Masons

[Ecclectic79]

Sounds good.

On a more humorous note I'm guessing none of you agree with Hall on the alchemical Santa Claus known as 'The Wonderman of Europe'. Back when I was studying theosophy and before I'd been brought back to Catholicism I had a medium telling me that I should be meditating on the violet flame daily. I'm rather glad the conversation never came to thetans or egg-timers.

 

[Albion]

Sounds good.

On a more humorous note I'm guessing none of you agree with Hall on the alchemical Santa Claus known as 'The Wonderman of Europe'.

No interest whatsoever.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Funny how, once you let the accusers know you'll brook no irrelevant discussion about spurious accusations, they just wander off without further comment, isn't it?

 

[Ecclectic79]

Funny how, once you let the accusers know you'll brook no irrelevant discussion about spurious accusations, they just wander off without further comment, isn't it?

For your personal query you get to both disclaim/disown anything visible from the outside and keep to yourself anything internal to the organization. You also get to define 'irrelevant discussion about spurious accusations'. When one sees that's how the game is played there's nothing else to do really but wander off.

 

[Rev Wayne]

For your personal query you get to both disclaim/disown anything visible from the outside and keep to yourself anything internal to the organization. You also get to define 'irrelevant discussion about spurious accusations'. When one sees that's how the game is played there's nothing else to do really but wander off.

Unlike our accusers, we aren't playing games. And what you described is not an accurate picture of what goes on here. I've seen enough of them come and go here, and it's always the same story.

A gunslinger rides into town on a big tall horse. He fires all his ammunition but hits no one. The townspeople shoot his big horse out from under him, and suddenly he has no foundation. If the fall doesn't kill him, it leaves him with a limp, and he limps his way back out of town. Sometimes he'll come back, sometimes not. If he does, sometimes he brings a friend. But his friend's aim is generally no better than his own, and since he has had no target practice in the interim, he suffers the same fate. And we never even seem to have to tell him to get out of town by sundown either.

 

[Ecclectic79]

Well, one of these days I'm sure Ophite Gnostics as well as Hermetists will realize that their religious freedoms and rights to practice are protected under law as much as anyone else's. Sometimes I can't help thinking Lavey wasn't trying to send that message with such a bold naming of his organization, something to the effect of 'See guys! I painted the mother of all bullseyes on my back and guess what! I can go to the bar, have a drink, talk sports, live a rather comfortable life, and I'm not only still alive but feeling as safe as ever!'. All of the above seem to be able to crank out people with working utilitarian moral compasses, its just that all of this goes back to my very first post - Yahweh tends toward the jealous side.

 

[Rev Wayne]

I'll leave the Gnostics and Hermetists for you to sort out, I prefer Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, slain, risen, and coming again in power to reign, and to gather His bride the church unto Himself. All the rest, to whatever lengths you or I or anyone else may desire to discuss it, pales into insignificance in comparison.

 

[americanvet]

Well, one of these days I'm sure Ophite Gnostics as well as Hermetists will realize that their religious freedoms and rights to practice are protected under law as much as anyone else's. Sometimes I can't help thinking Lavey wasn't trying to send that message with such a bold naming of his organization, something to the effect of 'See guys! I painted the mother of all bullseyes on my back and guess what! I can go to the bar, have a drink, talk sports, live a rather comfortable life, and I'm not only still alive but feeling as safe as ever!'. All of the above seem to be able to crank out people with working utilitarian moral compasses, its just that all of this goes back to my very first post - Yahweh tends toward the jealous side.

What?

 

[Albion]

What?

Apparently our friend thinks we all belong to the Church of Satan.

 

[williamgramsmith]

If you're not familiar with the history, I can understand you being taken by surprise. Indeed, I doubt that most Americans care much about 18th and 19th century European history, but it casts a long shadow, you know.

But if you now (having been alerted to it) do a little reasearch, you will see for yourself. At least three different Papal statements have forbidden Catholics from belonging, under pain of excommunication, and any Catholic informational site will explain that the church's policy remains the same today.

In the USA, we are likely to read comments from Evangelicals, particularly conspiracy fans, but that's a more recent development and it's based on totally different considerations.

I didn't say I wasn't somewhat familiar with the history, only as to who really "cares" the most.

