. We still love each other, even in disagreement. If we can't disagree, then we cannot be brothers as one or the other is considered as something else. In this way, Magus and I have treated each other as brothers. I have no fear of burning bridges. I cannot control what people think of a freely-expressed opinion. ;D
|
|
|
Post by 0tt0 on Mar 22, 2010 6:44:18 GMT
I didn't really mean to portray some type of ultimatum, I honestly did some face-to-face research today, as a fact. I think a couple comments here just left a bad taste in my mouth. My hasty(sp): "I don't think it's right for me." wasn't a "final decision" as much as it was an expression of disagreement... However it was DEFINITELY worded as such, which is my fault/lack of control when disappointed.
The brothers comment was alluding to the possibility that you both are Freemasons. If so, then you both ARE INDEED BROTHERS. ;-) I was just trying to put some water on the fire. Whether the fire is wood or gas, at least I tried something. haha.
|
|
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 22, 2010 6:54:23 GMT
In matters of information, it is the best to portray the information as accurately as possible. I recall your possible interest in a T.O. lodge, and the information should be as solid as can be conveyed. The one thing you will find in Freemasonry is agreement on basic tenets. There is additional agreement in some matters, yet it diverges widely after that. So yes Freemasons are free to disagree, and even in a heated situation it does not dispel the fact that Freemasons go in peace no matter what the outcome. I have brothers I disagree with on many matters, yet I still stand by them and don't concern myself too greatly with our differences. Where we can best labor together is the important place. I can recognize a brother or a person that wishes me ill, and may remain skeptical if I cannot make a clear judgment. These are important distinctions to recognize in life. The words in quotes for the thread title are important. I personally have met no one on this board, so I have to make judgment calls as everyone does. A tiled lodge meeting of Freemasons is another matter.
|
|
|
Post by 0tt0 on Mar 22, 2010 7:26:36 GMT
Haha, well I won't claim that the words in quotes don't apply to me, because they definitely do. Especially since I wrote them. I was only making an (apparently unwanted) attempt at calming down what I perceived as an argument. Arguments aren't much fun, even if I DON'T know anything.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 22, 2010 13:42:42 GMT
Greetings Otto, May I suggest that the only real way to discover what masonry really is, is to actually apply, and join a Lodge near where you live. Be well
|
|
|
Post by gipsyrose on Mar 22, 2010 14:43:43 GMT
Having read through this thread I feel drawn to restate what billmcelligott said in an earlier post.
"Freemasonry is a tool that will assist you in the development of yourself. How effective this tool is is not dependent on everyone else or your Lodge doing their part, that is your job."
Having now been involved with freemasonry for nearly four years, it has certainly been my experience that persisting with the structure that is provided to us by our rituals, whatever may seem to be the flaws initially, has changed my being in fundamental ways. Just the taking on of different roles, in a slow steady year by year progression, has had a marked impact on me, in ways that become more obvious to me as time goes on.
I think we have a precious craft that contains more wisdom than we may be consciously aware of.
|
|
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 22, 2010 15:55:10 GMT
I think you've struck an important point gipsyrose. I do not think Freemasonry offers any secrets. It offers tools and instructions to find the secret within ourselves. The one thing you *can* find in Masonry is a broadened path that leads us all back to our own front door. Somewhere along the line, humans have lost the key to get in. Freemasonry provides that key. Goat's words are wise. Real Freemasonry happens in a Lodge and is extended out. Like all journeys, it has to begin with a single step.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 22, 2010 21:50:15 GMT
From: The Masonic Restoration Foundation
Dennis V. Chornenky President, Masonic Restoration Foundation
"Traditional Observance lodges are similar to European Concept lodges in that they also incorporate higher dues, festive boards, a strict dress code and higher standards of ritual."
They also state that black suit and tie is a bare minimum accetable dress code for non-officers only.
|
|
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 22, 2010 21:55:57 GMT
From: The Masonic Restoration Foundation Dennis V. Chornenky President, Masonic Restoration Foundation "Traditional Observance lodges are similar to European Concept lodges in that they also incorporate higher dues, festive boards, a strict dress code and higher standards of ritual." They also state that black suit and tie is a bare minimum accetable dress code for non-officers only. It does not matter. The FACT is that there is a T.O. lodge approved by the M.R.F. in which the brothers wear 'black jeans and leather vests'. A 'strict dress code' is subjective until specifically described, and your claim was that tuxedos were enforced to meet the requirement. The above *still* does not require tuxedos. You claim they state a black suit and tie is a 'bare minimum', but offer no documentation for this. Can you provide some? Who said they did not ask higher dues and higher standards of ritual? That was never in dispute. Your strawmen are flapping in the wind. Better pull them in before they blow away again.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Mar 22, 2010 22:05:10 GMT
From: The Masonic Restoration Foundation Dennis V. Chornenky President, Masonic Restoration Foundation "Traditional Observance lodges are similar to European Concept lodges in that they also incorporate higher dues, festive boards, a strict dress code and higher standards of ritual." They also state that black suit and tie is a bare minimum accetable dress code for non-officers only. It does not matter. The FACT is that there is a T.O. lodge approved by the M.R.F. in which the brothers wear 'black jeans and leather jackets'. You claim they state a black suit and tie is a 'bare minimum', but there is no documentation for this. Can you provide some? Who said they did not ask higher dues and higher standards of ritual? Your strawmen are flapping in the wind. Better pull them in before they blow away again. No documentation? Don't be flipping stupid. It is all over the MRF courseware. I know you like to argue just to prove you are the biggest jerk on the block but this is getting old. Especially when it is clear that you don't know what you're talking about.
