Knights of Columbus creepy ceremony

(discussion may commence, same message as last one on previous page)

Nygdan, I just WISH I could say you are completely right.

But you aren't. You are taking a stubborn, but valid viewpoint, which negates the ability for change, and establishing new traditions, and representing the old ideas in new forms.

Sorry, but these things happen. Goddess worship went underground because we are living in the AGE of the Dark Goddess (Kali Yuga to the Hindus) and this means VEILED goddess worship.

Which means 'in secret', 'indirect', whatever you want to call it, the goddess of the many names IS Mary, who would you believe it is also known for her many names/titles.

Here's a tidbit for ya, as to if the RCC is involved at the top (although you ask a lot of WHY for someone who has seemingly never considered it for themselves, Nygdan):
In Poland, the Church encourages believers to pray to the Black Madonna of Czestochowka every morning before rising. It is reported that Pope John Paul follows this ritual. Time Magazine (June 11, 1979)

owl motif, usually associated with the Dark Goddess in her Goddess of Death aspect

as well as ALL snake symbolism being goddess worship, due to the snakes regenerative abilities.

"Actually the worship of the virgin, Black "Mother of God" with her God-begotten child, far predates Christianity and prevailed throughout the ancient world. Historians recognize that the statue of the Egyptian Goddess Isis with her child Horus in her arms was the first Madonna and Child."

"The worship of Isis and Horus was especially popular in ancient Rome. "

"Titles such as Our Lady, The Great Mother, are the same titles attributed to Isis! The word "Madonna" itself is from mater domina, a title used for Isis!"

"the Black Madonna is the ancient earth-goddess converted to Christianity."

His argument begins by noting that many goddesses were pictured as black, among them Artemis of Ephesus, Isis, Ceres, and others. Ceres, the Roman goddess of agricultural fertility is particularly important. Her Greek equivalent, Demeter, derives from Ge-meter or Earth Mother.

"authors casually equated the 'Black Virgins' venerated by Catholics with pagan goddess images of similar appearance"

"While best known for her aspects as mother, healer, and icon of justice and compassion these compelling icons do not deny their inherent duality and thus also embody the very Aztec concept that for life there must be death."

So you can see which aspect is worshipped in public, and what is mostly unspoken, hidden.

As for your crowned goddess ideas, Nygdan, again, you have tried to meet me halfway, and done so. Why not allow yourself (or atleast allow others to) use their full brain and accept:
Bible Myths, T.W. Doane devotes a chapter to The Worship of the Virgin Mother, where he candidly states, "The whole secret of the fact of these early representations of the Virgin Mary and Jesus - so called-being black, crowned, and covered with jewels, is that they are of pre-Christian origin; they are Isis and Horus... baptized anew."

Akilles, I am not a catholic, but I know many. They all tell me that they do not worship Mary. She is held in high esteem. Their prayers to her are not in worship, but a request that she continue their prayers to God for them as they go about their daily task.

We know that there is goddess worship from before Christ up to today. But to accuse a group of people of this just because they honor the mother of God makes no sense to me. Mary and the saints are not held in higher esteem than God or Christ.

There are alot of sites that bash catholics as demonic. This is due only to
ignorance and prejudice. I was taught the same thing when I was growing up. But I checked out the truth for myself.

Darkelf
Pronounced: Question everything

I apologize. Obviously, I don't think that ALL Catholic priests are child molestors. In fact, I think it is an incredibly small minority that cannot even be represented by a percentage figure. I was simply joking and I guess it was wrong of me not to put an "LOL" or a or something to that effect.

I do, however, disagree with the Catholic church on many issues. I won't go there because that's not what this thread was for. I started this thread because I was seeking information about the initiation ceremonies of the KoC. While I'm glad to see a vigorous debate on here, I'd prefer to get back to the topic and question at hand.

Does anyone who has taken part in or witnessed a KoC initiation ceremony care to reveal any details surrounding it? As I said in my original post, my now deceased father used to tell me that his initiation ceremony into the KoC was one of the scariest things he'd ever witnessed. Of course he was a man of his word and he took an oath not to reveal any of it, and therefor never gave me any details.

So with that all being said, I would again like to apologize for my inappropriate and feeble attempt at humor at the expense of the Catholic church. If anyone wishes to discuss the sexuality of Catholic priests or the heritage of Christopher Columbus, you should probably start a new thread. Thanks again!

why would a so called Catholic (Knights of Columbus) Ritual need to be scary?, and why would Catholics need Rituals anyway?.


[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

I cannot add much of significance to this other than to say that my father was a member. He was a NYC cop for 40 years and 3 years in the Marines prior to that. A very straight arrow, he was not a man who would have remained associated with anything remotely 'odd' as described in many of the prior postings.

''Probably'' For all you or i know some of that could tie into the ritual in question, and thus you may of just potentially negated your own thread.

Uhh... highly unlikely. I doubt the ritual in question involves a room of robed men bickering over the birthplace of Christopher Columbus. Furthermore, stating that members should "probably" start a new thread leaves open the possibility of not starting a new thread if the topics being discussed are linked as you inferred. Therefore, I haven't "negated" my own thread.

