Wizards, Wackjobs, and Weirdoes

[widows son]

I just receive the royal arch degree, and let me tell you, my wand just got bigger.

 

[jwhoff]

Of course. We're the worst of both sides of the argument.

Kinda puts us in everyone's wheelhouse doesn't it?

 

[dfreybur]

Well. I dont know about all that, but all I ever herd was thet Masonary isnt ocult, and we arent nothing but a fraternity.

Occult means hidden. That a brother doesn't notice the occult content does not mean there is no occult content. And that's as it should be. Brothers can and do ignore the plentiful occult content of our gentle craft. But seek and ye shall find. It's there aplenty. Ignore it and it doesn't effect you but ignoring it does not make it go away.

Consider a wider reason why there exist churches that object to Masonry. Some churches have objected to the occult content. Some brothers have responded by denying there is any occult content and that reaction became very common for a couple of generations. It's the apologist approach.

I have no interest in apologizing and I don't want to ignore. That some very strict churches object is to me a good sign that our activities are working.

When I was new I traded emails with a person who was clearly a brother. We made veiled references that could only be understood by a brother. Never giving out any of the secrets that are taught to every brother we managed to trade other secrets that are not mentioned. In this case that the due guards and signs are chakra activations. To understand this you need to know what the due guards and signs are as well as know what chakras are. Fail to know either and the meaning is missed. Chakras come out of Hindu teaching.

I quietly asked around for years until I encountered a brother of my generation who knew what chakras are. I spent the evening in discussion with him ignoring the dinner and entertainment for the event. I hadn't encountered in person a brother interested in the occult aspects before that.

Now many of the new men are interested in the history, the philosophy, the occult aspects. At one district meeting a young visitor used a keyword so as the others left I took him aside and asked about his interests. When I mentioned the chakra activation aspect he pulled out a notebook and flipped to a page where he had drawn a color coded diagram of chakras. I was thrilled to learn this young fellow new the field better than I did. Asymmetrical for a reason - excellent.

 

[JJones]

Well. I dont know about all that, but all I ever herd was thet Masonary isnt ocult, and we arent nothing but a fraternity. Thats why we always invite the woman and famlies when ever we eat or have an isntalations

This is just my opinion. If we were simply a fraternity or a charitable organization (you didn't mention it, but some people seem to think it) then we wouldn't have all the ritual. There's far more to Freemasonry than what's often taken at face value.

 

[widows son]

Great responses. I agree.

 

[Roy Vance]

If this where a social club it would be where the other social clubs like the Oddfellows ended up, in some book as history. Masonry's rabbit hole is much deeper than any social organization allowing the Masons curiosity to run free and while most are scared to death of the depths of the hole some Masons realize this is a rough and rugged journey one in which lives have been lost. Humans are notorious for believing what they want to be true and I think the Inquisition proved how futile it can be to attempt to change another's believes. I feel about all we can do is what has been done here and that is voice our feelings as to what the craft is so others are not scared to mold their believes by what they truly believe not what somebody pressures them into believing. I did hide my wand out of respect when I took into lodge, after reading this though I will never again. Great post Brother.

I also feel it was a great post. I am a relatively "young" Mason, having been Raised in May of '11, but I look around me in the Lodgeroom and see other Brothers who have been there for 30 or 40 years and just sit on the sidelines, some never having been in a 'chair' and it sort of disturbs me. I wonder if that is all they want from Masonry? You mentioned the depth of our 'rabbit hole', I, for one, am crawling as deep as I can go, just to see what is down there and I will take my wand with me, just in case.

 

[widows son]

I like this.

 

[Michael Neumann]

Bit confused here. I have only seen rods and staffs in a lodge room... never a Harry Potter wand... Can someone expand.

 

[BryanMaloney]

Let's define the issue starkly:

If the "occult" elements (i.e., Theosophy, religious Gnosticism, Chakras, etc.) are necessary elements to fully be a Mason, then there is no way that someone can be a conventional Trinitarian Christian* and be a Mason. However, if all this stuff is really just extra baggage that is thoroughly disposable, then there's no problem. You cannot be both a conventional Trinitarian Christian and adopt Theosophy, Gnosticism, etc. The doctrines are mutually exclusive. There's nothing wrong with Masons of similar interest getting together, but to claim that these interests are more than sidelines to Freemasonry turns Freemasonry into a religion, and one that would not be compatible with the religions of the majority of Freemasons.

