Ancient "Freemasonry"?

Discussion in 'General Freemasonry Discussion' started by MasonomroM, Sep 19, 2018.

  1. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    Bingo!

    Which should raise the question: What exactly were these lodges if they were not blue lodges?
     
  2. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    What bashing? Done by who?
    I was a Mason long before I joined the Freemasonic Order.

    I remain a Freemason to help other members ...
    1) realize that ritual only points to Masonry, but is not Masonry itself.
    2) practice the Masonry for which they joined Freemasonry.
    But of course, that is the essense of Faith!
    Yes! Why not?
    Agreed! But I would not have used "to try" in that statement! There is no try here - only DO!
     
  3. MarkR

    MarkR Premium Member

    1,002
    815
    133
    Base ball, base-ball, and finally baseball. The way the term was presented evolved. To say that the word freemason didn't exist because they used to hyphenate it or express it as two words just doesn't hold water.
     
    Glen Cook and texanmason like this.
  4. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    LOL! Getting a bit wet in your metaphors there Bro. Mark. You're eagerness to assume is saddening. When you get a chance, look at the difference between the Hebrew letters shin and sin. Attention to detain is what the fellow craft staircase lecture is all about and when you assume minor details mean nothing, you've gone from seeing abundance to being burdened.

    Details Brother Mark! It's about looking at what was originally written and not modifying it to suit your narrative - which has unfortunately been done by generations of eager men wanting to create a narrative that is fantasy based.

    The compound word was only used after 1717; that is a fact. To claim it was used before 1717 is fabricating history.

    To assume the terms are all synonymous and that the term's use evolved to keep the same meaning is conjecture; the evidence doesn't back it unless further conjectures are put forth to support the narrative of fabrication.

    When you examine what was done when the original stonecraft terms were used and overlay what is done currently, the conclusions should be obvious, unless you want to keep the fabricated narrative and evidence be damned. And there are a lot of members who do just this.

    Ancient Free Masonry was about superior stonecraft. The word "free" meant "superior"; not "unrestrained". And Masonry was about "Building".

    Freemasonry is about as far from Free Masonry as Dragnet is from actual police work. Freemasonry is not a speculative form of operative masonry; even though the scripts claim it is. It is something that points to its possibility though. Which is all that you can truly offer to a population of individuals who need to be invited to improve, not forced. Much like what I do here in challenging the status quo; invite members to think beyond the veil and see the truth behind Freemasonic conjecture.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018
  5. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,184
    3,240
    183
    Valid point.
     
  6. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    Unless everything that was done before was used to create the illusion of continuance. Then all the disjointed lore and nonsensical claims make perfect sense!
    It was an amalgamation in this aspect: All the Freemasonic scripts that were put together were for theatrical effect - to provide each patron with an authentic feel in the hopes that one day each would get the message that the theatrical performance was intended to convey - improve yourself!
    But they DID fundamentally CHANGE from what was going on previously! All one has to do is examine Operative versus Freemasonic practices - they are worlds apart, even when you make every effort to claim the latter is a speculative form of the former. Things simple do not add up.
     
  7. MarkR

    MarkR Premium Member

    1,002
    815
    133
    And I still contend that the difference between free-mason and freemason is no more significant (as words) than the difference between base-ball and baseball. A lot of compound words evolved through a hyphenated stage. And I wasn't discussing the meanings assigned to free-mason and freemason; I was only addressing your contention that the word didn't exist until they removed the hyphen.

    But you feel free to continue to laugh at and mock anyone who disagrees with anything you say.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2018
    Glen Cook and texanmason like this.
  8. MarkR

    MarkR Premium Member

    1,002
    815
    133
  9. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    As is you right to do. I disagree and my disagreement is based upon careful examination of the words used within context over the years, not the disputed terms as they compare to other terms used throughout the years.
    Yes, however you are comparing how other terms evolved with how these words were used within context over the years. Context and case specific! You're generalizing and saying your generalization is valid. It is not in this case.
    You have every right to ignore the details. You have every right to come up with a conclusion based upon that ignoring of details. I shall not dismiss the evidence and conclude anything that fits a narrative that doesn't support the evidence. There's more going on behind the curtain than meets the eyes!
    Good Lordy Mark, you know darn well that my laughter was at the metaphor you used, not you. Stop acting like a victim seeking a persecutor.

