|
Innerguard posted:Nominations for the lodge this year, up as WSW from WJW. Congratulations. My chief piece of advice would be to start planning your year as WM if you haven't already. Otherwise, continue as you have and support the Master and the lodge. My own lodge is coming back from our summer break this Tuesday, and as I humbly remain in the harness as Secretary for another year. My own agenda for the upcoming year is to be better organized, get a proper funeral committee running smoothly and to ruthlessly stamp out the use of the word "Brothren".
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
Paramemetic posted:You clearly don't understand the meaning of initiation, even if you "get the need," because you're not understanding the fundamental point that makes an initiation an initiation, which is a lineage. In all initiatic traditions, it is essential to have an unbroken lineage, or the initiation is into nothing. This is why the initiation of any person who would not otherwise be eligible for initiation is impossible, because by so initiating them, those individuals break their tradition and their tie to the lineage. The initiate is initiated into something Other-Than the original tradition, which may very well be all well and good, but isn't Masonry, and that's the key point here. I think I have to pay extra for that site feature which means that I'll have to pass on your offer. I guess that I'll also have to pass on talking about how ridiculous that line of reasoning is too. Nobody wants to hear me critique a organization I don't completely agree with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:42
|
|
Sithsaber posted:Nobody wants to hear me critique a organization I know nothing about. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I think I have to pay extra for that site feature which means that I'll have to pass on your offer. I guess that I'll also have to pass on talking about how ridiculous that line of reasoning is too. Nobody wants to hear me critique a organization I don't completely agree with. Do you have AIM? Username is the same. Or I can make a throwaway email account. I am titillated to hear about this: quote:I guess that I'll also have to pass on talking about how ridiculous that line of reasoning is too. Is that so?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Do you have AIM? Username is the same. Or I can make a throwaway email account. I am titillated to hear about this: I'll probably make a new email tomorrow although I don't get why a debate about freemasonry shouldn't go in the freemasonry thread. Board culture here is kind of inclined toward echo chambers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I don't get why a debate about freemasonry shouldn't go in the freemasonry thread. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I'll probably make a new email tomorrow although I don't get why a debate about freemasonry shouldn't go in the freemasonry thread. Board culture here is kind of inclined toward echo chambers. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Debate about Freemasonry does belong in this thread, but I haven't seen much of it in the last few pages. A debate requires some knowledge of the topic from both sides. That said.... Sithsaber posted:I'll probably make a new email tomorrow although I don't get why a debate about freemasonry shouldn't go in the freemasonry thread. Board culture here is kind of inclined toward echo chambers. Fascinating, quite so. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Debate about Freemasonry does belong in this thread, but I haven't seen much of it in the last few pages. A debate requires some knowledge of the topic from both sides. Ad Hominem. Seeing how I made a guy ragequit after he failed to label me racist, I'm pretty confident in my position. That is unless there's a secret doctrine I've missed out on. [/sarcasm]
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:Ad Hominem. You have mistaken people no longer feeling like discussing things with you since you're debating in bad faith for winning a debate. This is yet another example of your discussing in bad faith. If you were actually interested in having a fruitful discussion where people learn something, you'd be disappointed or sad that you were obnoxious enough to run them off. But of course you're not trying to have fruitful discussion. UGH sorry guys I'm pretty bad at this. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:You have mistaken people no longer feeling like discussing things with you since you're debating in bad faith for winning a debate. This is yet another example of your discussing in bad faith. Seeing how I calmly rebuked being labeled a racist with a coherent counterargument, I'm pretty sure I'm the one acting in good faith here. My "bad faith" seems to really boil down to posting where people don't want me to post. Quite. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:Seeing how I calmly rebuked being labeled a racist with a coherent counterargument, I'm pretty sure I'm the one acting in good faith here. My "bad faith" seems to really boil down to posting where people don't want me to post. Are you going to be a constant poo poo until a mod gets tired of reports being made and just nukes the thread? If you're that secure in your position then be glad with it and leave the thread. Er, I mean Hm, quite