It's really simple, if the "occult" stuff really is necessary to fully be a Freemason, all the way, deep down, breadth and depth, then Freemasonry is incompatible with conventional Trinitarian Christianity, with the majority of Judaism, with Islam, etc. If the "occult" stuff is what separates "true" Masons from mere "surface" Masons, then nobody who adheres to the doctrines of the larger conventional religions in the USA could ever become a "true" Mason.

*A conventional Trinitarian Christian would include Baptists, Methodists, Church of Christ, Roman Catholic, Orthodox Christian, most "nondenominationals", and a lot of other groups.

If the "occult" stuff floats your boat, no problem, but to claim that it is somehow mandatory for a "complete" Masonic experience is to ultimately deny the "complete" Masonic experience to anyone whose religion does not share those "occult" beliefs--it makes Freemasonry into a religion.

 

[dfreybur]

... I look around me in the Lodgeroom and see other Brothers who have been there for 30 or 40 years and just sit on the sidelines, some never having been in a 'chair' and it sort of disturbs me. I wonder if that is all they want from Masonry?

Brother Roy,

Do not discount the value of fellowship. I think this is a largely ignored reason why some brothers attend regularly while others do not. The fellowship aspect is there as long as other brothers are there.

I originally petitioned because I wanted to be active in the service and charity events. I very much like participating in those events but as I went though my degrees and worked with my mentor I learned something new about myself. Being with my brothers filled a gap that before joining I hadn't known was there. Likely many men who need company go into work that requires a lot of personal interaction. I ended up in work with email interaction. As much as I love my work it only fulfills some of my needs. Family, church, work are coed yet somehow I need time with other men. I'd continue attending even if little ever happened at Stated meetings other than paying the bills because I know of this need.

I suggest the same is true of the regularly attending brothers you mentioned. They find something deeply satisfying being in a group of fellow men. For me just being there is enough. I want to make more of my efforts so I've been through the line a couple of times, have studied the philosophies etc. But to me those are all supporting staff to the fellowship that keeps me coming back.

I further suggest that being in a group of fellow men isn't enough for other men. So we work on making our business meetings interesting and/or brief, on degree teams for shared activity, on beneficial or interesting activities.

 

[dfreybur]

Let's define the issue starkly:

If the "occult" elements (i.e., Theosophy, religious Gnosticism, Chakras, etc.) are necessary elements to fully be a Mason, then there is no way that someone can be a conventional Trinitarian Christian* and be a Mason.

Brother Bryan,

I in no way assert that interest in the occult elements of our craft is necessary. What I assert is that they are there whether a brother has any interest in them or not and whether a brother thinks they are absent or not. I in no way assert that study or practice of the occult elements of our craft are expected. What I assert is that they don't have any obvious impact on those brothers who ignore them but there is more to solid than the superfices, more to the whole than the surface, more to the impact than the obvious. The occult aspects are present and have been as far back as speculative members have been admitted.

However, if all this stuff is really just extra baggage that is thoroughly disposable, then there's no problem.

There's a difference between optional as in it works to ignore them and disposable as in it works to remove them. The occult aspects pervade the degrees. They can be ignored but that does not change the fact that they are present. They can not be disposed of.

You cannot be both a conventional Trinitarian Christian and adopt Theosophy, Gnosticism, etc. The doctrines are mutually exclusive.

There are various elements of Masonry that conflict with plenty of religions to one degree or another yet we have brothers of every religion any of us have ever heard of and many that none of us have heard of. Our degrees come out of the Bible as a lesson yet we've been admitting members of non-JCI religions for centuries. There are active lodges in Japan where the majority of the population includes Shinto which is polytheistic and Buddhism which does not teach about deity. Masonry includes dealing with the mutually exclusive through tolerance.

Membership in and doctrine of the Shinto religion and Christianity are mutually exclusive yet here we are an organization with plenty of members of both. As Masons we have joined lodges that teach coexistence among and tolerance of all faiths. And since we do not discuss religion in lodge we don't know the religion of every brother. We rarely have an idea of how much religious diversity our own lodges actually have. We accept the presence of that which we find mutually exclusive. So it is with religious membership; so it also is with what happens in our degrees.

There's nothing wrong with Masons of similar interest getting together, but to claim that these interests are more than sidelines to Freemasonry turns Freemasonry into a religion, and one that would not be compatible with the religions of the majority of Freemasons.

Fundie folks often claim that Masonry is a religion. Please resist sharing that tactic with them.

It's really simple, if the "occult" stuff really is necessary to fully be a Freemason, all the way, deep down, breadth and depth, then Freemasonry is incompatible with conventional Trinitarian Christianity, with the majority of Judaism, with Islam, etc.