Catholic policy does not equate to the bigotry that the counter cult industry's engage, in trying to destroy Masonry and making it all kinds of evil, especially as it relates to Mormonism.

 

[Albion]

I didn't say I wasn't somewhat familiar with the history, only as to who really "cares" the most.

OK

Catholic policy does not equate to the bigotry that the counter cult industry's engage, in trying to destroy Masonry and making it all kinds of evil.

All right, I agree with you. But when you write, " I've only seen anti-masonry coming from the counter-cult Evangelical/Protestant ministry's and adherents, not from the Catholic Church" you can see why a reader may get another impression from your words. No, the Catholic Church doesn't normally invent the hysterical and ridiculous conspiracy theories against Masonry that some fundamentalists do, but the RCC certainly can be termed "anti-Masonic" (as you did).

 

[Rev Wayne]

Apparently our friend thinks we all belong to the Church of Satan.

I think our friend's chief difficulty with us has less to do with us than with the atmosphere created by Masonry's accusers. Questions are being asked about matters which are less a part of the lodge than they are a part of a conspiracist mindset about the lodge. When that gets pointed out, we have to field comments like this:

For your personal query you get to both disclaim/disown anything visible from the outside and keep to yourself anything internal to the organization. You also get to define 'irrelevant discussion about spurious accusations'. When one sees that's how the game is played there's nothing else to do really but wander off.

I can understand the frustration, but I don't get the idea that our own frustration with the false foundation that underlies most of the questions we get asked. I've dealt with that false construct of "a fraternity within a fraternity," "one visible and one invisible" so many times, and it used to be at least amusing that people were still trying to make it stick after it had been refuted nine ways from sundown.

My initial response simply reflected some of that frustration, because that's the kind of thinking that appears to be behind comments about "keeping to myself anything internal to the organization."

But I've come to realize that it isn't just the false constructs that create the frustration. It's the vagueness of what gets presented, and that seems to be a large part of what is happening here as well. To be more specific: I've seen the names Hall and Pike trotted out here, I've seen some vague allusions to them being made; but when the rubber meets the road, no one here has given anything specific enough to even get a handle on when it comes to a response.

I think it might facilitate discussion if someone can provide more specifics rather than the generalities I've seen since joining in this discussion. Where are the specific allegations pinpointing exactly where and why someone has a problem? Where are the citations from works by Hall or Pike, rather than vague allusions to what they wrote? Where are the direct claims regarding "things we're keeping internal?" If anyone feels there's something "internal" that we have avoided discussing, why not pinpoint exactly what you're talking about instead of making shadowy references accusing us of it? After all, there are no real secrets in Masonry, other than grips and signs, and with all the exposees that have been done by former Masons, you don't have to look very hard to find those either.

This thing of having it suggested that hard-line esoteric far-out imaginings of people like Hall have anything to do with Masonry in general, is hogwash. I don't find anyone in the lodge who treats that as the norm. I am a member of our Grand Lodge's Masonic Research Society, and I recall a meeting in which the president opened the floor for anything we wanted to discuss. A man stood and tried to start a conversation going about Albert Pike, and was greeted with some pretty vocal objection to it, to the point that the president politely declined to go there. The only people who really want to read Pike and Hall are Masonry's accusers, because they use the bizarre and try to portray it as the norm.

I'm game for response, and I'm sure any other Mason would be, for anything specific someone might want to present, in the way of direct citations from anything those gentlemen may have written, even though it's rehashing old ground to do so. But vagueness and generalities provide no platform on which to conduct any discussion, and have become handy weapons for the accusers of Masonry.

All I'm suggesting is, perhaps we could all be a little more on point?

 

[Ecclectic79]

But I've come to realize that it isn't just the false constructs that create the frustration. It's the vagueness of what gets presented, and that seems to be a large part of what is happening here as well. To be more specific: I've seen the names Hall and Pike trotted out here, I've seen some vague allusions to them being made; but when the rubber meets the road, no one here has given anything specific enough to even get a handle on when it comes to a response.

Drudgeon dropped a link back at the end of page 12 with a whole bunch of links to close to a dozen authors who anti-masons supposedly like to cherry-pick. Bylaws aren't that hard to attain either.

