Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?

Subject: Freemasonry. good or bad?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Feb 18 - 02:37 PM

Several British newspapers recently ran an article on Freemasons in Parliament and in Journalism, among others.
Should a holder of any kind of public office be obliged to declare membership of such a secretive organisation?
Is their loyalty to themselves, their office, or freemasonry?
Is membership a direct threat to Democracy?
How can it be healthy when the police and judiciary are also riddled with freemasons?

Or could we just require a ministry of funny walks to keep tabs on them?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/04/two-freemasons-lodges-operating-secretly-at-westminster

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 07 Feb 18 - 03:51 PM

More cranks, as if we don't have enough with vegans and gender neutrals!

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: keberoxu
Date: 07 Feb 18 - 04:37 PM

Well, BEFORE this sinks below the music section, I'd like to point out:
Good or Ill, Freemasonry is part of history, centuries of it.

I'm thinking of the Age of Enlightenment
in which Central Europe becomes less orthodox in religion
and all this literature and music suddenly seems to pour out.
The places where German is spoken
-- there is no unified Germany at that time --
there is all this poetry, all this music,
and most of the poets and composers are,
you guessed it, Freemasons.

Maybe some of the composers weren't
but if it was literature and writing,
and the author wrote in German and published in German,
and was a man,
he was more likely a Mason than not.
At this point the Jews were discriminated against, of course.

I'm just saying, good or bad, it's literally etched in stone in some respects.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Jos
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 07:40 AM

The vocabulary in the original post - 'riddled with' - suggests that the person posing the question may not be seeking unbiased answers.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 08:02 AM

Whether the wording will influence the answers is debatable.
The question set out in the title is straightforward, the answer may not be.
Freemasons do a lot of good work for charity. That is a good thing.
Freemasons help their members by providing support to find jobs, or improve their positions. That may also be a good thing, but, if this happens by giving them an advantage over others who may be better qualified, it is not such a clear cut position.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 08:39 AM

"Freemasons help their members by providing support to find jobs, or improve their positions. That may also be a good thing, but, if this happens by giving them an advantage over others who may be better qualified, it is not such a clear cut position."

So, what is your opinion of professional networking?

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 08:43 AM

To be more explicit than Nigel from my experience the credo and teachings of the Free Mason are progressive lofty and Unitarian.
However in practice it is a good ol' boys club that will help cover up mistakes made in career and domestic life. It is also used to protect their kids when they are wayward.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 08:57 AM

If freemasons are purely a force for good then why the reticence of the individual to have public recognition of said good works. My feeling is that the individual mason's secrecy is at least unhealthy in a democracy and potentially a force for far worse. Those in receipt of public funds should disclose their membership or find alternative legit income streams.
As Matthew 6:24 says: No man can serve two masters.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: DMcG
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:07 AM

Both freemasonry and "professional networking" open up possibilities of corruption. It may or may not occur in any given situation, bur the risk is there.

What makes freemasonry a greater risk than some other professional networking routes is that it is cross-business: it is possible for a councellor to enter into a corrupt relationship with a builder in a way that is not so easy if both parties are builders, for example.

Secrecy is the problem, openness is a good way forward.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:12 AM

The point was to serve god and man but not serve a divisive church.

btw Matthew was full of shit. If Iains wants to use Matthew to further a divisive agenda as gospel he has missed the point George Washington clearly understood.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:17 AM

There are many business folk's organised charities (Round Table for example) which do much good without all the secrecy.
It's obvious that 'back-scratching' goes on behind the scenes. If not, why not be open?
It's a bit like the gangs prevalent nowadays. One holds allegiance to the gang and members 'help' each other out. Freemasonry seems to be the posh equivalent.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:20 AM

Iains was merely using a very well-known quote to illustrate his point (with which I agree)
Matthew was certainly NOT 'full of shit'. He was one of the Apostles, and much revered by Christians.
Why is it that every time Iains opens his mouth, someone jumps on him?
Dreadful behaviour.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:39 AM

I've known a few Shriners, a North American branch of Freemasonry. They are best known for sponsoring a number of pediatric hospitals. They seem to spend most of their time raising funds for the hospitals and consuming distilled spirits. They strike me as folks who never outgrew the university fraternity thing. Relatively harmless as long as they sober up before driving. No more likely to pose a threat to democracy than any other group that tends to wear funny hats and vote Republican.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:42 AM

Obviously we have different definitions of classic trouble making trollism. Good OR Bad? the question is already an argumentative indictment.

As secrets go it is a pretty wide open secret. If you fall for a deliberately divisive secrecy argument then the Masons are bad but have missed the reason of and for good.

So we have different thermometers Senofou, we still like cats.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:45 AM

An item on Radio 4 this afternoon (during the 1o'clock news) referred to the fact that county council planning committees are sometimes stuffed with masons. I wonder why.