Regardless, you was too quick, as i edited my post!

''why would a so called Catholic (Knights of Columbus) Ritual need to be scary?, and why would Catholics need Rituals anyway?.''

OK, so now we have heard that Catholics do not consciously worship Mary!

Well thank you! Ceaseless wonders, wow, the amazement is overwhelming.
Obviously if they knew they were conducting goddess worship they would stop!

Sometimes I don't think people bother to think things through.

If your 'father' was a straight arrow, and he joined the Knights of Columbus, what did he know signing up that we didn't? What assured him that there wouldn't be anything 'odd' (as used in your post)
"remained associated with anything remotely 'odd' as described in many of the prior postings."

Thats why you swear an oath first. The more straight up of a citizen, the less likely you will ever say anything to your wife or kids.

Regardless, I wouldn't call myself a Knight of anything if I didn't thoroughly know the history of the name, and how it has been used in the occult and pagan history (those words are meant to scare you, or wait, are they to make you ignore what I just said, and make you think I am a close-minded right wing Christian)

I mean, you think if your father had to get on one knee for another man he would have told you about it? I fail to see how that can be considered a logical conclusion. The initiation is meant to bind you to the group, make you NOT want to reveal what happened. Guess why. Because it happened to you! No man with pride says, "I put on a robe and got on one knee, and said I am in the dark", because the first question is: "Why?" followed by
"Who forced you?"

Hence proud men are shut up.

Originally posted by akilles
I mean, you think if your father had to get on one knee for another man he would have told you about it? I fail to see how that can be considered a logical conclusion. The initiation is meant to bind you to the group, make you NOT want to reveal what happened. Guess why. Because it happened to you! No man with pride says, "I put on a robe and got on one knee, and said I am in the dark", because the first question is: "Why?" followed by
"Who forced you?"

Hence proud men are shut up.

That is the most absurd assumption I have ever heard! That you would think that proud men would be ashamed of what they have done to gain membership into an honorable fraternity shows how little you understand such things. As a mason, I have spoken many time of the things I have done to gain membership into Freemasonry. Only you think there is reason to be ashamed, and that is because you twist facts and events to make them seem nefarious and shady.

People like you are not to be taken seriously, as it is obvious that you will find something to criticize any place you look for it. You're like a bitter old war veteran, cursing and blaming the world for your own misfortune and shortfalls. Start seeing things for what they are, and stop twisting things to suit your own agenda.

''Hence proud men are shut up'' Sebatwerk,

Its strange because in a way you make his case in point.

[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

[edit on 27-5-2005 by ThePunisher]

Boy !

Sounds to me like another Free Mason type cult.

What does Secrecy have to do with an upfront organization ?

It's pagan worship, that's why !

Why do they insist in hiding behind there secrecy ?

Example: Other organizations or churches don't have an agenda to hide.

Why do the Masons and other cults deem themselves to secrecy ?

If it's not up front something is going on. It's just plain old common sense.

Originally posted by Truthisoutthere
What does Secrecy have to do with an upfront organization ?
...
Why do they insist in hiding behind there secrecy ?

WHAT SECRECY!?!? Freemasonry has NO secrets, other than handshakes and passwords. What other supposed secrets are you talking about!?

Why do you insist that there is all this secrecy going on, without actually providing examples?

Other organizations or churches don't have an agenda to hide.

Neither does Freemasonry. It has been stated, over 1 billion times, what Freemasonry's aims and purpose are.

Why do the Masons and other cults deem themselves to secrecy ?

Again, what secrecy are you talking about!?!? I know of no secrecy in Freemasonry other than our handshakes! What the hell are YOU talking about? Freemasonry REALLY isn't as secretive as you would like to think.

If it's not up front something is going on. It's just plain old common sense.

Is that right? That's the most block-headed assertion I've ever heard in my life! That's such a completely BAD assumption! Do you always assume, without any kind of evidence, the worst of everything?

''why would a so called Catholic (Knights of Columbus) Ritual need to be scary?, and why would Catholics need Rituals anyway?.''

Assuming you don't erase this question after I answer it like the other one... I never said that the KoC ritual "HAD to be scary." If you read my original post, I basically said that my father told me it was the scariest/creepiest thing he'd ever taken part in. Beyond that, he didn't give me any details. He wasn't one to just completely make something up, either. I am not saying that every KoC initiation in every part of the world is scary and creepy. I'm just interested in finding out if any members can confirm or deny what I was told.

I never thought this thread would turn into such a hostile one as I was simply seeking information on the initiation ceremony. I think everyone here needs to take a few deep breaths and step back for a moment. Thanks.

Originally posted by Rasputin13

''why would a so called Catholic (Knights of Columbus) Ritual need to be scary?, and why would Catholics need Rituals anyway?.''

Assuming you don't erase this question after I answer it like the other one... I never said that the KoC ritual "HAD to be scary." If you read my original post, I basically said that my father told me it was the scariest/creepiest thing he'd ever taken part in. Beyond that, he didn't give me any details. He wasn't one to just completely make something up, either. I am not saying that every KoC initiation in every part of the world is scary and creepy. I'm just interested in finding out if any members can confirm or deny what I was told.