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:30
|
|
Sithsaber posted:people don't want me to post. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Innerguard posted:Are you going to be a constant poo poo until a mod gets tired of reports being made and just nukes the thread? If you're that secure in your position then be glad with it and leave the thread. I don't see how that post was being lovely, but I should probably leave this thread until a respectable poster repeats some of the questions I have tried to bring up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:36
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I should probably leave this thread Hmmmm, quite.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Alright, as the resident "occultist/esoteric" Mason and writer here... *cracks knuckles* Just gonna respond to each post here...Sithsaber posted:I'll leave this thread with the common sense statement that the men only rule was made during the era of man=penis. If we are not going by that basic tenant, everything else involving the roles of the sexes needs to be jettisoned. On the other hand I should forget about the philosophy and solely focus on the social club aspects of freemasonry. Nobody wants the wives to interfere with sharing beer and bbq. Do you go all soapbox about sororities and other such exclusive groups too? Does it make a group null and void just because certain people like to gather with those they share something in common with? Should it be my right and privilege to join Alpha Kappa Alpha, or the League of Polish Americans, or the Bar Association or any other group that has membership conditions? Sithsaber posted:At this juncture I've sadly written you guys off as a vestige of fraternity culture. The ideals and norms of your lineage are hopelessly diluted, and back in the day I probably would have sided with the blacks (hall) the commies and the esoteric syncretists. You... you realize we are a fraternity, right? Side with who you want, but to tell a member of an organization - of which you are not even a member - that their organization has become "diluted" in any way, is flat-out arrogant. Some of us are very familiar with the actual, real, not-just-pulling-poo poo-out-of-our-asses, history of this fraternity. Unless you just meant to use another word, our organization is very much the same in ideals as it was in 1717 when the first Grand Lodge was founded (and I've actually read the manuscripts and can back that up). Sithsaber posted:Do what pleases you regardless of my opinion. Shall do, my liege. Sithsaber posted:The ritual is basically anathema to the idea that gender is a construct and that sex is nuanced. You understand the idea of metaphor, correct? Everything in the rituals is a metaphor. That's the entire point of the initiatic tradition. Hell, if you want to rationalize the ritual with current sociological issues for whatever weird reson, there is black/white, man/woman, hot/cold, 1/0, day/night, mind/body, etc., etc., in all of us, existing concurrently all of the time. We have to learn how to recognize all polar aspects of our self in order to become better and grow closer to gnosis. How is that "anathema" to the idea of gender equality? Don't conflate the ideas of Freemasonry with the ideas of Freemasons. Sithsaber posted:I doubt that freemasonry has coopted the unity of opposites/rebis concepts. Nothing I've read indicates that you guys are that occultist.( I hear Jung isn't that popular amongst you) I was just about to ask why modern day freemasonry hasn't gone in that direction, but then I got depressingly cynical. Really? There is a ton of alchemical symbolism in the rituals, and a number of the early English Freemasons were involved in alchemy. I posted almost the same thing when I responded to your very first post in here - but why are you so hung up on Jung? He didn't exactly invent the opposites/rebis/abrasax/whatever concepts. Sithsaber posted:3. The ritual seems to be a bit too antiquated to coherently deal with issues like transexuality. Why does the ritual have to answer or deal with any big societal questions like gender equality/gender identity? It's not a catch-all system to tell you all the answers in life, it presents a system of moralities that you can interpret and apply to your life in the way that means the most to you. Even if Freemasonry is a hammer, not everything is a nail. Sithsaber posted:4. As you've brought up and I've come around to accept, the social component of the lodge is all that really matters and that's okay. To some people, yes. To all people, no. Sithsaber posted:6. I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea here: I basically would like freemasonry to be more progressive and not traditionalist. No, you seem to want Freemasonry to be a sort of Utopian catch-all group that also possesses the secret of life and peaceful society (as you define it). Sithsaber posted:Freemasonry is not a religion, but it is a tradition. Certain aspects of the tradition seem to be swept under the rug in this thread. Again, you're conflating ritual with governance. There are two aspects to Freemasonry: the ritual, which has been mostly unchanged since 1717 and is basically the same everywhere, and the fraternity, which has changed a lot over the years, and