The authorship of the gospel of Matthew by an apostle is tradition only. There is no evidence that it's really the case. There is no example anywhere in the gospel to suggest that the author was ever an eyewitness to any of the events related.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:51 AM

Yes Donuel, we do. Ours are fast sleep on the sofa near the fire just now.
I find all the weird ceremonies and secret rituals of the Freemasons distasteful. Do you remember quite recently David Cameron admitted doing...er... some odd things with a pig's head in one of his 'secret societies'?
My great uncle was one (not a pig's head, I mean a Freemason) and he flatly refused ever to disclose what they got up to. Most mysterious.
The Old Boys' Network is pretty well-known for preferential treatment of members though.
I would prefer all decisions and policies to be public knowledge. Why not?

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:54 AM

it ain't necessarily so...the things that you're liable to read in the bible...

Remember the point of the Free masons was to be free of a divisive church and usher in enlightenment.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:54 AM

Matthew aside Steve, the quote, 'No man can serve two masters' is very apposite. One can't be loyal to two conflicting interests.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 09:56 AM

The Roman Catholic church though is quite clear that membership of the Masons is not compatible with Roman Catholicism.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:04 AM

Holding two opposing ideas at the same time? I think we can and do.
ex. I should .......but I better not (repeat)

Remember this is Earth - ANYTHING GOES.

CAN"T Always wins early in the race but eventually CAN wins in the end.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:08 AM

I suppose if grown men want to prance around wearing satin pinnies with one trouser leg rolled up, putting a dagger to someone's bare chest, doing fancy and bizarre handshakes etc. there's no law which says they cannot.
But any beneficial positions offered and accepted, any financial gains thereby achieved, any use of finances belonging in the public sector should all be openly declared and above board.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:10 AM

Holy Roman inquisitions were not compatible with early Masonic teachings either.

RESIST

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:10 AM

I won't argue with that sentiment. But I will challenge the claim that Matthew the gospel writer was an apostle. For a start, no name was originally attached to that gospel and there are quite a few other pointers to the probability that it was neither written by a bloke called Matthew nor by anyone who was a compatriot of Jesus (if there ever was a Jesus at all). There are lots of things in Matthew's gospel that I see the wisdom of, having said all that, and one or two things that I don't agree with. Had I been present for the Sermon on the Mount I might well have been an occasional heckler.

Anyway, today I've heard from masons on the wireless that they're fluffy bunnies really, just in it for the friendship, etc., and utterly harmless and not at all secretive. Yes they bare their breasts, even the very few girl ones, they roll up their trouser legs and they have a secret handshake (as do the Sicilian Mafia) and they give each other the third degree (to make sure they're not moles, presumably). But it's all just in fun and it's just tradition and they mean no harm.

Like hell.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:15 AM

Iains may have well have posted
'BOOgyman. Is it good or bad?

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:16 AM

Hahaha Steve, I have a mental picture of you standing there yelling out your dissent at poor Jesus' efforts to preach.
"Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth."
"Oh no they won't!"
"Oh yes they will!"
Very Monty Pythonesque!

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:21 AM

Why is it that every time Iains opens his mouth, someone jumps on him?

Not EVERY time. He has occasion flashes of reason. He's jumped - and rightly so- when he's being a troll and a prat.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 10:27 AM

I thought it was blessed are the cheese makers

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 11:24 AM

""Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth."
I think the enclosure acts kicked that idea into touch.
I wonder how many of the aristocratic landowners responsible for the many enclosure acts happened to be masons?

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 11:59 AM

I wonder how many of the aristocratic landowners responsible for the many enclosure acts happened to be Tories?? Or Catholics? Of southpaws?

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 12:21 PM

Don't tell Jim it was the Jews. ';^/

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 12:25 PM

Greg I see you take pride in betraying your total ignorance. Well done!

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 01:11 PM

I confess, it was the vegans. We also stole the grail.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: DMcG
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 01:24 PM

The Roman Catholic church though is quite clear that membership of the Masons is not compatible with Roman Catholicism

The situation is more complicated, In the days of the 'Penny Catechism' that was certainly the case. Then, quoting the Catholic Herald:
'the Code of Canon Law was reformed, following Vatican II, the canon specifically prohibiting Catholics from joining "Masonic societies" was revised. In the new code, promulgated in 1983 by St John Paul II, explicit mention of Freemasonry was dropped completely. The new Canon 1374 referred only to societies that "plot against the Church".'

The Catholic Herald article seems to be a bit stuck in the past (which is the norm for the paper), but is quite clear that the Roman Catholic Church no longer singles out freemasons as such.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 01:40 PM

Power freaks, who generally speaking join to get on in life, the problem is when freemasons are police force members[ it has happened] and they use their influence to pervert the course of justice

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 01:48 PM

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/police-reform-thwarted-by-masons-fdg3khrm3

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Peter the Squeezer
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 02:06 PM

From BBC news - quoting Dr David Staples, chief executive of the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE).


He told BBC Breakfast: "We're not a secretive society. Nepotism (and) corruption is not tolerated."

