Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: "JB" <masonicstuff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:30:21 CST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
"John Nelson" <DieSpammerDie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d49eeb552dbeb2f98980d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <1121978541.32753.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> masonicstuff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>> >> Fortunately, there is no reason to think that is who is being
>> >> discussed. If a candidate were to ask for clarification he'd
>> >> be told such.
>> >
>> > The reasons are abundant. The ritual is littered with Biblical
>> > references.
>> >
>>
>> None of which the candidate is aware of.
>
> This is not a reasonable assumption to make. He may be aware of a
> great deal. He may not. Once initiated, he is certain to be aware
> of the nature of the ritual, at which point, the potential for
> conflict is unavoidable.
>
>> If quasi-Judaeo-Christian
>> ritual is unacceptable to the candidate (something that I would
>> argue is more of an historical nature) then what's the point in
>> his
>> candidature?
>
> This is a remarkably insensitive point of view. You or I may
> consider the ritual to be "more of an historical nature", others,
> especially those to whom the scriptural references are quite
> foreign,
> understandably might not. This coupled with the insistance the the
> candidate must have professed belief in "the" Supreme Being, and it
> is very easy to see someone being made to feel uncomfortable.
>
Oh come on! I think you're talking about an extremely unusual series
of events. These candidates know the Masonic ritual but passages
from the Bible are foreign to them?
So which parts of your ritual would you like to be replaced, and with
what? Clearly if candidates are routinely feeling uncomfortable
(something I don't actually believe happens) then we must change. I
actually think Steve has a valid point about St. Johns but how can
you whip out all references to the Judaeo-Christian Bible without
rewriting the entire ceremonies?
It seems to me that these are exactly the points people like Jim are
writing about when they say that there's no point in non-Christians
joining Christian orders (Knights Templar?).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3
iQA/AwUBQuDJmZrmCzZt58XtEQLvYACdEzeT5X2n0DXziMmbRI0igWZE1yAAoIvf
7W5aoJ5+x9tL3kFt4leHasVg
=O7p+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: John Nelson
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- References:
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Balboos
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: JB
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Larry
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Chris Hills
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Larry
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Perplexed Seal
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Larry
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: JB
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: Allan Randall
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: John Nelson
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: JB
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: John Nelson
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: JB
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: John Nelson
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: JB
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: John Nelson
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: JB
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- From: John Nelson
- Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- Prev by Date: Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- Next by Date: Re: [sof] New Lodge Website
- Previous by thread: Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- Next by thread: Re: freemasons stance on religion of members
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|