It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Rockpuck
My ol' grand lodge changed the wording a few years ago from "Communist" to "Subversive" and no one understood why I was so upset.
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Masons try to paint themselves as the good guys, when really they are on both sides of the conflict.
Masons are both religious and rationalist, Catholic and anti-Catholic, conservative and liberal.
Masons soldiers may meet each other on the battlefield, and elect not to shoot one another.
Originally posted by Trinityman
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Masons try to paint themselves as the good guys, when really they are on both sides of the conflict.
Indeed - all organizations will highlight the positive and not the negative. To my mind the many lists of "successful" freemasons available on masonic websites does not in any way imply that there are no bad freemasons.
Masons are both religious and rationalist, Catholic and anti-Catholic, conservative and liberal.
... black and white, young and old, Christian and non-Christian, upper-class and working-class. All true - and this knowledge helps put freemasonry into context.
However I would question your use of the term "rationalist". One must be a monotheist to be a freemason.
Masons soldiers may meet each other on the battlefield, and elect not to shoot one another.
Yes, and if more soldiers acted in this (masonic) manner then War would soon cease to be an effective tool for the Elite and perhaps we might make some progress.
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by solomanskey
I wouldn't count on Modern (WW2 and beyond) Masons to be revolutionary. The older gents imposed wording to essential make being subversive to the GOVERNMENT (note not the constitution) a Masonic Crime.
My ol' grand lodge changed the wording a few years ago from "Communist" to "Subversive" and no one understood why I was so upset.
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
reply to post by driley
Mason soldiers may meet each other on the battlefield, and elect not to shoot one another.
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
They don't just mention notable members, they also characterize themselves as community leaders, suitable rolemodels and as a charitable organization.
I guess praying to The Almighty Dollar could count as monotheism.
Then a soldier would be forced to drop his gun, but a Mason could never be forced to part with his working tools, despite the tale of Hiram Abiff's death.
A soldier -- who is also a Freemason -- illegally refusing orders from his superiors is acting subversively. Would a revolution carried out in such a manner be a direct violation of Freemasonry?
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
"Masons soldiers may meet each other on the battlefield, and elect not to shoot one another. "
A soldier -- who is also a Freemason -- illegally refusing orders from his superiors is acting subversively. Would a revolution carried out in such a manner be a direct violation of Freemasonry?
Originally posted by Trinityman
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
They don't just mention notable members, they also characterize themselves as community leaders, suitable rolemodels and as a charitable organization.
Which is exactly what some of them are. As to being a charitable organization - although charity is not an objective of freemasonry per se it is most certainly a spin-off, and a very welcome one at that.
I guess praying to The Almighty Dollar could count as monotheism.
It might, although such a person would struggle with the main tenets of the Craft.
Then a soldier would be forced to drop his gun, but a Mason could never be forced to part with his working tools, despite the tale of Hiram Abiff's death.
This is a very odd and obscure thing to say. What do you mean?
A soldier -- who is also a Freemason -- illegally refusing orders from his superiors is acting subversively. Would a revolution carried out in such a manner be a direct violation of Freemasonry?
It all depends where your priorities lie. It would appear that you are not familiar with the priorities of a Freemason.
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
So Freemasonry teaches good men and members of a community to play both sides against each other? Where does belief even enter the picture?
Originally posted by W3RLIED2
Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
So Freemasonry teaches good men and members of a community to play both sides against each other? Where does belief even enter the picture?
Thats arguing semantics. If you're talking politics there are many different ideals held by individual Masons. The question of Masons as revolutionaries is different also. I'm sure there are many among the Masonic community that would feel obligated to take it upon themselves to have some part in a coupe' or revolutionary movement, and there are those who would oppose. It's a choice for each person to make.
Belief enters the picture only becasue there are requirements to become a Mason. None of the requirements are political in nature.