varies considerably even from state to state. Yes, there have been times in Freemasonry's history where the leadership has made bad decisions (e.g. segregation), I don't think anyone here is doubting that or sweeping it under the rug. Sithsaber posted:Aborigines had to defend themselves from the oppressor and rivals. As you said, freemasonry has kind of triumphed (anti-intellectualism not withstanding) and it's not like women can't keep a secret. Native Australians also segregated the sexes, but they did so from a clear position of hierarchy. What do these governmental/sociopolitical ideologies have to do with our fraternity (which, believe it or not, does not actually run the country or oppress women in society). Isn't it a bit disingenuous to equate our meeting in a closed room once a month with institutional hierarchical gender segregation? Sithsaber posted:No. Just no. The ideals of groups like freemasonry have the potential to grow beyond their origins and base group. You're talking about expanding our (somewhat) small and exclusive organization into a larger movement that is open and accessible to all. And what if that's not in the interest of the people actually in the organization? Don't you think making it wide-open and commonplace would, well, dilute it? Sithsaber posted:That being said, I'd tolerate not letting in women Months of posting seems to disagree with this, unless you've just been playing Devil's Advocate all this time. Sithsaber posted:Nobody wants to hear me critique a organization I don't completely agree with. To me, it's more the fact that you're critiquing aspects of the organization you know nothing about, namely the esoteric aspect. Sithsaber posted:Ad Hominem. How is pointing out the fact that you're using things you know nothing about as points in your arguments "ad hominem"? He's not criticizing you as a person, just your arguments. And if you want to go all "freshman philosophy major" in here, I'd be more inclined to call it reducto ad absurdum. Sithsaber posted:My "bad faith" seems to really boil down to posting where people don't want me to post. No. But since you like fallacies, let me point you toward "ad nauseum", "argumentum verbosium," and "confirmation bias". Sithsaber posted:I should probably leave this thread until a respectable poster repeats some of the questions I have tried to bring up. THATTTT'S ad hominem. Don't worry, it takes practice, you'll get the hang of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
THAT IS NOT THE THREAD APPROVED RESPONSE COOL CORN
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Emron posted:THAT IS NOT THE THREAD APPROVED RESPONSE COOL CORN Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Hmmm, quite. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
Brilliant! And it saved me from having to explain "ad hominem."
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Brethren, I propose a motion to Postpone Indefinitely discussion with Sithsaber until such time as they are able to produce a valid dues card in their own legal name from a Lodge under the jurisdiction of a Grand Lodge in current amity with the UGLE. Also; Well, bless your heart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
Glorified Scrivener posted:Brethren, I propose a motion to Postpone Indefinitely discussion with Sithsaber until such time as they are able to produce a valid dues card in their own legal name from a Lodge under the jurisdiction of a Grand Lodge in current amity with the UGLE. I second the motion. Also, not everywhere has dues cards. In Scotland, unless you have life time membership ( which has just recently been abolished by the GLoS ) then the most you'll generally have is a receipt from the treasurer saying you've paid dues.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
@Cool Corn Glory be, a well detailed response has allowed this charade to climax. Forgive me for not quoting that ponderous post, but texting you something presented is impossible enough as it is. 1. To borrow something from your lexicon, there are levels to this poo poo. I never said that alchemy is nonexistent in freemasonry, merely that (from what I know of course) it does not go on a trajectory that leads to the proclivities in question. 2. If freemasonry does have room for the anima and the magnum opus, it shouldn't necessary bar women from communion with it. If Man can distill his anima, Woman can distill her animus. 3. There is much that I do not know, and even if I did stumble upon the truth, freemasonry would allow feuding interpretations of it. This tolerance is admirable yet paradoxically foreign to how I favor Metatron and a more doctrinaire belief in the marriage of the Lamb and his bride. 4. Although not as ideal as it could be, fraternities have their merits. I'm just partial to whole hearted subservience regardless of passing zeitgeists. Certain liberal interpretations seem lukewarm to me, and the good book says that something lukewarm must be spat out. 5. I was the poster of ill repute. Ps. I have obfuscated what I desired to veil. I did this in my own way because I lack the codes and signs of the fellowship. I also like big words and dislike acronyms and degrees. Ite missa est. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:
Why are you seemingly unable to write without grandiloquent loquaciousness? Hmmmm, quite...