Some of the occult content of Masonry comes out of the Kabbalah.

If the "occult" stuff is what separates "true" Masons from mere "surface" Masons, then nobody who adheres to the doctrines of the larger conventional religions in the USA could ever become a "true" Mason.

Tolerance is respect not agreement. Tolerance is peace not acceptance. Tolerance is open mindedness not approval. Tolerance is getting past whether you agree, accept or approve and finding common ground. Tolerance when done right has the same type of overlap as our ambiguous mixing of the words charity and love. Tolerance is generosity rather like charity is love.

So don't agree but do respect. Don't accept but do be at peace. Don't approve but be of open mind. Get past that to the common ground of the experience of the degrees. Degrees which include elements that you have stated are mutually exclusive. Degrees that trigger intolerant actions by the intolerant and tolerant actions by the tolerant.

... on all regular Masons ... Not just the ones we agree with or approve of.

 

[BryanMaloney]

Membership in and doctrine of the Shinto religion and Christianity are mutually exclusive yet here we are an organization with plenty of members of both.

Specifically because Freemasonry requires adopting the unique doctrines of neither. What bothers me are those who take Gnostic/Theosophical/etc. elements and proclaim them as some sort of "deeper" or "higher" Masonic teaching. You don't do this, but there are those who do. The teachings might or might not be "deep" or "high" but they are not a mark of being "more Masonic".

Fundie folks often claim that Masonry is a religion. Please resist sharing that tactic with them.

There are those on these message boards who essentially claim that to be a "true" Mason, one must become a Gnostic--adopt a specific religion, and make it plain that they think it is a good thing, that those Masons who do not embrace Gnosticism are somehow falling short.

Some of the occult content of Masonry comes out of the Kabbalah.

So? Does that mean that Masons must become kabbalists?

Tolerance is respect not agreement. Tolerance is peace not acceptance. Tolerance is open mindedness not approval. Tolerance is getting past whether you agree, accept or approve and finding common ground. Tolerance when done right has the same type of overlap as our ambiguous mixing of the words charity and love. Tolerance is generosity rather like charity is love.

And this has what to do with the price of tea in China? I say again, if the "occult" stuff is what separates "true" from "surface" Masons, then nobody who isn't into the "occult" stuff can be considered a "true" mason. It's got nothing to do with tolerance, it's got to do with immutable logic.

If A is a necessary condition to be B, then whatever lacks A cannot be B. If something can be B without having A, then A cannot be a necessary condition to be B.

Degrees which include elements that you have stated are mutually exclusive. Degrees that trigger intolerant actions by the intolerant and tolerant actions by the tolerant.

What I have seen has in no way looked like I must delve into anything "occult" to "truly" be a Mason. What is an eye above a structure? I can easily answer that it is the all-seeing eye of Divine Providence. What is a column? What is an obelisk? None of these things must have a specific "occult" interpretation. This is part of the wisdom of our forebears in harvesting so many symbols from so many sources--they underpin the fundamental unity of brotherhood. For while there may be differences in what each of us considers the ultimate source of Light, we all agree that we need Light.

Is a ladder to the sky a reference to Mount Meru, Jacob's Ladder, or the Ladder of Divine Ascent? It is a reference to the journey from the worldly world to the enlightened world. Beyond that, the specific "meaning" is chosen by each individual Mason and none can say one is "more true" than the other by virtue of it being more or less "esoteric" or "occult".

We are so very easily entrapped by the romance of the "esoteric", thinking that the more obscure and outre an interpretation, the more "true" it must be. "Manchmal ist eine Zigarre aben nur eine Zigarre."

 

[widows son]

Dfreybur, I wholly agree with you. Although I do agree that the interpretation is open to the individual. I'd like to think that our order is general in that department to allow such openness and tolerance. JM2C

 

[Frater Cliff Porter]

There are those on these message boards who essentially claim that to be a "true" Mason, one must become a Gnostic--adopt a specific religion, and make it plain that they think it is a good thing, that those Masons who do not embrace Gnosticism are somehow falling short.

I have enjoyed the study of a number of aspects and sects of the Christian faith from the Catholic church, to Lutheranism, to Gnosticism and have not found a single Gnostic declare that it is a MUST. The closest I can find is the fourth degree of the Scottish Rite which states a basic understanding of the concepts of Kaballah are necessary to fully understand some of Masonry. I am not certain that statement is accurate out of context, but understand it in the format of the degree.

Could you provide a direct example of a Brother making the claim you indicate?