He added that the handshake used by members during ceremonies is "not secret" but, when he was asked to demonstrate it to viewers of BBC Breakfast, he declined, saying he had "promised" not to.



If it's neither sinister or corrupt, then why does it have to be so secretive?

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 02:34 PM

The secret handshake lies in Peter the squeezer's avatar name.

As I said "the Free Mason are progressive, lofty and Unitarian.
However in practice it is a good ol' boys club that will help cover up and/or correct mistakes made in career and domestic life. It is also used to protect their kids when they are wayward."

Comon guys they are not the Klan. Their whole idea is to have an Omni partisanship.

Why secretive? Simple. Things or knowledge people are denied or may not have, automatically makes them desirous.

In your case you have a secret you conceal but for a different reason than the Masons.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:06 PM

Greg I see you take pride in betraying your total ignorance.

Of the enclosures/inclosures, Inanes? Them as threw my forebears off the common lands and reduced them to poverty and sent the to the Americas?

Go back to quoting The Mythical Matthew.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:33 PM

For Greg. Proverbs 26:11

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:35 PM

Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do! We do!
Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do! We do!
Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg, a star?
We do! We do!
Who robs cave fish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do! We do!

Sing Along!

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Joe_F
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:37 PM

At any rate, some of them (such as Robert Burns & Rudyard Kipling) could write pretty good songs.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:50 PM

It is my understanding that many of America's Founding Fathers were Freemasons, including George Washington. Clearly a revolutionary movement.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:57 PM

White people have much in common with cave fish. We do.

You wanna join? nothin to it. jus rare back and do it. You will be unanimously voted in, in a very clever system.

You see there are ignorant people anywhere you go. Even they get a vote to let you join or not. If you get a secret black ball they have to vote again until they are all white balls. Between votes subtle teaching goes on. It took me 3 black balls before they got hungry enough to just let it go.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 04:12 PM

If you are really unpopular they will make you a sentry to keep you out of the meeting room. Inside it is a lot like Hogwarts.

I was a good sentry with duties like the Sargent of Arms for the Congress.

The sexist female version of the Masons are the Daughters of the Eastern Star.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 04:15 PM

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Joe_F - PM
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:37 PM

At any rate, some of them (such as Robert Burns & Rudyard Kipling) could write pretty good songs. well to be xact two of them , of course many people who were not freemasons wrote prety good songs

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 04:28 PM

Here is the rub, you have to be referred or invited to join. Asking can be the first step.
Leaving is as easy as deciding to stay home.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 08:25 PM

For Greg. Proverbs 26:11

Not surprising, Inanes, that you would have a close association and familiarity with vomit.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 04:13 AM

From: DMcG
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 01:24 PM

The Roman Catholic church though is quite clear that membership of the Masons is not compatible with Roman Catholicism

The situation is more complicated, In the days of the 'Penny Catechism' that was certainly the case. Then, quoting the Catholic Herald:
'the Code of Canon Law was reformed, following Vatican II, the canon specifically prohibiting Catholics from joining 'Masonic societies' was revised. In the new code, promulgated in 1983 by St John Paul II, explicit mention of Freemasonry was dropped completely. The new Canon 1374 referred only to societies that 'plot against the Church'.'

The Catholic Herald article seems to be a bit stuck in the past (which is the norm for the paper), but is quite clear that the Roman Catholic Church no longer singles out freemasons as such.

The same source makes clear that not mentioning Freemasonry explicitly was only so as not to limit the exclusion, not to change the stance on Freemasonry. From that source:

When the Code of Canon Law was reformed, following Vatican II, the canon specifically prohibiting Catholics from joining 'Masonic societies' was revised. In the new code, promulgated in 1983 by St John Paul II, explicit mention of Freemasonry was dropped completely. The new Canon 1374 referred only to societies that 'plot against the Church'. Many took this change to indicate that Freemasonry was no longer always bad in the eyes of the Church. In fact, the reforming committee made it clear that they meant not just Freemasons, but many other organisations; the 'plot' of its secularist agenda had spread so far beyond the lodges that to keep using the umbrella term 'Masonic' would be confusing. The then Cardinal Ratzinger issued an authoritative clarification of the new law in 1983, in which he made it clear that the new canon was phrased to encourage broader interpretation and application.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Senoufou
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 04:19 AM

It would have been simpler, then, merely to provide Catholics with a list of organisations they are forbidden to join. That would have made the situation perfectly clear to all.

Subject: RE: Freemasonry. Is it good or bad?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 04:36 AM

From: Senoufou - PM
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 04:19 AM

It would have been simpler, then, merely to provide Catholics with a list of organisations they are forbidden to join. That would have made the situation perfectly clear to all.

Good point. But then you would need to ensure that the list did include every organisation that should be excluded, and somehow allow for the possibility that new organisations might arise who could say "we're not on the banned list". Surely it is better to make clear that organisations are excluded if they espouse certain principles.

Cheers
Nigel