I'm really quite agnostic toward the notions that people put out there as to whether Masonry is integrated into some kind of one world government, one world religion guiding of things; I can think of many organizations who are much more exclusive and much more likely candidates. That parts of the Egyptian pantheon are woven in symbolically to the rituals are well known. There are two globes on top of columns, one being the earth, one being the second heaven, and like the pillars of atlas or Castor and Pollux you have the 'As above so below' as you'd find in the Emerald Tablet. If as above so below is as important it makes a lot of sense why people would want to try tethering the heavens to earth with city design or exact locations for certain astrologically based buildings treating the prime meridian as the key of Isis.

If you all personally treat Freemasonry as a more in depth Rotary Club and ignore all of that, fine, but why not Rotary Club or Knights of Columbus in that case. If you find intellectual debate on all kinds of topics interior to Christianity and foreign to Christianity - me too! There's enough out there quite well written to where I don't feel like I need to climb to learn about things like sacred geometry and its perceived value in architecture. I'd also have to say that a lot of such techonological biproducts which act on things more subtle than what science has figured out are things that are in what I'd think of as open/public domain - ie. they're tools/technologies that don't necessarily always necessarily have an eschatological anchoring. Much like major company logos can readily by thought of as sigil magick it doesn't mean that every Christian who owns a company needs plane lettering for signs or needs to take the letterhead off of their business cards.

I think you just have to know what brings you to Masonry, why your in it, what it does for you, and respond to the critics accordingly. Similarly to state that you choose it over Rotary or Knights of Columbus because you feel like you can get more charitable work done - fine. Its really tough however to claim that anyone who'd offer that Theosophy and by extension New Age weren't extracted from Masonic thinkers and ideology (remember that HP Blavatski was working in the 1880's - not too far from Pike's time so his intellectual genie is still very much floating out there, you could perhaps then see a similar chronological parallel between Manley P Hall and Alice A Bailey - all of the current New Age stuff is getting closer to the 150th anniversary of its roots).

I think it might facilitate discussion if someone can provide more specifics rather than the generalities I've seen since joining in this discussion. Where are the specific allegations pinpointing exactly where and why someone has a problem? Where are the citations from works by Hall or Pike, rather than vague allusions to what they wrote? Where are the direct claims regarding "things we're keeping internal?" If anyone feels there's something "internal" that we have avoided discussing, why not pinpoint exactly what you're talking about instead of making shadowy references accusing us of it? After all, there are no real secrets in Masonry, other than grips and signs, and with all the exposees that have been done by former Masons, you don't have to look very hard to find those either.

This thing of having it suggested that hard-line esoteric far-out imaginings of people like Hall have anything to do with Masonry in general, is hogwash. I don't find anyone in the lodge who treats that as the norm. I am a member of our Grand Lodge's Masonic Research Society, and I recall a meeting in which the president opened the floor for anything we wanted to discuss. A man stood and tried to start a conversation going about Albert Pike, and was greeted with some pretty vocal objection to it, to the point that the president politely declined to go there. The only people who really want to read Pike and Hall are Masonry's accusers, because they use the bizarre and try to portray it as the norm.

So it sounds like - from your internal perspective - that such things as Egyptian pantheism and Hermeticism are vacant from the social atmosphere and are really just part of the physical buildings, signs, dusty books that no one ever reads, and that such things have been fast asleep for as long as you've been part of it. I'm not stunned that times change and I'm sure as more Christians flood in they add their own influence and perhaps even push-back to having initatory activities from degree to degree be anything more prospected for values than St. Patrick's Day and Easter customs.

I still say just take the power yourself, build a club for Christians where the initiations are based on the mysteries of Christ, use such rituals to fine-hone people's immediate sense of what Christ did for us, use the writings of the Carmelite nuns for understandings of Christian mysticism and perhaps walking the mansions, and viola! You have everything you wanted rolled up in one! If Golden Dawn, OTO, and Argenteum Astrum, and even Wicca were able to grab that kind of structural focusing and use it to aid people in delving into the mysteries of their own symbolism - lol, Christianity isn't the least bit hard up for symbols and accordingly I can't think of a reason why such immersions wouldn't work incredibly well for Christ.

I'm game for response, and I'm sure any other Mason would be, for anything specific someone might want to present, in the way of direct citations from anything those gentlemen may have written, even though it's rehashing old ground to do so. But vagueness and generalities provide no platform on which to conduct any discussion, and have become handy weapons for the accusers of Masonry.

All I'm suggesting is, perhaps we could all be a little more on point?

