Founders of Freemasonry?

[psalms 91]

Although time has dimmed our recollections, Albert Pike was a famous man in his day, quite apart from Masonry. There's a monument to him in Washington DC where we normally expect such things only for presidents. But as for his writings on Masonry, they are purely his own. Any other Mason could write his own "take" on the meaning of many things Masonic, for that matter.


I don't know what you are asking in that sentence. Does it have anything to do with Masonry?


Explain them to us then, so we can see what you are referring to.


The founder of Communism was Karl Marx, who never lived in Russia and, to the best of my knowledge, was not a Mason.

1. Does not the masons claim to be enlightened?
2. Pikes writings are extensively used when looking at masons.
3. As I am not a mason how could I know what is hidden in the 33rd degree?
4. Marx was supported by the masons while writing in London was he not?
5. Misspoke on this one with Marx, it was Lenin and revolutionaries I was thinking of when I asked how did they get into Russia and what role did the masons play in this?

 

[Albion]

1. Does not the masons claim to be enlightened?

There is a reference to receiving light, yes, but I don't think that is what you are referring to when you use the word enlightened. In any case, we can all stand to be more aware or learned in various ways.

2. Pikes writings are extensively used when looking at masons.

No, they are not. I cannot remember him being mentioned in a lodge meeting and if he's been a subject in some Masonic publication I've received it would be a very small one. His writings are certainly NOT "extensively used." That is just false. They aren't "used" at all, if you want the truth. I personally have never read any of them and have never had any Mason suggest that it would be worthwhile for me to do so.

3. As I am not a mason how could I know what is hidden in the 33rd degree?

Then why would you claim that anything IS hidden in the 33rd degree when you do not know this to be true?

4. Marx was supported by the masons while writing in London was he not?

I don't believe so. His financial support came almost entirely from Friedrich Engels.

5. Misspoke on this one with Marx, it was Lenin and revolutionaries I was thinking of when I asked how did they get into Russia and what role did the masons play in this?

It is an accepted and proven fact of history that it was the German government that took Lenin to Russia, and it did so because they hoped he would foment trouble leading to Russia having to drop out of the war--a hope that came true. Lenin first made his appeal to the Socialist Party of Germany, and they took it to the military and the government.

 

[circuitrider]

1. Does not the masons claim to be enlightened?
2. Pikes writings are extensively used when looking at masons.
3. As I am not a mason how could I know what is hidden in the 33rd degree?
4. Marx was supported by the masons while writing in London was he not?
5. Misspoke on this one with Marx, it was Lenin and revolutionaries I was thinking of when I asked how did they get into Russia and what role did the masons play in this?

1. Masons believe that Freemasonry helps us to grow as individuals. We believe that we have become better men than we would have been without Freemasonry. But we never claim to be better than anyone else.

2. Just because non-Masons look at Pike extensively don't mean Masons do. Pike is little read by Masons and only usually read by Masons who are part of the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite. I've met northern jurisdictions Scottish Rite Masons who've hardly heard of Pike.

3. That's the point, you don't know what is in the 33rd degree so how do you know it is something objectionable? You don't.

4. Marx was not a Mason. The Communists and the Nazis persecuted Freemasonry.

5.The founders of communism were not Masons.

As I've said above, Scottish Rite is just one of the branches of Freemasonry you can join when you become a 3rd Degree Master Mason. The 3rd Degree is the highest degree in Masonry. I am both a Scottish Rite member and a York Rite member but many Masons only join one or the other. Both have different degrees in their rite. Many York Rite members never join the Scottish Rite at all. The 33rd degree, while it is an honor to those who receive it, is not the highest Masonic degree nor does it mean anything outside of the Scottish Rite.

I can give you a list of the degrees I hold in different Masonic bodies but that misses the point. Even someone who is a 33rd degree Scottish Rite Mason doesn't know what is in the degrees of the York Rite if they haven't received them. There are other Masonic bodies that are not Scottish Rite or York Rite as well that not all Masons have received those degrees. Making a big deal out of the 33rd degree in relationship to the rest of Masonry doesn't fit how Masonry works.

 

[psalms 91]

1. Masons believe that Freemasonry helps us to grow as individuals. We believe that we have become better men than we would have been without Freemasonry. But we never claim to be better than anyone else.

2. Just because non-Masons look at Pike extensively don't mean Masons do. Pike is little read by Masons and only usually read by Masons who are part of the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite. I've met northern jurisdictions Scottish Rite Masons who've hardly heard of Pike.

3. That's the point, you don't know what is in the 33rd degree so how do you know it is something objectionable? You don't.

4. Marx was not a Mason. The Communists and the Nazis persecuted Freemasonry.

5.The founders of communism were not Masons.

