Albert Pike: More harm than good?

Discussion in 'General Freemasonry Discussion' started by cacarter, Apr 2, 2014.

?

Is Albert Pike more harm than good?

Poll closed Jul 11, 2014.
  1. Good

    11 vote(s)
    44.0%
  2. Harmful

    6 vote(s)
    24.0%
  3. Some good, some bad.

    8 vote(s)
    32.0%
  1. Frater Cliff Porter

    Frater Cliff Porter Premium Member

    391
    30
    0
    Pike was an extraordinary man to which Freemasonry, not just SR Freemasonry owes a great debt. Albert Pike's SR damn near rescued Masonry from the massive decimation of the anti-Masonic period and made it, to some degree, to be "cool" to be a Mason again. There are more than 700 unpublished works of Pike's at the House of the Temple, many of which are the only English versions of ancient archaic text in the world to this date.

    Morals and Dogma has an annotated version and I recommend it. More than that, Esoterika is a phenomenal read and I recommend it to every Mason.

    Pike had the courage that most of us lack these days, he speculated out loud. We don't do that anymore because people pile on and beat down ideas as they form, so we hide them, covet them and dispose of them if we can't find a footnote that proves our point.
     
  2. jjjjjggggg

    jjjjjggggg Premium Member

    252
    155
    63
    Brother Porter... spot on!!!


    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  3. rebis

    rebis Premium Member

    155
    28
    18
    Very well said brother.
     
  4. Mindovermatter Ace

    Mindovermatter Ace Registered User

    95
    32
    18
    To touch on the brother's question of the baphomet, it didn't come from the taxil hoax. Leo taxil attached the picture that was drawn a few years prior and associated it to baphomet and masonry. The word baphomet was first used during the trial of the Templars. King Philip IV of France accused them of heresy and worship of the baphomet.


    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  5. dano2880

    dano2880 Registered User

    16
    0
    0
    Baphomet came from an former rc priest eilphas levi it was only a symbol of male and female sexual union with christian symbols as well with the arms of baphomet one up one down as above so below ect.

    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  6. dano2880

    dano2880 Registered User

    16
    0
    0
    It came from his book transindental magic

    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  7. BryanMaloney

    BryanMaloney Premium Member

    1,246
    232
    63
    It is all well and good for the learned and respectable gentlemen to say this, but they do so as a futile and foolish gesture. Even in their own time, "dogma" was already attached to "the odious sense" far more than it was to any alleged "true sense". One might as well write a book about "girls" and have it actually be about children of either gender, but all below a certain age. After all, using the same criterion as for "dogma", "girl" once meant a child of either gender below a certain age. And is the "villain" of a work merely a non-free agricultural tenant? "Villain" originally meant "serf", after all. Walk up to a woman, smile at her, and say "I wish to have intercourse with you right here." After she punches/maces/calls the cops on you, explain that you were using "intercourse" in its "true sense" of "conversation", not the "odious sense" that has been attached to it more recently.

    If the publishers felt a need to make excuses about the use of "dogma" even that far back, perhaps "dogma" was an extremely bad choice of terms. The poor rhetor blames the audience for all faults in understanding his message.
     
  8. BryanMaloney

    BryanMaloney Premium Member

    1,246
    232
    63
    Why not just honestly mark speculation as speculation and not pretend it to be anything else, then? Let the pile-on begin. After all, if one has honestly set out where one is speculating, then there is nothing to fear, no accusation of dishonesty can stand. What I have seen, even in the present day, is that people very often refuse to admit that their speculations are speculative, since that might open the possibility that they (the people in question) don't actually exist, either? At least that's my speculation as to why people defend speculation so heavily and deride honest citation.
     
  9. MarkR

    MarkR Premium Member

    1,002
    815
    133
    Thank you for clarifying brother. What I meant was the Baphomet connection to Freemasonry came from the Taxil hoax, but I didn't say that clearly.
     
  10. Frater Cliff Porter

    Frater Cliff Porter Premium Member

    391
    30
    0
    Bryan,

    Pikes work was in keeping with the tradition of the times as far as citation goes. I am not certain what you mean by, "Why not just honestly mark speculation as speculation and not pretend it to be anything else, then?" How do you "mark" speculation as "speculation?" What is dishonestly speculating versus honestly speculating?
     