    Details Mark! Taking laughter out of context and reframing in to suit a victim narrative is just sad! If you're feeling frustrated, perhaps your energies would be better suited looking at the details! They are there and in abundance! All you have to do is train your mind to recognize patterns and not assume the dogma you were gleefully and ignorantly handed is the actual story that unfolded.
     
  10. MasonomroM

    MasonomroM Registered User

    14
    11
    3
    Well, this thread really got some legs....
     
    Glen Cook and Warrior1256 like this.
  11. Warrior1256

    Warrior1256 Site Benefactor

    7,184
    3,240
    183
    Yep....**sigh**
     
    Glen Cook likes this.
  12. texanmason

    texanmason Registered User

    52
    34
    18
    The Craft can do without this kind of condescending attitude.
     
    MasonomroM likes this.
  13. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    The Craft could do with a healthy dose of reality and far fewer encouragers of fantasy.

    That being said, you're virtue signaling with your comment. A very old tactic to take focus off the substance of the topic and redirect it like a smelly red herring to avoid facing serious discourse about our Craft's shortcomings. By virtue signaling, you've taken focus off the topic and redirected it upon me. Rather than look at what I wrote and take it as a prescription for success, one that is tried and true, you've painted it in a offensive light - and me as well - one that is of your own making, and taken it as an insult and responded in kind. You are your own victim here.

    Fortunately, your comment has more to do with your nature when faced with such prescriptions than the substance offered.

    We'll have to disagree on your attacking comment as well.
    slander.jpg
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2018
  14. LK600

    LK600 Premium Member

    654
    708
    113
    I can not speak to this exact issue, but historically spelling was not standardized. There was no dictionary or anything similar in nature throughout the years (specifically speaking about Europe). The spelling of a word could take numerous forms, so basing anything (for or against) should be done with a grain of salt.
     
  15. texanmason

    texanmason Registered User

    52
    34
    18
    Sorry John, calling out your conduct towards other brothers isn't "virtue signaling." No-one is encouraging fantasy, or dismissing reality. In fact, we're trying to encourage realistic understandings of history. Your condescending remarks don't help anyone, and they don't foster learning.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2018
  16. coachn

    coachn Coach John S. Nagy Premium Member

    2,051
    2,027
    133
    No, you are not.
    Actually, it is "virtue signaling". You're framing this as an attitude and moral issue. It is neither. However, you'll continue to frame it that way so that you can continue to make it sound like conduct unbecoming toward others when what it actually is: Sound advice that upsets you enough to attack me rather than address the issues the statement points toward.
    Your words don't reflect reality. And I am not the only one seeing the encouragement of fantasy and the dismissal of reality within the Craft! Here's another Brother's comment upon the subject:

    “Masonic authors have been known to abandon all reason in their reveries upon Masonic symbolism. Their flights of fancy have produced such ludicrous outrages as the theory that Freemasonry originated with Adam in the Garden of Eden, or perhaps in ancient Egypt, or possibly even fabled Atlantis. The latter notion is especially appealing to these dreamers as there is no evidence of the existence of that legendary continent, and, more importantly, there is no evidence to contradict their hypothesis. ”

    “I am not from Missouri, but I do firmly subscribe to that state's motto in regard to Masonic research: "Show me!" There is more than enough antiquity and honor connected with our Craft to make references to unfounded claims and fanciful digressions unnecessary (and downright embarrassing!). Nonetheless, such speculations have had a profound effect upon the history of the Craft.”
    -- Bro. S. Brent Morris

    He is not alone. He echoes what Bro. Mackey said years ago:

    “How is the history of Freemasonry to be written, so that the narrative shall win the respect of its enemies, and secure the assent and approbation of its friends? In the first place, we must begin by a strict definition of the word Masonry. If we make it synonymous with Freemasonry, then must we confine ourselves closely to the events that are connected with the Institution in its present form and organization. …

