|
Post by atarnaris on Feb 23, 2005 12:00:48 GMT
I was chatting to a friend regarding Freemasonry and on his query of a definition I gave the well known " a peculiar system of morality...". He answered to me "Well, if all you teach is morality, I can go to the church, read the Bible and become moral. So why join Freemasonry at all?" I know it was a mistake trying to persuade him, but what would YOU have answered him back? I could only agree with him...
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Feb 23, 2005 12:12:54 GMT
It's not something you can persuade someone about.
Those who come to join freemasonry do so of their own free will and accord, having formed a favourable opinion of our order, and without influence.
If you have to persuade someone to become a freemason, are they the right one?
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Feb 23, 2005 12:55:35 GMT
Andrew, it's like the old story about the yokel asked for directions who replied "If I was doing this journey I wouldn't start from here!"
I would tailor my answer to the questioner and try to explain what it meant to me and why I was a member.
What did he want to hear? Was he interested in the Historical side, the Mystical, the Social, the Charitable? Did he have an open mind or did he have preconceptions about Freemasonry, either favourable or otherwise?
There are four answers to any question, the Right one, the Wrong one, the one you would love to give, and the one they want to hear.
I have to go off to work. I will think this one over and post a longer answer if you wish when I return later this evening.
|
|
|
Post by atarnaris on Feb 23, 2005 12:56:56 GMT
Bod,
I was trying to persuade him about the benevolence of the Craft, not to join. He is a BIG anti-mason, of course with no backing up of his opinion, except of what he has heard...
My question remains. What would you have answered...
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Feb 23, 2005 13:00:43 GMT
If you met a ferocious lion would you stop and discuss how bad for him it would be eating you? Or if you were being mugged would you pause to debate with your attacker the social consequences of his actions?
Personally I wouldn't bother discussing it with him, he has his opinion and nothing, and I mean nothing, you can say to him will change his mind.
|
|
|
Post by atarnaris on Feb 23, 2005 14:21:03 GMT
I see what you are saying, but I can't resist... Lions and thughs always present a challenge to me that I cannot deny to myself...
|
|
|
Post by Jumile on Feb 23, 2005 15:06:17 GMT
I'm reminded of any number of sayings here, but this one probably says it all:
Though having said that, and without meaning to sound too PC, is it worth investigating why that friend has that opinion. Or, more particularly, why he holds onto it so dearly? I suggest this because he's a friend, and is not something I'd recommend with an acquaintance or colleague - as this reminds me of another saying:
Assuming he really wants the truth, as opposed to justification or conviction of his own point of view: if you show yourself to be open and honest about what you're asked, and are careful to realise the difference between what really is and isn't secret (as per Taylorsman's definition, which I admire), then you should be able to be of help to him. Not in "winning a convert", but rather in disabusing the person of this uneducated prejudice.
From there he or she is, again, a blank sheet and is free to form their own balanced opinion. And you're there to provide half of that balanced opinion.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Feb 23, 2005 23:10:48 GMT
I never waste my breath on staunch antis, they are usually driven by religious reasons , occasionally political, we simply beg to differ. I have found that such antis try all the sneaky tricks used to great effect by lawyers etc in Courts to trick you into saying something you didn't mean and to put words into your mouth or even to make you lose your temper, so I have a short (but initially at any rate polite) way with them.
To the man who genuinely is ignorant of the facts I will if he is open minded try to answer his questions as best I can.
Unlike Andrew I am not into challenges I simply do not have the patience for such matters, nor am I any good at making conversions.
|
|
|
Post by a on Feb 24, 2005 8:26:19 GMT
Some of you may be interested to know that over the past couple of years as I have researched Freemasonry around the world, in its various flavours, I have also invested a fair amount of time in talking to what many of you may call "antis", of all types, to help me understand why they are "anti". Quite enlightening.
But I do worry about the term "anti" it is sort of dehumanising, which is not that dissimilar to some of the things that went on in WW2.
"antis" are anti for a reason. Some of these reasons are in my opinion valid. Others are not "anti" they are just labeled "anti" through labelling by Freemasons, as I myself once was.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on Feb 24, 2005 8:47:33 GMT
Have to disagree with your prime idea there Stewart. I am NOT and have never been "inclusive" to use the modern PC buzzword. There are some people I simply do not like and they no doubt have the same feelings about me. Fair enough if that is as far as it goes and it doesn't come to physical measures. If someone attacks what I believe in and hold dear, even more so causes it and me trouble as some Antis such as Mr Mullins has done to the Craft then I am not likely to treat them like a long lost friend, but will shun and avoid them. If I have to interact with those of such a mind, say in a work scenario, then we will stay off of the contentious subject to keep the peace and achieve whatever common goal we need to attain but that is it.