The reason I find this difficult is that the claim would be decidedly un-Gnostic. The very nature of the faith would provide that the knowledge you are seeking is within you and around you all the time and all at once...and so, although initiation was a tool in the Gnostic sects, the more modern Gnostic groups even came to reject ritual in some circumstances because they feared the symbol would be mistaken for the think symbolized.

I wrote the original paper...and I am no occultist or magical guy or what have you...but I do believe men should be allowed to seek a deeper meaning to their Masonry and should not be ridiculed for it.

 

[Michael Neumann]

a basic understanding of the concepts of Kaballah are necessary to fully understand some of Masonry.

My wife and I were cruising etsy looking for antiques. I crossed a book from the 1800's called Cabala Or the Rites and Ceremonies of the Cabalist. It just arrived and is setting on my desk. The thing is encoded so I am going to have a fun time guessing what the symbols mean based upon my knowledge of the blue degrees and the York degrees I have been through. Any insight would be nice.

 

[dfreybur]

Specifically because Freemasonry requires adopting the unique doctrines of neither. What bothers me are those who take Gnostic/Theosophical/etc. elements and proclaim them as some sort of "deeper" or "higher" Masonic teaching. You don't do this, but there are those who do. The teachings might or might not be "deep" or "high" but they are not a mark of being "more Masonic".

Appendent bodies claim to be "further" rather than "higher". Should a Masonic historian claim his studies are "deeper" I'd be okay with that. That mystics call their studies "deeper" thus does not bother me. Claims of "higher" tend to draw correction from me.

There are those on these message boards who essentially claim that to be a "true" Mason, one must become a Gnostic--adopt a specific religion, and make it plain that they think it is a good thing, that those Masons who do not embrace Gnosticism are somehow falling short.

I've missed such boards but that sort of mistake does not surprised me.

So? Does that mean that Masons must become kabbalists?

No and that's my point. By participating in the degrees we partake in some kabbalistic practices. Doing so does not make us kabbalists. Nonetheless those kabbalistic practices are there to any who know what to look for. Not knowing what to look for does not mean they are not present.

And this has what to do with the price of tea in China? I say again, if the "occult" stuff is what separates "true" from "surface" Masons, then nobody who isn't into the "occult" stuff can be considered a "true" mason. It's got nothing to do with tolerance, it's got to do with immutable logic.

If A is a necessary condition to be B, then whatever lacks A cannot be B. If something can be B without having A, then A cannot be a necessary condition to be B.

It is not necessary to accept the validity of occult practices to be a Mason. But any of us who give a due guard and sign do an occult practice whether we know it or not, whether we accept occult practice or not. The occult is present. Learn more occult principles and more examples can be found in our practices. I suggest this can be a mind opening experience - It teaches that since we regularly do occult practices, often without even knowing we do so, those practices are not harmful in spite of some teachings to the contrary. There are many ways to have mind opening experiences of that sort. Something we've been doing at lodge for decades and we learn about it. Boom another internal limitation falls. It happens with brothers who think they can't memorize until they present their proficiencies as one of the first such lessons we learn.

It isn't doing the occult practices like the due guards and signs that make us Masons. What makes us Masons is what is in our hearts. But what Mason does not do the due guards and signs? We all do. Knowing such an action has deeper meaning can be called deeper. Not knowing such an action has deeper meaning does not make one a false Mason. Not knowing doesn't even make one not a contemplative Mason as there are many topics on which to contemplate.

What I have seen has in no way looked like I must delve into anything "occult" to "truly" be a Mason.

Occult means hidden. There are many levels of hidden. Keeping the modes of recognition secret makes them occult even though non-Masons can go to any library and search for exposes. That you do not see other hidden actions does not mean they are not there. As in my case of pointing out that the dues guards and signs. Not knowing they are chakra activations does not make them not chakra activations.

What is an eye above a structure? I can easily answer that it is the all-seeing eye of Divine Providence. What is a column? What is an obelisk? None of these things must have a specific "occult" interpretation. This is part of the wisdom of our forebears in harvesting so many symbols from so many sources--they underpin the fundamental unity of brotherhood. For while there may be differences in what each of us considers the ultimate source of Light, we all agree that we need Light.

Is a ladder to the sky a reference to Mount Meru, Jacob's Ladder, or the Ladder of Divine Ascent? It is a reference to the journey from the worldly world to the enlightened world. Beyond that, the specific "meaning" is chosen by each individual Mason and none can say one is "more true" than the other by virtue of it being more or less "esoteric" or "occult".

We are so very easily entrapped by the romance of the "esoteric", thinking that the more obscure and outre an interpretation, the more "true" it must be. "Manchmal ist eine Zigarre aben nur eine Zigarre."