    “… No greater honor could accrue to any man than that of having been the founder of a new school of Masonic history, in which the fictions and loose statements of former writers would be rejected, and in which the rule would be adopted that has been laid down as a vital maxim of all inductive science, — in words that have been chosen as his motto by a recent powerful investigator of historical truth:

    'Not to exceed and not to fall short of facts — not to add and not to take away. To state the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.'" – Bro. Albert C. Mackey 33° (History of Freemasonry; Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, 1917 edition)



    If that were true, especially of you, you would not find the prescription I said condescending. Yet, here you are once again saying...
    A prescription for learning ...
    All you have to do is train your mind to recognize patterns and not assume the dogma you were gleefully and ignorantly handed is the actual story that unfolded...
    not fostering learning? It sounds like you have a lot more going on here than the surface issues in this thread.
     
  17. Bevan Jones

    Bevan Jones Registered User

    29
    16
    3
    I believe the below is the clearest explanation of the emergence of Speculative Freemasonry from the Operatives....

    In December 1583, James I of England appointed William Schaw as principal Maister o' Wark (“Master of Works”) to the Crown of Scotland for life, responsible for all royal castles and palaces. Schaw, a loyal Catholic, replaced the Protestant Robert Drummond, most likely as a direct result of the Gowrie Regime. Around the time of Schaw’s installation as master, the 7th Lord Seton was sent as ambassador to France, accompanied by his son Alexander Seton and William Schaw, known to be friends due to their shared interest in architecture. Returning the following year, Schaw was intimately involved in building the Seton Collegiate Church and Seton Palace. George Seton remained in France, not liking the pro-Protestant turn of events in Scotland.

    The First Schaw Statutes, written in December 1598, were rooted in the “Old Charges” of stonemasonry, typically describing the duties, charges and regulations of a mason’s lodge. However, many also included a prayer and description of the Seven Liberal Arts, followed by a romantic history of the operative craft. Schaw included additional material to describe a hierarchy of wardens, deacons and masters. Apprentices joining a guild would be bound to their masters for seven years. Within Freemasonry, an initiate symbolically rolls up his trouser leg to show that he is not bound with chain irons, and is coming to the lodge of his own free will and accord.

    Schaw spent more time in Edinburgh than Glasgow and his earlier trip to France with Lord Seton had been funded by the town of Edinburgh, considering the kings lack of funds at the time. This loyalty, and the fact that his great friend, Alexander Seton, had now become Provost of Edinburgh, goes a long way to explaining why Schaw favoured the Operative Lodge of Edinburgh (“Mary’s Chapel Lodge No. 1”) over Mother Kilwinning Lodge No. 0 near Glasgow, in his Statutes. Mary’s Chapel Lodge is in possession of the oldest known operative masonic lodge records, dating back to July 1599, shortly before the publication of Schaw’s Second Statute.

    In his Second Statute, Schaw attempted to make up to Kilwinning by declaring it the “head” lodge for the operative craft and giving it regional authority for west Scotland, whilst confirming all its previous practices. Interestingly the officials of the lodge were recommended to ensure that all fellows and apprentices "take trial of the art of memorie". Having placated operative lodges in the West of Scotland, Schaw now also encountered problems from the St. Clair Family. Over 100 years prior, William St. Clair, the builder of Rosslyn Chapel, had been a great employer of stonemasons, notably the Tironesian experts in gothic architecture. The St. Clair descendants thus felt they had some say in the matter of how operative masonic lodges should be run, even though the surviving male line of the family had fallen out of favour with the ruling elite of the time.

    However, the Setons and St. Clairs were still close and Dunfermline Lodge was supported by both the St. Clairs and Alexander Seton, Earl of Dunfermline. Schaw now placated them as well, by confirming the role of the Lairds of Rosslyn as “patrons and protectors of the Craft”, in his St. Clair Statutes of 1600 and 1601. Schaw died in 1602 and his tomb inscription, written by his great friend Alexander Seton, begins as follows:
    This humble structure of stones covers a man of excellent skill, notable probity, singular integrity of life, adorned with the greatest of virtues – William Schaw, Master of the King's Works, President of the Sacred Ceremonies, and the Queen's Chamberlain.

