Who are the Knights of Saint Andrew?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Emmanuel Rebold (freemason) disagree's some where in there i think..

A General History of Freemasonry
archive.org...

but who really knows ?

a clear visible history for a secret society
seems counter productive to me
but i'm strange

a reply to: kibric

This might be a great read for those who think some cultures are disgusting =) Just saying, not implying anything..

a reply to: tikbalang

you clearly are

so who ?

a reply to: kibric

I got a lot of help trying to unravel stories, and then i found empirical and observational science. All those stories just went in the garbage-, im not implying anything to a few, selective people. I just consider them to be lucky and fortunate to be raised in a loving environment, and not in the true sense of the culture it comes from.. Im just lucky to be able to gain the knowledge how everything works from the basics..

Stories are always great, especially when you believe in them..

originally posted by: AMPTAH
Like I said in my 1st response. There is no definitive evidence. They didn't leave a written record.

There are writings concerning Masonry going back almost 1,000 years, what are you taking about? .

It's found in the common elements used as "landmarks" of the crafts.

What landmarks does Masonry share with the Templars?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
There are writings concerning Masonry going back almost 1,000 years, what are you taking about? .

Freemasons don't write anything.

There are only symbols. All education is by allegory and symbolism.

a reply to: AMPTAH
Well, the biggest area of Templar suppression was in France. In Spain, the Knights Templar were reformed into the Order of Christ which still exists today. In Germany, a troop of knights showed up in battle armor to their trials and were surprisingly found innocent. In England, suppression and trials were delayed greatly until the Pope put his foot down on the monarch. And it was really only the French king that opposed the Templars.

As for the Templar-Freemason continuation theory, you should "Compasses and the Cross" by Stephen Dafoe. He debunks man of the various theories using facts. There is no evidence of the Scottish Templar-Freemason resurgence. The Regius Poem dates Freemasonry back to 926 AD, prior to founding of the Knights Templar.

It's the same thing with the Cult of Mithras. They vanished, the same way the Templars vanished.

Not really. It's apples and oranges about the rise of Christianity and the fall of pagan religions with the suppression of the Templars.

However, if you look at the remnants of the things left back by the Cult of Mithras, you'll see easily, that the "same ideas" flowed into the Templars, and then into the Freemasons.

The similarities are superficial at best.

a reply to: AMPTAH
There are actually several Lodges with windows. Each of the Historic Lodges in Idaho have windows and we have them open during our meetings.

a reply to: AMPTAH
We write a lot down.

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
There are writings concerning Masonry going back almost 1,000 years, what are you taking about? .

Freemasons don't write anything.

There are only symbols. All education is by allegory and symbolism.

what lodge are you in?

originally posted by: AMPTAH
Freemasons don't write anything.

There are only symbols. All education is by allegory and symbolism.

Stop making things up.

I don't know about the US but I can find no such information in the UK.
Except the Knights of St Andrews is a part of the Order of the Thistle which is part of the royalties self grandising club.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
There are writings concerning Masonry going back almost 1,000 years, what are you taking about? .

Freemasons don't write anything.

There are only symbols. All education is by allegory and symbolism.

what lodge are you in?

I am in the invisible lodge.

originally posted by: tikbalang

Stories are always great, especially when you believe in them..

The whole world consists of nothing but stories.

But all stories have some degree of what we call "facts," and some degree of what we fall "fiction."

Even the "facts", however, can be misleading, since they are usually "selected facts", that promote someone's agenda, or idea of what should be "revealed" vs what should remain "hidden".

Why do people find the need to "hide" things? To keep "secrets"?

This is a very puzzling phenomena, that has been given various interpretations over the ages.

Jesus said, he has told nothing secret in private, that he did not say in public. [John 18:20]

Yet, in public, he spoke mainly in parables, [Matthew 13:10] which could only be understood by those who knew the secrets. [Matthew 13:11]

Freemasonry is a Society with Secrets.

Unlike Jesus, however, Freemasons don't teach their secrets in public.

The only thing Freemasons teach publically about their order, is that they are involved in Charitable works.

Now this is quite funny.

Because, Jesus taught his secrets publically [albiet only few could understand], but required his followers to do their Charity in secret. [ Matthew 6:4]

Freemasonry is the exact antithesis to Jesus, doing their Charity publically and announcing that as their works, and keeping their "Freemasonic Lessons" a secret, to be taught only in private.

We have the same issue of secrets in both. Just the reverse idea of what should be secret and what should be public.

So, obviously, there's no one standard. People can and do believe in opposite things, hold contrary doctrines and reverse practices.

