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 sweetnlow
philosophy?
Originally posted by muzzleflash
That is a really good question. I am not exactly sure if there is any relevance directly, and I have to feel my way through this based entirely on intuition.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by sweetnlow
philosophy?
Wow, are you always so purposefully obtuse?
What would be the relevance of a 33rd Degree Scottish Rite Mason to a non-Scottish Rite Mason? Why would the non-Scottish Rite Mason even care if the other had received the 33rd Degree? Who 'outranks' who, a 33rd Degree Scottish Rite Mason or the Master of a Lodge?
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by muzzleflash
That is a really good question. I am not exactly sure if there is any relevance directly, and I have to feel my way through this based entirely on intuition.
There really is no relevance to the non-Scottish Rite member as the degrees do not confer any type of authority on the main body of Masonry (The Blue Lodge). The head of the Scottish Rite for the State of New Jersey is in my lodge and technically I 'outrank' him when we are in lodge together.
Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by muzzleflash
There is the beginning of all the masonic journeys. Sadly, there are some who get their third degree, and never step foot in a lodge again. Those people miss out on the real meaning of the lessons taught.
Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by muzzleflash
Not sure if you're familiar with, but within the York Rite there is a invite-only body called the "Holy Royal Arch Knights Templar Priest" which I believe has 33 degrees in it (although they only confer one now). Our one and only Masonic Light is a member of this group so he could clarify.
I'd have to look through my Cryptic book, but 11 isn't really relevant in the ceremonies.
An invitational body composed of highly dedicated and long serving York Rite Masons. Membership requires affiliation with the Knights Templar, and members must be Past Eminent Commanders of a Knight Templar Commandery. Originally, this body conferred 33 degrees, but now only one is conferred. Membership is limited to 27 members per presiding body. The presiding body is a Tabernacle, and the presiding officer is a Preceptor (titled Eminent).
Originally posted by muzzleflash
I once read that there are two types of persons, and I do find that it makes a lot of sense and holds much truth.
The most common type of person is one who just memorizes and repeats, without actually caring to learn or understand or find more.
And there is the other type which is more rare, that seeks to learn more and attempts to gain understanding within all of what they find.
Membership is limited to 27 members per presiding body.
The presiding body is a Tabernacle,
The limit of Regular Members in a Tabernacle is 33.
Originally posted by network dude
Most masons are not as fortunate as I am to have these resources.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Isn't it supposedly true that no rank outranks the other, or no order is better than the others?
And cannot one become a fellow within all of these orders simultaneously if accepted into them?
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Another question if you don't mind.
Isn't the other Lodge the "Red"?
I ask because although there is a ton of information all over the internet, much of it appears bias and skewed towards either obscuring things or painting them in very opinionated manners. So it's kind of hard to determine what is true and what is false, so I of course take things with a grain of salt and don't take things too seriously because I don't know who to trust.
Originally posted by network dude
In between Augustus' drunken ramblings, he throws some good knowledge my way at times.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
A major issue with that is that many people appear to speak from ignorance because they have misunderstood the translation of terminology and were so invested in their prior beliefs that they would refuse to change those beliefs even when the truth revealed them to be totally misled. It is probably an "ego issue" that is holding them back, and of course it holds us all back but I am personally seeking to minimize it's grip upon me so that it will not stunt my chances of learning new wonderful concepts.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Typically it has to do with ego as people refuse to admit their preconceived notions were incorrect and view such admissions as a sign of weakness instead of broadening their view.
Well, if you're going for the pure math, you'd actually have to turn it 36°... The angle between points of a regular 5-sided figure are 72°. (360°/5) So if the point up is at 0°, the first one clockwise from that is at 72°, the second at 144°. To turn the symbol so that that second point is pointing down (180°), you'd have to rotate the figure 36°. If you only rotated it 33°, the bottom point would be at 177°…
Originally posted by muzzleflash
I am still learning a lot, but from what I can tell so far, if you get a pentacle and turn it 33 degrees to the side, it will become a pentagram. This is a mathematical concept.
I'm not familiar with the institution in question, so this is merely a guess, but perhaps the 27 "members" are non-officers, and there are 6 officers in that body? Or they changed it at some point and didn't correct all their literature. Though that seems unlikely somehow. (depending on how old that order is, at least... one generally doesn't screw with tradition that drastically...)
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Also I found something confusing.
On the first link at yorkrite, it says about the HRAKTP :
Membership is limited to 27 members per presiding body.
The presiding body is a Tabernacle,
Then at the HRAKTP.org site it says:
The limit of Regular Members in a Tabernacle is 33.
Is there a technical difference between "members" and "Regular Members"?
It's just an inconsistency that I noticed, or perhaps a differentiation within terminology.