    As well as having the oldest operative lodge minutes, Mary’s Chapel Lodge No. 1 also records the admission of Lord Alexander into the lodge in 1634. Was this Lord Seton? And did Schaw, Seton and Dickson introduce the Art of Memory into masonic ritual? It’s certainly a strong possibility. We thus know that speculative masonry must have emerged sometime between the 1599 operative minutes and the 1634 initiation of a Lord into the lodge, who clearly would not have been an operative stonemason.

    Although baptised as a Roman Catholic, James I of England was brought up Presbyterian and, following the Union of the Crowns, he leaned towards Anglican practise. James had great trouble with both Protestants and Catholics in Scotland. Anglicanism seemed like a reasonable compromise. Speculative Freemasonry may have emerged from Scots Protestant and Anglican families, such as Hamilton and Murray, splitting from the traditional Templar / Catholic families of Seton and St. Clair. The rift between David Seton (Catholic aligned and allegedly the last Scots Templar) and Sandilands (Protestant and the last Prior of the Hospitallers before surrending the Order to the Catholic Queen at the time) is well documented. The current Queen is Church of England and still head of the Order, under new brand and management of course.

    Certainly, Robery Moray (direct descendant of the Tullibardine Murrays) was a prominent Scots Mason and founder of the Royal College, whilst several Hamiltons and Murrays are later recorded in Scots Masonic minutes. HRH The Queen, Duke of Lancaster is also directly descended from the Tullibardine Murray's but that's another story...

    The Protestant / Catholic debate was raging, around the same time that Rosicrucianism (hermetic mystery schools) and Francis Bacon was defining his New Atlantis and scientific empiricism. It must have been a fascinating time to be alive and equipped with a brain and a soul. As Freemasonry tried to provide a united platform for reconciling science with spirit, it may have tried to reconcile the many differing religious views, with a united reference to the “Great Architect of the Universe”.

    Would Lords have associated with stone masons at this time? Very unlikely, considering the social structures prevailing. However, the operative lodges already had convenient meeting places and could have offered the perfect recluse for the gentry interested in discussing the emerging sciences, especially considering that stonemasons had always been open to the liberal arts, with maths and geometry being skills required for a master builder at the time.

    James I would have had much insight into historical and emerging developments, being close to the major role-players at the time and having the benefit of the inheritance of Lord Sandiland’s Templar collection, via the Hospitallers. We will of course never know the exact course of events but the above is at least a reasonable guess, when considering the sequential timeline of events and interplay of the key characters at the time.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2018
    texanmason likes this.
  18. Elexir

    Elexir Registered User

    634
    484
    63
    What is a traditional templar catholic family as opposed to a catholic family?
     
  19. JamestheJust

    JamestheJust Registered User

    1,645
    499
    83
    >What is a traditional templar catholic family as opposed to a catholic family?

    It may be that Templar Catholics followed John the Baptist rather than Jesus
     
  20. Bevan Jones

    Bevan Jones Registered User

    29
    16
    3
    A Catholic-aligned family that traditionally supported the Templar narrative, such as the St. Clairs and Setons. But of course the situation was very fluid and family members married into opposing families at the time, as well as changed their alliances as power shifted. However, it was clear that Sandilands, under pressure from the Setons, had to give up being Hospitaller Prior to the Catholic Queen, due to his Protestant allegiance. Up until this point, one can track clear lines of descent from Robert de Brus and several Flemish Templar families, to the Earls of Atholl and Argyll. These families then appear to split along Protestant / Catholic lines and almost all prominent Scots Freemasons, including the famous Dukes of Atholl (who head the Atholl lodges), as well as the Queen Mother's Scots ancestral lines, come from the Protestant / Anglican line. The Setons and St. Clairs fade into relative obscurity. One cannot unfortunately do justice to the massive amount of genealogical and historical research required in short quotes on a forum such as this. As an aside, the current (reluctant) Duke of Atholl now lives in South Africa and has little to no interest in his family's role in all of this. I know because he's told me so. Bah, history, what good is it huh? :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2018
    Warrior1256 likes this.

Share My Freemasonry