While Jesus' explanation of why it is necessary to keep some secrets is known: he says some people are not worthy to know them, lest they be prematurely healed [Mark 4:12], it is not known publically exactly why Freemasons believe their secrets should be kept. That too, is a secret in Freemasonry.

This has led to many speculations about what Freemason's do.

The Mystic Gurdjieff tells of a completely different reason why it is necessary for some things to be secret. Gurdjieff travelled the world, and interviewed many adepts, gurus, and self-proclaimed masters of the esoteric. The overwhelming viewpoint he took away from them, is that these secrets are available to everybody, if they would but look, they are really just ordinary and easy to see, and the reason they the adepts "obscure" them further, with abstruse symbolism, is merely that this is the only way the average person would take an interest in them, and seek to find them out. When something is rumored to be hidden, that itself motivates the individual to become a seeker, and go hunt for the gold.

Basically, Gurdfieff's idea is that things are kept secret, so that people would go look for the secret. Finding out a secret, brings greater appreciation and understanding, than just handing over the information to the aspirant, who is more likely to then sneer at the simplicity of the content, which is obtained too easily.

Then there' the more modern ideas of why the secret. In a capitalist society, corporations keep their methods secret to maintain advantage over competitors. So, some secrets are kept to gain or maintain advantage over others. To rule them easily, or to profit more from their lack of knowledge of the particular secrets. Nations use secrets for the same reason, to get advantage in wars, and the like.

There are even more reasons that people have given for there being need for secrets. But, the point is that there is no one reason that motivates people to think secrets are necessary.

All these orders, flavors of orders, variations of each other, hold the same view that secrets are to be kept, but do they have the same reasons, or the same secrets? By virtue of man's imagination, and as we have just seen, reasons can vary, they each introduce their own twist on the matter. Many times, the secret of some order, is nothing but a nice story that means whatever the lodge members imagine it might mean, having no other significance, than an entertaining mystery.

The true mysteries are only known to a very select few.

originally posted by: AMPTAH
Unlike Jesus, however, Freemasons don't teach their secrets in public.

The only thing Freemasons teach publically about their order, is that they are involved in Charitable works.

Here you go again.

Besides the five handshakes and five passwords there is nothing else secret. What do you want to know?

a reply to: crayzeed
It's primarily an American thing.

a reply to: AMPTAH
There's a variety of reasons for privacy and keeping secrets.

The word "secret" comes from the Latin secretus which means to set apart or hide. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary a secret society is "any of various oath-bound societies often devoted to brotherhood, moral discipline, and mutual assistance." This is a fair description of Freemasonry, although I still disagree that we [Freemasonry] are a secret society -- maybe it's my bias. I do agree that Freemasonry is a private organization that possesses secrets. It is important to note that privacy is synonymous with secrecy. Privacy is the "quality or state of being apart from company and observation." Privacy is a natural right as everyone has a right to hide or conceal that which they possess or own whether it is a person, place, thing, belief or ideal.

Now it is laughable to think Freemasonry is truly secret as one only needs to go to a library or get onto the internet to find a vast amount of information regarding our Fraternity, although more often than not some websites information is and was exaggerated and sensationalized. Even many of our own writings are published publicly and open for non-Masons to read. If so much is published why do we keep them private? There are many reasons why we Freemasons continue our private nature and the keeping of secrets. Freemasonry was traditionally extremely private during eras of totalitarianism out of obvious necessity as free-thinking and liberal ideas were seen as dangerous, condemned by tyrants, and forced from public view.

In his article "Why Secrecy", Bro. Roger Firestone 33° stated:

Another major reason why secrecy is advocated for the knowledge imparted by Freemasonry is to impart the lesson that our teachings are valuable. We leave many inexpensive items lying carelessly about our homes and offices, whereas truly valuable items are kept locked in safe deposit boxes or other repositories, or are carried with us at all times. In Poe's story, "The Purloined Letter," many hiding places are searched for the letter; having been left in plain view, it is overlooked as worthless. Since knowledge, per se, cannot be locked up physically, keeping it secret is the method used to restrict its circulation and ownership. If the teachings of Freemasonry were made available to anyone as a matter of routine, it would indicate to both members and outsiders that we attach only a modest value to them. Instead, we have spent centuries of effort keeping the truths of Masonry secret and passing them down the generations by memory. This should convince us that what we have labored so hard to possess is valuable indeed.