The things I see people getting scared by is not understanding the mind, understanding of how rituals are meant to in a sense deliver understandings or help understandings unfold that cannot be delivered in words since words are the most superficial, most open to interpretation and misinterpretation things that can be bantered around. People have in the past as well been freaked out by Christian mysticism because there was a fear of drawing on experiences from the subconscious. For some who would be way out of their depths playing in those waters its wise that they don't, just that for those who do I don't think it should be stigmatized. If however people don't agree with the content then that's its own matter, much like if you had a really big Christian mystics club and Muslims were showing up for coffee, donuts, and charitable activities there might be at least a few Clerics who'd have thoughts on that.

 

[Albion]

I'm really quite agnostic toward the notions that people put out there as to whether Masonry is integrated into some kind of one world government, one world religion guiding of things

Honestly, it looks like you go back and forth with each post.

I can think of many organizations who are much more exclusive and much more likely candidates. That parts of the Egyptian pantheon are woven in symbolically to the rituals are well known. There are two globes on top of columns, one being the earth, one being the second heaven, and like the pillars of atlas or Castor and Pollux you have the 'As above so below' as you'd find in the Emerald Tablet. If as above so below is as important it makes a lot of sense why people would want to try tethering the heavens to earth with city design or exact locations for certain astrologically based buildings treating the prime meridian as the key of Isis.

I guess we could say that about the Vatican grounds and buildings too.

If you all personally treat Freemasonry as a more in depth Rotary Club and ignore all of that, fine, but why not Rotary Club or Knights of Columbus in that case.

The Knights of Columbus are biased against all men who are members of another Christian church. I guess that's the easiest answer. To me, Masonry allowing all men of whatever Christian denomination to work together for good is more admirable.

If you find intellectual debate on all kinds of topics interior to Christianity and foreign to Christianity - me too! There's enough out there quite well written to where I don't feel like I need to climb to learn about things like sacred geometry and its perceived value in architecture. I'd also have to say that a lot of such techonological biproducts which act on things more subtle than what science has figured out are things that are in what I'd think of as open/public domain - ie. they're tools/technologies that don't necessarily always necessarily have an eschatological anchoring. Much like major company logos can readily by thought of as sigil magick it doesn't mean that every Christian who owns a company needs plane lettering for signs or needs to take the letterhead off of their business cards.

I think you just have to know what brings you to Masonry, why your in it, what it does for you, and respond to the critics accordingly.

Yeh, that's the calm and reasonable approach, but when people are telling you that you don't realize what you're doing and that you've enrolled in the service of Satan or the crafters of every Earthly ill, it doesn't seem sufficient.

Similarly to state that you choose it over Rotary or Knights of Columbus because you feel like you can get more charitable work done - fine. Its really tough however to claim that anyone who'd offer that Theosophy and by extension New Age weren't extracted from Masonic thinkers and ideology (remember that HP Blavatski was working in the 1880's - not too far from Pike's time so his intellectual genie is still very much floating out there,

Well, first we'd have to know if that's accurate to say. I would say that it is not. It's historical, to be sure, but so is Pope Pius' XII assistance to Hitler, the Spanish Inquisition, and similar downer moments in Catholic Church history. I wouldn't think that you should feel a moral obligation to resign your membership over it.

I still say just take the power yourself, build a club for Christians where the initiations are based on the mysteries of Christ, use such rituals to fine-hone people's immediate sense of what Christ did for us, use the writings of the Carmelite nuns for understandings of Christian mysticism and perhaps walking the mansions, and viola! You have everything you wanted rolled up in one! If Golden Dawn, OTO, and Argenteum Astrum, and even Wicca were able to grab that kind of structural focusing and use it to aid people in delving into the mysteries of their own symbolism - lol, Christianity isn't the least bit hard up for symbols and accordingly I can't think of a reason why such immersions wouldn't work incredibly well for Christ.

I've heard that argument before. Essentially it goes like this--sure, there's nothing WRONG with Masonry, but you could put all that energy to work for the Lord, as if a man can't do two things at once. And of course the speaker NEVER says that he's applied that thinking in his own life.

 

[Ecclectic79]

Honestly, it looks like you go back and forth with each post.