As I've said above, Scottish Rite is just one of the branches of Freemasonry you can join when you become a 3rd Degree Master Mason. The 3rd Degree is the highest degree in Masonry. I am both a Scottish Rite member and a York Rite member but many Masons only join one or the other. Both have different degrees in their rite. Many York Rite members never join the Scottish Rite at all. The 33rd degree, while it is an honor to those who receive it, is not the highest Masonic degree nor does it mean anything outside of the Scottish Rite.

I can give you a list of the degrees I hold in different Masonic bodies but that misses the point. Even someone who is a 33rd degree Scottish Rite Mason doesn't know what is in the degrees of the York Rite if they haven't received them. There are other Masonic bodies that are not Scottish Rite or York Rite as well that not all Masons have received those degrees. Making a big deal out of the 33rd degree in relationship to the rest of Masonry doesn't fit how Masonry works.

I am aware of the fact that they were not masons but that does not answer the question of were they supported financially and what role did the masons play in getting the revolutionaries into Russia back then. I also am aware that there are higher degrees of masons but 33rd is usually used as a starting point ot knowing the hidden things

 

[Albion]

I am aware of the fact that they were not masons but that does not answer the question of were they supported financially and what role did the masons play in getting the revolutionaries into Russia back then.

We do not have any knowledge of such a connection and have said so. If you have something specific to point to, do that. Otherwise, we've heard these sensationalist claims before and find no credibility in them. And I told you in my last post who it is that got Lenin into Russia and why, and I told you who financed Marx, so what's the point of repeating your mistake now again?

I also am aware that there are higher degrees of masons but 33rd is usually used as a starting point ot knowing the hidden things

It is?? Most conspiracy theorists say that they've found hidden meanings in every degree. They think they've found hidden meanings everywhere. Why would the 33rd degree be what you are thinking when it is a degree that's part of only a single segment of Masonry? The idea that some small clique of 33rd degree Scottish Rite Masons can set any plans in motion for the majority of Masons who aren't members of the Scottish Rite seems ridiculous on its face. Impossible, in fact.

 

[circuitrider]

It is?? Most conspiracy theorists say that they've found hidden meanings in every degree. They think they've found hidden meanings everywhere. Why would the 33rd degree be what you are thinking when it is a degree that's part of only a single segment of Masonry? The idea that some small clique of 33rd degree Scottish Rite Masons can set any plans in motion for the majority of Masons who aren't members of the Scottish Rite seems ridiculous on its face. Impossible, in fact.

Exactly Albion. The Scottish Rite does not run the rest of Masonry. Just because the Scottish Rite has degrees numbered up to 33 does not mean that degree is higher than some other degree in Masonry in some other Rite or group of degrees.

 

[americanvet]

I guess I'll have to join the Scottish Rite. All the degrees and honors I have in the York Rite don't give me enough "rank" to help rule the world. Us York Rite only guys get the short end of the stick.

 

[circuitrider]

I guess have to join the Scottish Rite. All the degrees and honors I have in the York Rite don't give me enough "rank" to help rule the world. Us York Rite only guys get the short end of the stick.

No, you just need to number the York Rite Degrees. If you'd call the Mark Master degree the "34th" Degree then you could be up 44th Degree at KT and you'd trump the Scottish Rite.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Skip also fails to note that during the same time Masons were not letting in black men neither was the Southern Baptist Convention or southern Methodists.

Two points:
1. Masonic prohibitions against black men dates from the start of the Grand Lodge era. The SBC was formed in 1845; thus Freemasonry had a real head start on the topic. fyi, up until 1975, at least, SC had a black letter prohibition against black men becoming SC Masons, thus making every SC Mason at that time a racist. I'd say anyone who belonged to a GL which excluded black men solely on their skin color was a racist.

2. The split in American Baptists was over the decision to not allow slave-owners to become missionaries. The SBC resulted from that decision. For your comparison to be apt you'd have to show that the SBC prevented black men from joining their congregations, which, to my knowledge, they never did. Nor did they deny them heaven, though they certainly did insist on their segregation and did not let blacks pastor their churches. So while Masonry was discriminating against blacks and denying them the benefits, so called, of Freemasonry, the SBC was only insisting that they sit in the back of the room. Why Masons like to see that as morally equivalent remains a mystery.

Masons seem to like to show that they are no better than anyone else in this matter. This flies in the face of their other fable, that they are good men being made better, but the idea is to deflect the criticism and thus avoid the blame. As much as I admire the man, George Washington was the perfect Mason in this regard. While he recognized the institution of slavery as wrong, he just couldn't bring himself to free his own slaves due to the cost he would incur to himself by doing so. Very Masonic in outlook.

BTW, perhaps you can tell us which Grand Lodges have apologized for their racist actions, as did the SBC. One GL has had a black Grand Master; not sure if any others have made that move.

I've never been a member of a lodge that did not admit black men.

Have you ever been a member of a lodge that did not admit non-Christians? Would you belong to such a lodge? Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Well, 11:00 on Sunday morning isn't called 'the most segregated hour of the week' in America for nothing, so your criticism applies to Christianity too,...