|
|
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 22, 2010 22:15:30 GMT
It does not matter. The FACT is that there is a T.O. lodge approved by the M.R.F. in which the brothers wear 'black jeans and leather jackets'. You claim they state a black suit and tie is a 'bare minimum', but there is no documentation for this. Can you provide some? Who said they did not ask higher dues and higher standards of ritual? Your strawmen are flapping in the wind. Better pull them in before they blow away again. No documentation? Don't be flipping stupid. It is all over the MRF courseware. I know you like to argue just to prove you are the biggest jerk on the block but this is getting old. Especially when it is clear that you don't know what you're talking about. I say 'there is no documentation', yet I meant merely there was none provided in your post. My error was in not fully explaining my request. I freely admit it offer my apologies. Do you have documentation on this statement: "They also state that black suit and tie is a bare minimum accetable dress code for non-officers only." I do not doubt it is true, yet has no bearing on the M.R.F. requiring tuxedos in specific. You did provide documentation for the earlier statement, which has no bearing on tuxedos being required, but not for the later one. I found the reference, and it is correct-still no tuxedo requirement. You have not shown that the M.R.F. requires tuxedos. You cannot, as I have it from brothers on the M.R.F. board that disagree with your assertion that the M.R.F. requires tuxedos. Your statement was: The MRF has strict and dogmatic guidelines in regards to T.O. lodges. I have read them and they specify full tuxedos as lodge attire. The M.R.F. has no full tuxedo requirement for lodge attire, though individual T.O. lodges do have such requirements. If you think the truth makes me a jerk, it cannot be helped. I think a full and accurate picture is important in serious endeavors.
|
|
|
Post by 0tt0 on Mar 23, 2010 4:48:09 GMT
...I think I could scare up a suit and tie from the closet without a problem, guys.
As far as the online thing goes, again, I've begun speaking with people about it face-to-face, and with full understanding that meetings held in lodges are not performed over the internet. I think I'm being seen as "beneath" some of you. Slightly offensive, to be honest, and again, if I've offended ANY of you, I apologize... I'm only here to learn more about Freemasonry before making a decision. I hope/assume that is a noble enough cause to be on a somewhat similar pitch, as I assume most of you have done the same, regardless of joining.
|
|
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 23, 2010 4:54:58 GMT
0tt0, I for one do not see you as beneath me at all. If I gave that impression, I assure you it was unintentional. My point was that nobody should be seen as 'beneath' in Masonry simply because they cannot afford a suit. It was not a suggestion that you could not afford a suit, just an example of something I admire in Freemasonry. In Freemasonry, we all meet as equals. Those who see positions of honor as positions of power have missed the point, in my opinion. No person deserves respect he does not earn. I wish you the best in your future endeavors. ...I think I could scare up a suit and tie from the closet without a problem, guys. As far as the online thing goes, again, I've begun speaking with people about it face-to-face, and with full understanding that meetings held in lodges are not performed over the internet. I think I'm being seen as "beneath" some of you. Slightly offensive, to be honest, and again, if I've offended ANY of you, I apologize... I'm only here to learn more about Freemasonry before making a decision. I hope/assume that is a noble enough cause to be on a somewhat similar pitch, as I assume most of you have done the same, regardless of joining.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Mar 23, 2010 10:57:26 GMT
As far as the online thing goes, again, I've begun speaking with people about it face-to-face, and with full understanding that meetings held in lodges are not performed over the internet. I would agree you wil only get the real feeling of Freemasonry in a masonic Lodge. I have to be honest here, I feel slightly offended that you would think anyone here has shown superiority. I noticed you were a new member when the thread was started. The natural thing for an evangelical Freemason to do is to look after or safeguard the conversations with a new or potential Mason [as I am sure the other Mods have done]. I have kept a very close eye on this thread and in my opinion you have been welcomed and you have been given some honest and reasoned information. What you decide to do with this information is your choice. You have been exposed to maybe five different orders of Freemasonry here and that has been explained. I think the replyeeees here have done a decent job of trying to give an insight into a very complicated subject. So I am disappointed that you feel 'talked down to', I for one just cant see evidence of that in these posts.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 23, 2010 14:08:16 GMT