 

[widows son]

I like this.

 

[BryanMaloney]

Appendent bodies claim to be "further" rather than "higher".

Alas, not true. The front page of the official web site for the Scottish Rite for Australia states that the 33rd degree is "the highest and last in Freemasonry". That's pretty darn specific. Likewise, Pike made it quite plain that Blue Lodge is deficient and insufficient.

No and that's my point. By participating in the degrees we partake in some kabbalistic practices. Doing so does not make us kabbalists. Nonetheless those kabbalistic practices are there to any who know what to look for. Not knowing what to look for does not mean they are not present.

I never denied they were present.

It is not necessary to accept the validity of occult practices to be a Mason. But any of us who give a due guard and sign do an occult practice whether we know it or not

In one sense, EVERYTHING that is not openly published through legitimate Masonic outlets is "occult". That's such a broad use of "occult" that one ought not use "occult", given the word's connotations. There is a vast difference between happening to use a symbol that other groups might attach theurgic/thaumaturgic power to but without such an attachment and actually attempting to practice such theurgy/thaumaturgy. Should I presume that everyone who says "bless you" after I sneeze believes that demons haunt us to steal our souls, which emerge from our bodies when we sneeze? The "bless you" in this case is "occult" in other overly-broad use, but it is not "occult" in the more precise use.

Occult means hidden.

"Tits" means "mammaries". Why don't we say "tits" instead of "breasts"? Occult does mean "hidden" but it means a LOT MORE than merely "hidden". "Occult" carries a lot of other baggage, as well. Connotation usually has far more meaning than the simple denotation. Using "occult" means that one wishes to embrace all the other bagggage. Using "esoteric" means that one wishes to dump the baggage and be more neutral, closer to "hidden" by itself. If "occult" merely means "hidden", what is wrong with using "hidden"?[/QUOTE]

Not knowing they are chakra activations does not make them not chakra activations.

But they are not chakra activations. They are gestures that happen to strongly resemble chakra activations and are possibly descended from these chakra activations. What does "girl" mean? Well, if one traces the etymology, it means a child of either gender. Therefore, using your reasoning, all boys are really girls!

 

[Michael Hatley]

Why don't we say "tits" instead of "breasts"?

"Teets" is a funny word when applied to humans - but my wife doesn't think its very funny :30:

Therefore, using your reasoning, all boys are really girls!

Well, shit. Some of you could do with a wax job :scared:

I don't care who a fella is, if they have a chemistry set and claim to be an alchemist, they are a funny fellow. If a person wants to worship the sun, why, worship it. Or whatever. One man's snake oil is another man's ambrosia.

But once a fella sells books and travels the speaking circuit profiting from their good word then they are in a different category. But debate em as an equal? Haha, that gives em cred. They make their livin building their personal brand while the rest of us do more useful things, their brand is a reflection of the men they out rhetoric. Pshaw. Let em buy a bigger chemistry set.

Hey, it just occurred to me - the CIA isn't clandestine, it is occult! Anyone wanna start a for profit website on the expose?

And don't mind me, I'm tongue in cheek brethren, tongue in cheek!

 

[dfreybur]

Alas, not true. The front page of the official web site for the Scottish Rite for Australia states that the 33rd degree is "the highest and last in Freemasonry". That's pretty darn specific. Likewise, Pike made it quite plain that Blue Lodge is deficient and insufficient.

Alas indeed. I'm an AASR-SJ Scottish Rite Mason so Australia doesn't get to speak for me, my valley or my jurisdiction. Pike may be a former SGC of the AASR-SJ but he's long dead and never did speak for me or my valley. His influence on my jurisdiction is large but old. My bias - I think my mentors at my reunion who taught me to call the SR degrees "further not higher" knew late 20th century Masonry better than Pike. Now that it's the 21st century I figure they also know 21st century masonry better than Pike. His being dead makes him not able to learn about our centuries so it is a slam dunk.

I never denied they were present.

As to the rest I point out that neither of us get to speak for the other and that's as it should be. We disagree and that's okay.

You've referred to others who claim it is necessary to be gnostic. Neither they nor either of us get to speak for each other and that's as it should be. I disagree with them as well and that's okay also.

One of the reasons this is a good topic is because it hits on a point with much disagreement. It's a point some Antis have used for leverage. It's a point some members deny is applicable. It's a point some members assert is applicable. It's a point some members are unapologetic about the issue, both among the deniers and asserters. Another reason is the new generation of brothers have a wide range of interests that include this topic so it helps us to discuss it.