Part of the trouble is if I'm going to read every single charter or rule book for Masonry I'd need my own motivations completely outside of an internet conversation - no doubt it wouldn't happen in a few hours. A lot of what people have said that I see over and over again seems very neutral, matter of fact, and at worst has tried to separate things into neat stacks.

I guess we could say that about the Vatican grounds and buildings too.

That's absolutely correct. The Vatican city is indeed loaded with sacred geometry including a rather obvious eight-spoked wheel. There's a lot of evidence that the Knights Templar were able to gain influence in the Vatican and did make some subtle changes in their image that still hang residual today.

Well, first we'd have to know if that's accurate to say. I would say that it is not. It's historical, to be sure, but so is Pope Pius' XII assistance to Hitler, the Spanish Inquisition, and similar downer moments in Catholic Church history. I wouldn't think that you should feel a moral obligation to resign your membership over it.

HP Blavatski was actually very forward in criticizing Masonry from the standpoint that she felt speculative Masons were sitting on their thumbs regarding what she believed had to be done and hence she struck out on her own. There's at least one organization - Lucis Trust - that's held her legacy but there are also all kinds of signs that Theosophic thought and goals have also blossomed out into many other organizations.

Back to Catholic history though it was such inquisitions apparently that caused humanists to become Speculative Masons. The Christians today who worry about it are likely people who look at that, whether or not they acknowledge that it was a much more understandable goal at a time where the church was picking up and torturing free-thinkers for what it believed to be hidden information, and they'd believe that the sentiment let loose at one point is still echoes around the structure (at least for everyone's least favorites here to an extent it seemed to). The challenge with staying or leaving churches is that there really aren't a lot of places to go unless you're certain about throwing your particular organization's doctrine under the bus in part.

 

[Rev Wayne]

I think you just have to know what brings you to Masonry, why your in it, what it does for you, and respond to the critics accordingly.

I do know why I'm there, and it has nothing to do with anything any critics are saying. I joined because the Holy Spirit led me to do so. The first time the nudge came, I, like many Christians, had come under some of the influence of antimasons. I had just bought Ankerberg's The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, and when I began reading it, the Holy Spirit was showing me what was wrong with the accusations. Now, I had come to KNOW that voice, but because of the undue influence of antimasons, I took what happened to mean that somehow the book had some sort of demonic influence that was causing me to mistake some other voice for His. Unfortunately, from the time that first incident occurred until the time I began a quest to understand which side of the matter was the truth, was around 10 years, and then 2 more years beyond that before I came to the conclusion that I could reach no conclusion on the matter, and placed it in the Lord's hands and entrusted the decision to HIM.

Fact is, spiritual discernment shows up on every gifts inventory I ever took, as the strongest of the spiritual gifts the Lord has seen fit to bestow. It wasn't until after I had spent several years running from a call to the ministry, and the Lord Jesus Christ's miraculous rescue from the drug-addicted hell I ran to, that God began bringing experiences into my life to exercise that gift, teaching me more than anything else, not how to exercise it, but teaching me that I can trust the gift.

That's why I get frustrated with the whole antimasonic smokescreen generated around accusations regarding Pike, Hall, the Blavatskys, Golden Dawn, and all the other stuff that gets passed off as "what Masonry is about." When I see what is taught in lodge, and what is found in our manual, I see none of the nonsense that makes for so much antimasonic cannon fodder. The problem with most of the critics, I believe, is that they falsely try to make of Freemasonry another religion, and then criticize it on that basis.

It has been said that at the Union of 1813 that re-consolidated the "Moderns" and the "Antients," that a conscious effort was made to remove all Christian references from Masonry. All I can say at this point, 200 years later, is: they failed miserably. In fact, I go further to state, that the claims bandied about in certain Masonic circles, about a move that took place post-1717 of "Christianizing Masonry," is imaginary and illusory, and a supposed phenomenon that many Masons truly believe as something that really happened. It was really quite the opposite, the Christian bearing had always been there. Masonry did arise, after all, in a country that was so predominantly Christian it could be referred to as exclusively so. The only real questions about one's religion were, would you be Catholic or Protestant? (The answer to that question changed about as often as they changed rulers. But I digress.) No, the real phenomenon that took place was the (attempted) DE-Christianizing of Masonry.

I do not have it on hand, but shall have it in a couple of days, a work which, I hope, shall clarify things in regard to Masonry's pre-1717 content, a resource work done primarily on the Scottish Lodges, as I recall. I already have an idea what I will find, I just need to see it first-hand to see what puzzle pieces fall into place for that period.