Untrue. As noted elsewhere, Freemasonry refused black men admission; which denomination of Baptists ever denied blacks salvation? I'd say that there are many churches that surely did, but American Baptists have always been in the forefront of missionary outreach to all races, even the black men that Freemasonry considered so inferior. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

RGrand Lodges don't order lodges have limited authority over lodges...

I'd say you've gone a step too far on that. The lodge operates under a charter or warrant from a GL, which gives them quite a measure of control. As well, the WM generally swears to uphold lawful GL rules and edicts as part of his swearing in oath. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Masons believe that Freemasonry helps us to grow as individuals. We believe that we have become better men than we would have been without Freemasonry.

So Freemasonry could do something for you that your religious faith could not? Since you are a UMC pastor, if memory serves, just what weakness in the Holy Spirit was healed by the spirit at work in Freemasonry? Cordially, Skip.

 

[Albion]

Untrue.

I don't think so.

As noted elsewhere, Freemasonry refused black men admission; which denomination of Baptists ever denied blacks salvation? I'd say that there are many churches that surely did

So, you have no point to make?

but American Baptists have always been in the forefront of missionary outreach to all races,

You must have some special interest in the American Baptist Churches USA, but that denomination was never the focus of any of my own comments. I never mentioned them, in fact.

 

[circuitrider]

So Freemasonry could do something for you that your religious faith could not? Since you are a UMC pastor, if memory serves, just what weakness in the Holy Spirit was healed by the spirit at work in Freemasonry? Cordially, Skip.

Skip, racism in most Christian groups in the south and in much of the north is a horrible part of US history. So it is bogus to place special blame on Freemasonry for what was a part of a wrong by the entire society and not just lodges. Freemasonry and the Church have both been working to change that ever since. Both Grand Lodges I have been affiliated with have had black members since before I became a Mason. So I'm not interested in taking blame for a "what used to be."

And yes, BTW, I know pastors who tell me that there were times when black persons were not admitted into membership in Baptist churches at all, not even to sit in the back.

As to my faith, you've got it backwards, maybe because you don't understand Methodism.

Methodists, unlike fundamentalist Christians, do not believe the the only knowledge to be gained in the world is found in the Church. United Methodist hold as sources of our beliefs to be Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. Both reason and experience can come from sources outside of the Church. It is primarily fundamentalist Christians who segregate the Church from the rest of God's created world and act as if nothing can be found to be true or be learned outside of the four walls of the Church.

Remember that not all Christians view Christianity the way you do Skip.

 

[circuitrider]

I'd say you've gone a step too far on that. The lodge operates under a charter or warrant from a GL, which gives them quite a measure of control. As well, the WM generally swears to uphold lawful GL rules and edicts as part of his swearing in oath. Cordially, Skip.

Skip, I'm far more aware of the rights of individual lodges and Grand lodges in my jurisdiction than you are. I've been Master of two lodges in my current jurisdiction. One of the two lodges I was the founding Master and helped the lodge get its charter. I've just been elected Senior Warden in a lodge I'm now a member of and will be Master again in 2016. I know Grand Lodge code. Thanks.

 

[circuitrider]

Have you ever been a member of a lodge that did not admit non-Christians? Would you belong to such a lodge? Cordially, Skip.

No, I've never been a member of a lodge that didn't admit non-Christians. No, I would not belong to a lodge that wouldn't admit non-Christians.

 

[Rhamiel]

this conversation is changing into which Protestant denominations were racist and which ones where not

not really of much interest to me, I am a Catholic
yes colonialism by Spanish who happened to be Catholics did harm much of central and south America
but the Church was always interested in the salvation of souls of the Native Peoples
the fact that Freemasonry used to not let in ethnic minorities is no shock to me
it helps illustrate the inclusiveness of Christ and His Church against the discrimination of the World and the sects that are born from Worldly minds and hearts

 

[Simpleman25]

No, I've never been a member of a lodge that didn't admit non-Christians. No, I would not belong to a lodge that wouldn't admit non-Christians.

Every since I've come forth and stated that my lodge only admits Christians, skip has had a thorn in his side. Claiming as he did with you that GL's somehow rule lodges with an iron fist. Yet another absurd claim by someone that has never been there or done that.

You would think he'd be in favor of an all Christian lodge!

 

[Skip Sampson]

So, you have no point to make?

Aside from showing that Baptists have done more for black men than Freemasonry ever has, no.

You must have some special interest in the American Baptist Churches USA, but that denomination was never the focus of any of my own comments. I never mentioned them, in fact.

I never mentioned the above group, and the context of my post is real clear with respect to the meaning of the words used. Your bafflement over it just proves the point I've made so many times: Masonic scholarship is an oxymoron. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

You would think he'd be in favor of an all Christian lodge!

I don't believe that there actually is one. Cordially, Skip.