As far as the online thing goes, again, I've begun speaking with people about it face-to-face, and with full understanding that meetings held in lodges are not performed over the internet. I would agree you wil only get the real feeling of Freemasonry in a masonic Lodge. I have to be honest here, I feel slightly offended that you would think anyone here has shown superiority. I noticed you were a new member when the thread was started. The natural thing for an evangelical Freemason to do is to look after or safeguard the conversations with a new or potential Mason [as I am sure the other Mods have done]. I have kept a very close eye on this thread and in my opinion you have been welcomed and you have been given some honest and reasoned information. What you decide to do with this information is your choice. You have been exposed to maybe five different orders of Freemasonry here and that has been explained. I think the replyeeees here have done a decent job of trying to give an insight into a very complicated subject. So I am disappointed that you feel 'talked down to', I for one just cant see evidence of that in these posts. May I suggest that it may simply be a lack of confidence on your part Otto, everything is new to you etc., or as with a mirror, what has been expressed by others in writing to you about Masonry and within Masonry has been reflected back to you. Perhaps you should just 'feel' the experience and learn from it. All part of an individual process, which is very personal. If you have just started upon the path, then perhaps you would like to keep a diary of your path. Then re-read it now and again as you move on. Best I can do for now. Be well,
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 23, 2010 14:12:23 GMT
Having read through this thread I feel drawn to restate what billmcelligott said in an earlier post. "Freemasonry is a tool that will assist you in the development of yourself. How effective this tool is is not dependent on everyone else or your Lodge doing their part, that is your job." Having now been involved with freemasonry for nearly four years, it has certainly been my experience that persisting with the structure that is provided to us by our rituals, whatever may seem to be the flaws initially, has changed my being in fundamental ways. Just the taking on of different roles, in a slow steady year by year progression, has had a marked impact on me, in ways that become more obvious to me as time goes on. I think we have a precious craft that contains more wisdom than we may be consciously aware of. What I get from your email is that you feel more 'grounded'. A bit like the strong foundations of an old building. Be well,
|
|
|
Post by aogop on Mar 24, 2010 20:01:53 GMT
Otto, I sent you a PM. Also, if there is a chance you will be sent overseas, there are quite a few military lodges sponsored by Prince Hall Grand Lodges in Guam, the Middle East, Japan, Korea and other areas around the world where the US has a strong presence. If that is something you are curious or interested about, let me know by replying to my PM and I can get you the contact information.
To answer your original questions, nobody cares if you have tats or ear rings, although I imagine people might question if the tat had something to do to promote anarchy or something that would oppose what Freemasonry supports. We have officers in lodges in our district who are Samoan by birth and have their faces tattooed...
|
|
|
Post by letterorhalveit3 on Mar 25, 2010 9:27:54 GMT
Looks like my thread got hijacked. Oh well, I think the more recent posts make it pretty clear that I shouldn't join. Thanks for the advice, everyone. I think you would be making a mistake and perhaps a very unfortunate one causing you to miss out on the wonderful experience of being a Freemason if you didnt join simply because of the meandering conversations on a "Masonic" forum. You'll find that in many cases, the discussions on these fora have little if anything to do with Freemasonry and its good to remember that the opinions expressed are those of individuals, many of whom are not Freemasons, and those opinions and experiences may have nothing whatever to do with what you would experience upon joining a Lodge. Feel free to PM me if you would like to discuss joining.
|
|
|
Post by letterorhalveit3 on Mar 25, 2010 9:33:53 GMT
Confused? The same way you where confused by the basics of PHA and mainstream basic visitation? Is that relevant to the topic at hand in any way, or just a personal attack of a conversation on from another site as is purportedly prohibited by the rules here? Your claim, like the others you make, would have to be proven. I have been confused before, and admitted to it. That's the only way to grow. I may not always like the truth, but I far prefer the truth and endeavor to always speak the truth. I know it bothers you that I have a command of Masonic jurisprudence and protocol, but I suggest you learn to live with it. It will save on the cost of ant-acids. Love and Light, Whatever. It doesn't bother me at all that you are wrong and making claims you cannot back. It's par for the course. IF there is a requirement to wear tuxedos from the M.R.F. as you claim, prove it. It's simple as that. ;D I think there has been a rather blurry connection drawn between the MRF and the actual TO Lodges themselves. THe MRF is intended to preserve and re-invigorate Masonic traditions, customs, culture, etc. One of the ways this is done is through the establishment of TO Lodges which is something the MRF encourages. I can tell you from experience that some TO Lodges requires the wearing of tuxedos, some require "cutaways" or mourning suits, some simply require what might be considered business attire in the form of suits and ties and some are less formal. The emphasis is on restoration of traditions ritual and culture which some Lodges chose to add to by dress codes. This is not the case with all TO Lodges as certain members of this forum would indicate. I have a great interest in TO Lodges and thats why I am a member of the MRF and I have visited TO Lodges which do not required tuxedos or white tie and tails. If anyone has given you information to the contrary, they are quite simply wrong.
|
|