Within any private and voluntary organization, secrecy or privacy is necessary and compatible with trust. Because of the shared experience of members and because they share protected information an organization builds allegiances and meaningful relationships. According to Gary Fine and Lori Holyfield, "The link between trust and secrecy supports group cohesion while leaving room for personal investments." Private organizations rely upon trust to keep private or secret that which has been entrusted to his care. The relationship between privacy and secrecy extends to personal relationships as well as fraternal ones. Simmel states, "Every relationship between two individuals or two groups will be characterized by the ratio of secrecy that is involved in it." W:.Bro. Cliff Porter in his 2007 article Secrecy and Faith discusses how secrecy breeds trust and courage. Cliff makes the following declaration:

There are many reasons we may love our spouses, but believing we can share anything with them is an important aspect to a healthy relationship. The idea that your closest companion will not share your private moments with anyone else is what allows you to trust them. The idea that we can trust them gives of the courage to share with them. This is the basis of the secrecy of Masonry.

While some denounce secrecy on moral grounds, Simmel states that secrecy is a universal sociological form and has nothing to do with moral valuations. Those who believe that secrecy is naturally wrong and use the "nothing-to-hide" argument do so based on assumptions not fact. They presume that secrets are kept only to hide something wrong, but often privacy and secrecy enhance freedom and liberty since living in a police state, in a state of forced "transparency", inhibits the exercise of natural rights like freedom of speech, association/assembly, and all of those essential to a free society.

Others argue that secrecy is against their faith and religious doctrine, and in the case of those who are Christian, they often overlook Holy Scripture that states there is nothing wrong with secrecy or privacy. Many also seem to forget that since secrecy is universal that everyone keeps secrets and practices secrecy at some level. Those who would deny their own personal secrecy couldn't withstand much questioning concerning intimate aspects of their lives without, as David Flaherty says, "capitulating to the intrusiveness of certain subject matters." They also forget that a key element of a free government, like a Republican or Democratic one, is secrecy.

In my opinion, it is not about Freemasonry having anything to hide, but rather it has everything to do with the sense of entitlement some feel to know the business of others...and frankly, they don't have that right. Entitlement is the belief that one deserves something without putting labor or effort into properly receiving it which is the antithesis to the natural rights that protect secrecy and privacy. As free men we are endowed with the right to keep what is our personal, confidential, private, and secret; and as free men we do not need to justify the exercise of our Natural Rights.

Also, there's nothing immoral or wrong with secrets. See Matthew 6:6. See Proverbs 12:23. See Proverbs 10:14. Proverbs 11:13.

Unlike Jesus, however, Freemasons don't teach their secrets in public.

Well, Jesus was attempting to save mankind and Freemasonry is neither a religion nor focused on the salvation in the afterlife.

Because, Jesus taught his secrets publically [albiet only few could understand], but required his followers to do their Charity in secret. [ Matthew 6:4]

Actually most Masonic charity is done in secret.

Freemasonry is the exact antithesis to Jesus...

That's your opinion only.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Besides the five handshakes and five passwords there is nothing else secret. What do you want to know?

Hmm...I will say this, every mason I've met and discussed any topic on Freemasonry, has given me contradictory information verses that coming from other masons. It is as if the Freemasons can't keep their public story straight. Too many twists and turns in the arguments and the dialog. Either you have secrets, more than just the handshakes, or you don't. That's just simple logic.

originally posted by: KSigMason

Freemasonry is the exact antithesis to Jesus...
That's your opinion only.

Yes, I have an opinion. But, it's not "only" my opinion. Else, the Church would not have forbidden Christians to join the brotherhood of Freemasons.

I will not judge Freemasons as being right or wrong, but I will judge that they teach not the same things as the Christians, and their manner is diametrically opposite the method of Jesus. While Jesus accepts everyone that called on him, the Freemasons use a black ball. Everything in manner and method is different and opposing in nature. That's an antithesis.

In a plural world, opposites can coexist just fine. But, we should never confuse the two. It is important to point out the differences, lest anybody gets confused, and takes one for the other.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: OpSpec
From what I gather, they are an elite group and the successors of the Knights Templar (apparently after the Knights Templar were disbanded, some fled to Scotland and became the Knights of Saint Andrew).

No Masonic organization is directly traceable to the Knights Templar.

They only date from the 1990's as well.

Wait...there is a publication from 1884 that says this:


Link

originally posted by: AMPTAH
Hmm...I will say this, every mason I've met and discussed any topic on Freemasonry, has given me contradictory information verses that coming from other masons. It is as if the Freemasons can't keep their public story straight. Too many twists and turns in the arguments and the dialog. Either you have secrets, more than just the handshakes, or you don't. That's just simple logic.

Was that you asking a question about something you wanted to know or was that just you bloviating?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
Wait...there is a publication from 1884 that says this:

As I said earlier in the thread, it was popular in the 1800's to link yourself to these chivalric orders. There is zero evidence the Templars are related to Masonry.