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
jrgnsn_tjf posted:Why are you seemingly unable to write without grandiloquent loquaciousness? I like informative fun. Have thee a stance on my points?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I like informative fun. Have thee a stance on my points? Learn to write, because it's obvious why CC gave you the boot. Hrmm. Quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:Learn to write, because it's obvious why CC gave you the boot. Hrmm. Quite. Hmm irrelevant. Ps. That wasn't a complete sentence, sport. Notice how I'm not the one acting in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Sithsaber, are you real?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Seriously, please stop replying to him. Please.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
I didn't know I'd ragequit. News to me! Unrelated note, what do you lot think of The Working Tools magazine?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Loomer posted:I didn't know I'd ragequit. News to me! You kind of disappeared in a huff after you said that I hate white people. In lighter news, reddit has hundreds of pages devoted to debating aspects of freemasonry. I have no further reason to "disrupt"...conversations about picnics and magazines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I have no further reason to "disrupt"...conversations about picnics and magazines. Hmmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:26
|
|
Paramemetic posted:It was discussed but since the vast majority of us in this thread not only do not but can not recognize co-masons as masons, nor discuss masonry with them, it was more or less decided that it's better to keep this thread about regular lodges and appendant bodies. http://www.masonicdictionary.com/communication.html posted:The term communication with respect to Freemasonry is often misunderstood. Communication in this sense means a lodge meeting. Therefore the injunction that a Mason is not to hold Masonic Communication with a clandestine mason simply means you are prohibited from sitting in the same lodge room. (See following definitions for support) There is no rule against discussing freemasonry with clandestine masons, as long as it doesn't happen in open lodge. Masonry can be discussed with clandestine masons to the same extent that it can be discussed with other non-masons.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 09:45
|
|
|
quote:(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Hmm, quite.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Brothers, I'm doing my 2nd degree proficiency on the 18th and my raising is slated for past master's night. I'm a bit nervous, any suggestions on how to adopt the long form better aside from practice?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 08:12
|
|
|
SaNChEzZ posted:Brothers, I'm doing my 2nd degree proficiency on the 18th and my raising is slated for past master's night. I'm a bit nervous, any suggestions on how to adopt the long form better aside from practice? One of the guys in my lodge reads the piece into the voice memo app on his phone and then listens to it on his headphones while washing dishes or whatever. It also helps to break the text down into smaller chunks and work on it piece by piece. I find the Obligations usually break down into a rough kind of intro>body>conclusion paragraph structure, and I used that as a guideline when learning them. But whatever your method there's no substitute for just investing time every day until you've got it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
I always broke the obligations into "I will" and "I won't" counts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Thanks guys. Also! At yesterday's stated meeting, we had a visitor (Right Worshipful Master) from the Ancient Stirling Lodge #30 in Stirling Scotland! He came all the way here (California) to pick up a masonic case that one of my brothers made for him. Being that it was Hawaiian shirt night, we were plenty outdressed. (Not pictured, me not in a Hawaiian shirt because I do not own one) 
Frozen Pizza Party fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 12:32 |
|
|
SaNChEzZ posted:Thanks guys. Heresy! What city is this?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 03:42
|
|
