PDA

View Full Version : Freemason good or bad?


Zombiewire
05-23-2005, 07:47 AM
I just wanted to see what people thought of the Freemason.

MIDDLE AGES - From 500 AD to 1389 AD
500. The theory has been advanced by Leader Scott (Mrs. Lucy Baxter) that upon the fall of Rome certain skilled workmen retired to the Isle of Como and preserved the Stone Masons' art; that they later emerged and came to the continent to erect the many cathedrals built in the middle ages. The theory was urged with great skill and energy for many years by Ravsenscroft. It was accepted by many as the missing link between the associations of the ancient world and the modern world. It is a highly debatable subject.

926. In a number of ancient manuscripts ins the legend that in this year Prince Edwin, son of King Athelstan, presided over a meeting of Masons at York.

1080. There existed in Germany about this time a group of stone masons known as the Steinmetzen. They were well organized operative workmen with rules, ceremonies, and titles that have caused some to clam that they are the ancestors of the Craft.

1136. Melrose Abbey Church being built. Traveling Masons placed their marks on some of the stones.

1147. Companies of Norman Masons emigrated to Chartres to help build the Cathedral there.

1187. Jerusalem falls to the Saracens. A formal separation came between the Order of Sion and the Knights Templar. This separation was marked by a ceremony at Gisors, France, referred to as the "cutting of the elm." Henceforth the Knights Templar operated autonomously.

1189. Following the death of his father Henry II, Richard Plantagenet (the Lionheart) was crowned King of England at Westminster Abbey in London on September 3. While King of England he spent the vast majority of his ten-year reign abroad, devoting himself to the Crusades. Richard's constant companions were knights from the Order of Knights Templar who participated in his Crusade to recover Jerusalem. The Knights Templar were formally under the control of the Order of Sion created a half century earlier by Godfroi de Bouillon. (Source: Holy Blood Holy Grail (Dell) )
http://www.freemason.org/cfo/spring_2004/history2.htm

large
05-23-2005, 08:39 AM
Hmmmm . . . gotta think back a ways, 'bout '63, I think . . proir to being "Knocked in th' Head", the short history given to a budding (First Degree) Freemason was that the Masonic principles sprang from the building of King Solomon's Temple, etc . . . a long time before 500 A.D. . . . . . I got the impression it was a Stonemason's Union, so to speak, at the outset . . . We won't go any farther . . I don't really know how much of this is permissable . . . or repeatable . . .

MoralCompass
05-25-2005, 04:47 AM
I guess with all the hub-bub surrounding "The DaVinci Code" (which I have not read) and the Masons ties to big business/big politics it does give us outsiders at least a little bit of curiosity. I know my grandpappy was a Mason of high degree, but I know absolutely nothing of them. Were they ever associated with the Knights Templar? Just wondering.

large
05-25-2005, 07:51 AM
a quickie here . . Back beyond the 30's being a Mason in the United states may have held special meaning to a select group . . . Most of the time it meant you were a White Anglo Saxon Protestant in good standing in your community . . but there were darker connotations in some areas and communities . . because the same people belonged to both orginizations . . . . this has cast a shadow over the Orginization in the form of rumors and such . . which, for the most part is gone due to the passage of time . . . .

All in all, presently it's a good orginization . . . And Yes, Knights Templar is, I believe a branch group, as are the Shriners, etc . . . You must have attained a Third degree Status prior to advancing in any of the other groups . . .