Well, I wasn't intending to post a dissertation on the matter, but felt like your honest question about what turns my rudder, deserved a fair reply. What I see in Freemasonry that compels me to say it is not incompatible with my Christian faith, derives from its actual content, particularly in ritual and lectures--which is why I sometimes get the knickers in a twist when uninformed assertions come at the craft from obtuse directions, and founded on things that get credited as "authoritative Masonic sources," when actually it's some "secret teachings" blather that came from Manly Palmer Hall 30 years before he ever experienced his first ritual, or from someone's misapprehensions of Pike, who ought not to be read by anyone unskilled in reading extensively lengthy English sentence constructions, and multi-page, multi-level, skillfully constructed rhetorical arguments.

Sorry, that stuff is not Freemasonry, that's the accusational framework of imaginary Freemasonry created by the hyper-paranoid, conspiratorial mindset of what used to be the antimasonic fringe, which has now permeated the whole of the antimasonic camp to become its ever-increasing norm.

Like I said, if you have something specific that comes from Freemasonry itself, and not from the likes of the esoteric fringes of it, that you wish to present and let's deal with it, by all means, pull it out. But I doubt I'll engage very far with you in addressing the kinds of things you seem to be interested in, because it really appears you have bought into the antimasonic idea of what constitutes Masonry, and that's unfortunate.

Nor will I engage with you, even should I choose to bite the bullet and go ahead and discuss such issues, as long as you continue in generalities and never get around to anything that anyone can really stick a fork into and take a big enough bite to make a genuine response. I mean, as long as you continue simply mentioning the names or general aspects of things that might have said or done by the people you mention, but never manage to pull out and post anything specific from any specific work they wrote, or any specific thing they themselves actually said or presented, there's no point in trying to discuss any of them.

Believe me, that's not being uncooperative or unwilling. That's just making an honest assessment of what any attempt to discuss such generalities might actually manage to produce, and deciding, "Ain't nobody got time for that."

 

[Ecclectic79]

TY, that was very helpful.

As far as feeling like the Holy Spirit was leading you in and doing a double-take, I agree that life can take some interesting turns and that it can very much feel like destiny itself won't let you off the hook despite whatever trepidation you may find.

Something I actually felt recently was that - from my own proclivities and for the way my life is being squeezed from all side - I was being lead to read up the occult to gain an understanding on how the human mind and subconscious stretch out into the aethers and are able to sort of control things. My sense was really scientific, ie. the feeling that I both wanted to understand the quantum universe God created and understand what other people out there were doing but also to be able to sift the differences between eschatological right and wrong when it comes to this stuff. I'd worked through a volume that dealt with everyone from William Borroughs to Austin Osman Spare, have the major compendium of Henry Cornelius Agrippa that I haven't read yet, but I started finding out that its just too much of a temptation at this point (even with prayer of protection). Historically I was that guy whose mouth absolutely watered at the idea of a spiritual experience, I still am that way to a large extent, and while I generally wasn't crazy about drugs the second someone said they had LSD or mushrooms my mouth would water because - for me - that was about getting things done and sorting out the components of who I was. All of that said I realize that my tendencies have some aspects and directions that could juxtapose me with the Lord's will via the methods and I absolutely do not want that.

At this point myself I'm examining my rather intense mystical proclivities and trying to find out how I can put them in full service of the Lord or at least harness and channel that energy in accordance with his word. Hopefully with enough prayer, dedication, and signal grace from thereof I might be able to sort that out at my end. Should I find out from the Lord also that its just my alcohol or my gambling then so be it - I'll pray for his grace in fighting it.

 

[Albion]

Part of the trouble is if I'm going to read every single charter or rule book for Masonry I'd need my own motivations completely outside of an internet conversation - no doubt it wouldn't happen in a few hours. A lot of what people have said that I see over and over again seems very neutral, matter of fact, and at worst has tried to separate things into neat stacks.

If you say so, but my observation was that what you've concluded seems mixed. That's not a criticism; I'm just having a little difficult following your message.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Gee, Albi, was it something we said? No one seems to want to talk to us anymore.

 

[Ecclectic79]

Page 16, some possibility the thread ran its course.

^^bump