Question for ritualist and Manuscript researchers

[dfreybur]

On Mithraic background - While the few remaining Mithraic temple sites look a LOT like lodge rooms (more like AMORC rooms than ours, by the way), our knowledge of Mithraic teachings is itself speculative. Apparently they were a mouth to ear religion who did not write down their lessons. Which in itself resembles our traditions but in a way not related to speculations about their teachings.

 

[dfreybur]

Masonic origin myths -

One of the optional AASR-SJ degrees is one about alchemy. It tells an origin myth for Freemasonry as a deliberate import of the tools used in Gothic cathedrals to teach alchemy. It's ambiguous whether this degree tells about co-opting existing labor union lodges or chartering new ones from scratch.

As the AASR-SJ rewrote the degrees a few years ago, I have not seen all of them since. For all I know this degree from the Pike era may have been dropped in the rewrite.

 

[dfreybur]

Sorry that I jumped on this part of you quote...I had to look up AMORC, which led me to SRIA and SRICF the latter being the Masonic organization. Other then having Rosecrucian in their names does anyone know what, if anything, these groups have in common?

The AMORC is completely independent of Masonry, though there are numerous Masons who are members of AMORC.

The SRIA and SRICF are invitational Masonic appendent bodies. If I understand correctly they cover different regions of the world.

What do you mean by optional degree? Do you mean that its one of the ones that doesn't have to be done full form?

Correct. The mandatory degrees are the ones that must be presented to every reunion class. The optional degrees are presented as valleys decide to present them.

Many valleys do the mandatory degrees plus one or two optional degrees. I've traveled to reunions just to see one optional degree. The time I saw the alchemy one was when we lived in Washington state so it would have been 2002-3. We traveled to Yakima to see two of the optional degrees. The one on alchemy and the one on the laborer being worth his wage.

 

[MasonicAdept]

Many valleys do the mandatory degrees plus one or two optional degrees. I've traveled to reunions just to see one optional degree. The time I saw the alchemy one was when we lived in Washington state so it would have been 2002-3. We traveled to Yakima to see two of the optional degrees. The one on alchemy and the one on the laborer being worth his wage.

@dfreybur I actually live in Washington State at present. What are the name of the optional degrees?

 

[Bloke]

....Well SRICF is for the United States and SRIA stands for IN AMERICA so im not sure on that one...

Societas Rosicruciana In Anglia.... but it might also be America. Here, Anglia refers to England.
https://www.sria.info/home/

You have SRI《initials of place》. It's generally going to be Masonic Rosicrucianism and invitational. I got asked to join several years ago lol, " you know I'm only a member of the blue", they were a bit surprised.... now it's changed, you only need to be a MM but the degree/work is not intellectually accessible to all. My mentor joined. Said he really didn't get it. He'd led RCC. Most guys I know on SRIA are pretty cluey (smart)

 

[Ripcord22A]

http://www.sria.org

 

[Bloke]

@Rip

Of course you don't see the disrespect, we aren't the same person. Walk in my shoes and talk about what I see.
But I am confused, spiraled out of control is an exaggeration. But to be expected, You are the eyes viewing the alleged incident.

And just so we are clear, I was disrespectful on purpose. I am a human, and I have my limits. Don't push buttons to the weapons of mass destruction and complain when the lawn doesn't look the same. I asked twice for him to move on, he chose those course of events.

You have to view the circumstances from where I sit, and then you will be in a better position to judge how Nagy and I reached this point.

You get a pass....

I see it. It's mutual. You basically called him a girl lol. Rip give some golden advice, going "ad hominem" is doing neither of you nor thread thread service.

 

[Bloke]

http://www.sria.org

Thanks !

 

[Bloke]

....Well SRICF is for the United States and SRIA stands for IN AMERICA so im not sure on that one...

..... Other then having Rosecrucian in their names does anyone know what, if anything, these groups have in common?

They all draw from the same small well.. It takes a while and is not their best podcast, (which are the ones one the second and third degree so far) but
http://podcast.blueloungesocial.com/podcast/ep-8-rosicrucianism-freemasonry/

Or there is good old wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Rosicruciana

 

[Bloke]

http://www.sria.org

Interesting.. "Due to the fragmentary nature of Rosicrucian orders, there are a number of historical Rosicrucian societies with similar names that either no longer have a Masonic connection, or have gone dormant: The SRIA (A for "America") was chartered by the SRIA (in England) in Philadelphia in 1878. It reformed in 1889 as Societas Rosicruciana in the United States (SRIUS), and reformed again as SRIA in 1912. In 1916 the order began admitting women, and its charter was revoked. It is in existence today, but has no Masonic connections whatsoever."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Rosicruciana#Societas_Rosicruciana_in_America_.28SRIAm.29

I know Wikipedia is not the great source, but its often a good start for a helicopter view so you can move onto further research with a hint of what you need to look for..

SRIA - England, Australia etc - Masonic, MMs and above
SRIA or SRIA(m) - None masonic... "No. There is no Masonic Requirement to join the Society. We accept Masons and non-Masons alike. Anyone who believes otherwise is confusing us with either the English SRIA or the SRICF." http://www.sria.org/faq/

And several other "SRI<insert place letters>"

 

[Luigi Visentin]

Two Freemasons should aviod being "opponents" or competitors when discussing Freemasonry.

I totally agree with you !

 

[Luigi Visentin]

First of all thank you for having indicated this document. I admit that the Post Boy sham was not among the documents I have read and it has some interesting particulars while other seems to be a little "guessed".
Referring to the question that started this thread, my opinion is that most of the contents of the cathechisms are compliant to the content of the Legend of the craft. However some of them have been modified according to the changes that have likely happened around the end of the 1600. For example the "Graham" (1726) includes many forced interpretations, so question and answers are likely ancient, but explanations included are recent. However I think that other questions and answers present in other catechisms are not masked at all. In some cases, in facts, even a clear phrase can hide something if you do not know what is behind it. The only problem is that, unfortunately, we have lost a lot of material therefore, even in the best situation, it will be difficult to reconstruct completely how were the rites before 1717.

 

[Bloke]

First of all thank you for having indicated this document. I admit that the Post Boy sham was not among the documents I have read and it has some interesting particulars while other seems to be a little "guessed".
Referring to the question that started this thread, my opinion is that most of the contents of the cathechisms are compliant to the content of the Legend of the craft. However some of them have been modified according to the changes that have likely happened around the end of the 1600. For example the "Graham" (1726) includes many forced interpretations, so question and answers are likely ancient, but explanations included are recent. However I think that other questions and answers present in other catechisms are not masked at all. In some cases, in facts, even a clear phrase can hide something if you do not know what is behind it. The only problem is that, unfortunately, we have lost a lot of material therefore, even in the best situation, it will be difficult to reconstruct completely how were the rites before 1717.

Hi. This thread has been extensively edited and the OP banned due to conflict between participants. It was advised the ban is temporary, but I do not know when , or if, he will be back. I would assume it was a cool down ban of 24-48 hours; it is much longer since then. My bet is that he's lost to us.