I never thought this thread would turn into such a hostile one as I was simply seeking information on the initiation ceremony. I think everyone here needs to take a few deep breaths and step back for a moment. Thanks.

As a 4th degree knight I can say there is nothing scary or “cult like” about the Knights. Now someone mentioned "why do Catholics need rituals", Catholics do not have "rituals". Yes the knights of columbus have degree ceremonies but not all Catholics are in the knights.
Now it is true this thread ran wild but it seems to always happen when anyone mentions the knights of columbus. Also it seems to be the same person always ranting the same thing over and over with no proof of what he is saying. It seems that akilles has a personal issue with the knight of columbus and the catholic church. Now akilles, since you seem so against Catholics, what is it you stand for. In the past I read many of your post and it seems like you suffer either from delusions or you are a narcissist. I sometimes think you are Jack Chick himself but that is beside the point. Back to the point, what do you believe in? What is it that makes everything you say right and everyone else on the board is wrong. You say “we pray to a pagan goddess” but you have an interest in the knights because, yes you remember you sent me a u2u to find out what happens in the 4th degree ceremony. I suggest you read faith and fraternalism to find out since the 4th degree pledge is published in this book for the world to see. Maybe you read it, maybe you didn’t. If you did you probably didn’t like it because it proved all of your delusional thoughts wrong. Many people on the board say “Deny ignorance”, why don’t you deny your own. Peace be with you.

Pbrez, YOUR beliefs are pretty much concluded (unless you sometime choose otherwise), and so you find quandary when dealing with people who look further.

Can we all just get along... for the kids???

Anyway, I take back everything that I said a few posts ago. This thread was far more interesting once we got into the priests touching young boys and Christopher Columbus not being Italian!

Regardless of where Columbus was born, I think he should be considered Italian. Italians don't get enough recognition in this nation for the things which they have done. The original NYC sky scrapers were built with their sweat and blood. Were it not for the Italian immigrants, this nation would not be nearly as great as it is (or was, depending on your political beliefs). Not to mention the whole pizza and other Italian food thing!

Can we atleast pay him some respect and refer to the pre-Sell out Cristobal Colon?

And please, when we talk about his Italian involvement, lets make it clear it was only the DeMedici family and its interests that were considered 'Italian' in the whole deal (of loaning money to the Spanish Crown).

It was supposed to make it look like its not "fishy" that the Spanish Crown is getting Italian funding for their mission, so hence they send an "italian". But really, it doesn't matter because the DeMedicis do not represent Italy, they merely ruled it.

This means they didn't fund the trip, as much as, buy a controlling interest.

But things get really interesting when you realize that it was the same people who organized 'John' Cabot's voyage to the new world, who sent Columbus. And Cabotto got maps from a Welsh man, of the Ap Meryk family (the p is effectively silent), who had been in charge of Fishing Licenses.

Interestingly, Ap Meryk had already had fishermen unknowingly going to the New World to fish, but they had to land somewhere else before returning to Scotland, where they would gut the fish, and salt it etc.

But this had been going on for atleast 30 years prior to 1492 (and lets not speculate about what else had already happened). So Columbus had the name, and 'motivation' (thought he was going to India, riiiight) to go to the New World, while Cabot had the map to the more immediately useful locations (resource-wise, a lot of fish, furs, and timber was found. A LOT) which would become a British colony.

So we can see here how the DeMedicis have acted as one hand, while another royal family (Queen Elizabeth is descended from the Ap Meryk/Amerike family, interestingly) has acted as the opposite hand.

The name of Columbia and America were brought on those first boats, nothing more. And now it is time to acknowledge the fact (and who named them)

So why were the Knights of Columbus named after Christopher Columbus? Or is that not true? If it is true, why would they pick him to name their organization after, of all people? Surely they would have known of the questions surrounding his ethnicity as well... right?

The responses to my original post have spawned a whole new series of questions that I want to know the answers to. ATS rules. And ATS members rock! wooooooooohhhooooooooooooo!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Rasputin13
So why were the Knights of Columbus named after Christopher Columbus? Or is that not true? If it is true, why would they pick him to name their organization after, of all people? Surely they would have known of the questions surrounding his ethnicity as well... right?

Wikipedia states that the Knights of Columbus are indeed named after Christopher Columbus. They were founded in 1882.

The Knights were named after who Columbus was named after.

Why? Its like asking why they started in the first place. They were started in 1882, and wouldn't you know it, 2 years later, in 1884 all Catholics are banned from being Freemasons, effectively forcing them to join the Knights! Sweet, I think...

And another telling piece of evidence not offered up by any Knights here, the OFFICIAL magazine of the Knights is also named after their Goddess, as the mag is titled: Columbia.

And they call their philosophy Columbianism, hmm....


I mean, that is a LOT of praise for Columbus, is it not? They say they serve ONE, and serve all. So is the One Columbus or Columbia? I think its clear.

Does this mean it is ever put in such clear terms to members? Hardly.