If someone is otherwise friendly but has a closed mind on Freemasonry I will leave it at that, beg to differ and remain friendly with them on other points.
There are some things on which one has to take a stand and I feel that our society is losing the plot by all this "inclusivness" and fear of offending etc. If some Anti Zealot takes umbridge at my response to them then that is TOUGH!
|
|
bod
Member
UGLE - MM (London), MMM RAM(Middx), OSM (London)
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by bod on Feb 24, 2005 8:48:19 GMT
Get real stewart!
These people are anti freemasonry, ergo, anti's. EOS
I've always preferred the term 'spade' ; as opposed to 'manually operated earth crust removal implement'
I've even been known to call it a fcuking shovel....
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Feb 24, 2005 21:35:36 GMT
Andrew Firstly from the title of this thread you are talking about a friend, and whenever I have been asked a similar question I usually state the following (roughly) You have known me for several years and you know my values and the things I do, do you think I would belong to something that is fundamentally wrong? (a question to a question). I then normally tell them that if World Politics were run along the lines of freemasonry the World would be a better place. I then always tell them that of the hundreds of brethren I have met during my time as a Freemason I can count on one hand the Brethren I would not like to be left in a room with, and ask him if he could do the same. And finally I try to make them aware of the tremendous feeling of fellowship and fraternal well being there is in Freemasonry and I know of no other organisation in the world that can give me that. And if like so many thay really dont want to hear, I say well you are the only one missing out, not me (And if they liked thier food I would tell them about the festive boards ) That bits a joke! This is what I would tell a friend. If it was a discussion with an out and out anti, unfortunately I would not bother. Stewart The only reason that anyone has for being Anti is ignorance, a total refusal to be told the truth. Now if you think there is a good reason for that then fair enough I disagree with you, Ignorance is anything from a misunderstanding to a blatant hatred it is still ignorance of the truth. Freemasonry is A peculiar system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbolsFreemasons are encouraged in the art of Brotherly Love, Relief and TruthThere is nothing else to add, except there is no excuse for ignorance. You can take a camel to water but you cannot make it drink, there is none such blind as those that wont see! etc etc etc.....
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Feb 24, 2005 21:41:13 GMT
Chris, What a wonderful post
|
|
|
Post by a on Feb 24, 2005 21:57:58 GMT
Middlepillar
Can't fault what you say.
Let me give you an example.
Do you remember on another forum a Freemason stated something to the effect that in days gone by to get work in his industry you had to go to Lodge (shipbuilding I think form memory)? Now that was in days gone by, I accept that. But lets just say that an individual thought that this was somewhat unfair and wrong, so disagreed with it and were classified as an anti. They are not really anti Freemasonry, just anti what one Freemason, or a group of Freemason use the Lodge for. If employment then stops to be decided in the Lodge (which in this case it would have as it was in days gone by) then the anti has no reason to be anti anymore. In fact he could potentially make a good Freemason.
This is the theory v practice issue again I am afraid. If the theory more closely equated to the practice then there would be far fewer antis. And you may remember that several examples of this divergence were given by your brothers on another forum. Reduce the gap and you will reduce the number of antis. And make life a lot more pleasant for many, unless of couse what I am told off forum is inaccurate.
Just my opinion obviously from what I have been told and read on forums.
But even if I am wrong, a "back to basics" campaign could help you enhance public confidence, and may bring some ex members back in. After all if our world ever needed love, relief and truth, it is here and now.
Go on on let me run it for you, go on, I dare you.
|
|
|
Post by middlepillar on Feb 24, 2005 22:13:03 GMT
Let me give you an example. Do you remember on another forum a Freemason stated something to the effect that in days gone by to get work in his industry you had to go to Lodge (shipbuilding I think form memory)? Now that was in days gone by, I accept that. But lets just say that an individual thought that this was somewhat unfair and wrong, so disagreed with it and were classified as an anti. They are not really anti Freemasonry, just anti what one Freemason, or a group of Freemason use the Lodge for. If employment then stops to be decided in the Lodge (which in this case it would have as it was in days gone by) then the anti has no reason to be anti anymore. In fact he could potentially make a good Freemason. So in fact his anti stance would be in result of ignorance of the true facts, wouldnt it? [/quote] Go on on let me run it for you, go on, I dare you.[/quote]
|
|