  11. dfreybur

    dfreybur Premium Member

    3,935
    2,378
    133
    Fact -

    The rules of reference were different at the time.

    Speculation -

    Scholars at the time would have been able to tell easily what was speculation in the work.

    Tentative conclusion -

    The changing rules of references have made it harder over time to tell what is speculation and what is now.

    Maybe my labeling above should be inserted as notes in the annotated version.
     
  12. BryanMaloney

    BryanMaloney Premium Member

    1,246
    232
    63
    Leaping from the immediately sourced to speculation without having the honesty to note which is which. In Pike's day, as as been noted, there was a presumption that everyone could immediately recognize sourced material and presume the rest was speculation. Today, that is not the case.

    Any work written in the present day that could begin to qualify as scholarly follows certain conventions, which can be looked up, for example, in the "Instructions to Authors" for multiple scientific journals. Statements that are not immediately marked with a citation are to be presumed to be the author's own and not necessarily supported by other sources, although the author could attempt to show how one follows from the other.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2014
  13. Frater Cliff Porter

    Frater Cliff Porter Premium Member

    391
    30
    0
    Bryan you didn't answer my questions. If you don't like Pike fine. My guess is that you have never taken the time to read more than a sound bite.
     
  14. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    You call it a theory ....... lol
     
  15. BryanMaloney

    BryanMaloney Premium Member

    1,246
    232
    63
    Look. I have a stalker.
     
  16. jvarnell

    jvarnell Premium Member

    753
    26
    48
    I read all these threads so I guess if you are a thread yes.
     
  17. Dpranch11

    Dpranch11 Registered User

    17
    4
    3
    Seriously? No disrespect to anyone but regardless of intelligence, theory or whatever else you can come up with because at the end of the day he was nothing more than a racist. Adolph Hitler had good attributes also but we saw what happened to our Jewish brethren and more.Today in the south brothers aren't even recognized. Why? We throw many reasons and nonsense when the real out in your face reason is race. Don't go all it doesn't exist because I personally ran across many I wonder how in GODS good grace are ya'll Masons in the first place other than a social club to hold a title.The words straight from Mr. Albert Pike reads as follow....In a letter by General Albert Pike to his brother in 1875 he said, "I am not inclined to mettle in the matter. I took my obligations to white men, not to Negroes. When I have to accept Negroes as brothers or leave Masonry, I shall leave it.. Lets stop putting on rose tinted glasses and work towards bringing this fraternal order we all love and respect into what it should be and not forget how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in peace.The offended will be offended the enlightened will wake up to the truth.
    Fraternally,
    Demitrius N. Daniels
    PIKES PEAK LODGE # 5 F&AM (PHA) MM
     
  18. tldubb

    tldubb Premium Member

    351
    233
    63
    Brother Demitrius you are spot on!

    Todd L. Wilson, Junior Deacon
    Clarence C. Kittrell, #149 ( PHA )
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    Sent From My Freemasonry Pro App
     
  19. rebis

    rebis Premium Member

    155
    28
    18
    When passing judgement like that, it is important to take the time period into consideration. Times were different back then in the south...everybody was a racist. Freemasonry in America was in the dark ages, and Albert Pike was a huge contributor to resurrecting the fraternity. All masons, wether we like him or not, owe him a great debt of gratitude.
     
  20. Dpranch11

    Dpranch11 Registered User

    17
    4
    3
    Brother rebis. You are wrong on so many accounts. Call it for what it is. That's the problem today within the order more especially the south. To say all people from those ages were racist? I won't even go there better to let history tell you better. He did what? Are you serious ? This fraternal order would of stood with or without him or any of us for that matter. No man is a mountain even though we put them on pedestals. I'm not here to judge our brethren but I'm all about shedding light and knowledge on situations. The man who stands for nothing will fall for everything and anything. No disrespect to you or others who hold a Mr.Albert Pike to being a great Mason and for starters I wasn't discrediting the man I was simply stating a truth and like they say the truth hurts.Have a blessed and prosperous day. We are all open to our own opinions but when those opinions are stated out loud be prepared to deal with whatever may come your way whether good or bad. Again no need to look at this through rose tinted glasses.

    Fraternally,
    Demitrius N. Daniels
    PIKES PEAK LODGE #5 (PHA) MM
    Colorado Springs,Co
     

Share My Freemasonry