Talk:Freemasonry/Archive 8

message: DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 4 Nov 2005 and 9 Nov 2005.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.
Please add new archivals to Talk:Freemasonry/Archive_9. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you.--SarekOfVulcan 23:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

message: On Nov. 4 Nadim made the following addition to Cultural References:
 -* In the movie Braveheart, William Wallace refers to Freemasonry
 as the "secret society" bent on restoring Scottland to its
 independance. Robert the Bruce, and his father, were Freemasons.
On Nov. 5 Dreamguy deleted this addition. I would like the group to discuss the merits for deleting this paragraph as it appears relevent and factual. No explanation was given by the Editor who deleted it, so I am interested in his thinking on this.Call of Duty 07:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is that it's because the history of Freemasonry can only be reliably traced back to the founding of the UGLE (or the lodges that joined to create it.) William Wallace and Robert the Bruce significantly predate this. I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if this report is accurate as far at that goes.--SarekOfVulcan 08:19, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I also thought the Robert the Bruce as a Freemason was a bit curious, however with all the Rosslyn Castle/Knights Templar books out there at the moment, some apparently written by Masons, admittedly unorthodox Masons, it is easy to see how this idea could be included in a movie about Scotland. I think the Holy Blood, Holy Grail series of books written by Michael Baigent also put forth these sorts of theories regarding Freemasonry's Scottish/Templar origins. I see that Mr. Baigent is currently the editor of Freemasonry Today and even involved in a lawsuit with Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown over these sorts of theories. I realize that all of these writers do not speak for Freemasonry, but only for themselves. I also did not see the movie Braveheart so can't help much on whether Freemasonry/Robert the Bruce was mentioned in it, perhaps someone else can help us out here. If the reference was in fact made in the movie the paragraph should probably be included, although it could be reworded to reflect that it is only a cultural reference of Freemasonry, and not an actual accepted fact. Thank-you for your comments. Call of Duty 08:43, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Braveheart Reference 

message: I would be interested to know which current editors of this page are members of the Masonic Fraternity. Comments made by Vidkun, SarekOfVulcan, and MSJapan in Talk:Freemasonry#Two_types_of_Masonry.2C_ETC, and Jachin, GRYE in other paragraphs appear to imply that they are themselves current members. Thank-you.Call of Duty 07:55, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I'm a "mainstream" Mason.--SarekOfVulcan 08:19, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Ehyeh asher ehyeh.Jachin 12:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

text: WP:bite, WP:AGF--SarekOfVulcan 19:03, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, that's disappointing. But, hey, any excuse for a beer... planning on coming to Seattle soon? Lots of good brewpubs.--SarekOfVulcan 18:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I should do a bit of travel whilst on hiatus from my studies, it's been ages since I've seen the world.  Seven world tours under my belt, very few countries of good culture and history left to be seen, I guess it's about time I check out America.  :P  Then again, the US has about as much cultural and historic value as Australia, damn newborn countries, so boring.  :)Jachin 05:41, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point of View Query 

message: I removed Anti-clericalism from the bunch of anti-masonic links added by User:Call of Duty as allegations do not make for encyclopedic entry worthy instances, furthermore anti-clericalism does not have any citation of Freemasonry apart from a linkback in the 'see also' section.
Generally a see-also to a page that only incorporates that article in a see-also modus is considered moot.  Jachin 12:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for support of evidence, I noted the same lack of any sort of relation between anti-clericalism and Freemasonry here, because the same section appears in full in Anti-Freemasonry, and makes little to no sense in context there, either.  I think the assumption by critics is that "anti-clericalism means against Christianity, and Freemasonry is against Christianity, so Fremasonry has a lot to do with anti-clericalism", but it's just speculation on my part, in the same vein as that section of the article. MSJapan 17:15, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Anti-Clericalism is one of the principal criticisms, if not the principal criticism, of Freemasonry by the Roman Catholic Church. There is a section on it in the Anti-Freemasonry page, a summary of which I placed into the criticisms section on this page. The link at the bottom of this page to the Catholic Encyclopedia will provide readers with additional information if they are interested.Call of Duty 23:33, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There may be a criticism, but it appears not to have any basis in fact as part of the movement; no other source besides the Catholic Encyclopedia seems to lend any credence to the association of Freemasons with anti-clericalism, so it would seem to me that it would be better served as a subsection of "Criticisms of Freemasonry by the Roman Catholic Church".  I guess what really concerns me most is that a generalization is being made based on an unsourced opinion, regardless of the fact that the supporting quote only seems to apply to one country (France) for a limited amount of time (Third Republic), and furthermore that the generalization is being made based on a position that was purported to have been taken almost two centuries ago.  What was liberal then would be considered conservative now.  Therefore, I think more work is necessary on this section in both articles to put everything into its proper perspective. MSJapan 23:48, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The section is entitled criticism of Freemasonry. Anti-clericalism is a central criticism of Freemasonry. The Catholic Encyclopedia is an official and approved document of the Roman Catholic Church, and is certainly not a "generalization" or an "unsourced opinion". Your descriptions of what anti-clericalism is or what the Roman Catholic Church's criticism is in regard to anti-clericalism is unsourced, in fact I have never seen it so described before. Please provide a citation for your description, I would very much like to read it. Thank-you.Call of Duty 00:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not saying anything new; it's in the articles themselves (anti-clericalism and the sections on the Freemasonry and Anti- pages).  On the two Masonry articles, it states that "Freemasonry was associated with 19th century bourgeois liberalism", but never connects it to the anti-clericalism as such in a factual manner (As a note, that section has never been edited, and is in its original form as posted, AFAIK).  The only conclusion that can be drawn from those sections is that Freemasonry may or may not have been involved in anticlericalism in France during the time of the Third Republic.  That is far too specific a time and place to support the association with either bourgeois liberalism or anti-clericalism in any general sense (which seems to be the intent), nor do I think it was Freemasonry alone that was associated with it (I don't think the current Pope would feel he had to rechristianize Europe if there wasn't already some opposition to it historically). Also, given the various reports as links, it might be better to rewrite the Masonry article anticlericalism sections such that they pertain to more wide-ranging criticisms, rather than just a single time and place.  Basically, without passing judgment on the argument at all, the sources do not support the statement that is intended, and the section needs to be rewritten to make a statement that *is* supported by the sources. MSJapan 01:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well we, or someone, could go through the Catholic material pertaining to their position on Freemasonry and Anti-Clericalism. The Catholic Enycyclopedia is a good place to start, but there are others. From what I know about the subject I think the description contained on the anti-freemasonry page is a reasonable one. Maybe it could be better, maybe the reference to bourgoise liberalism is a little quirky, not so sure exactly what bourgoise liberalism is in any event. The basics of anti-clericalism are laws restricting Church property, public displays or processions of religious, nationalization of church schools, monastaries, murdering of priests and nuns, etc.. Mexico, France, and Russia did a pretty thorough job there. Portugal and Spain under the Republicans tried it but only managed to murder 9,000 priests before Franco and Salazar defeated them. However I think we only need a three or four sentences in a summary. The Kulturkampf in Bismarkian Prussia and Germany could also be mentioned. Masonic politicians from the Grand Orient were all involved in these events. The Grand Orients in Europe issued documents on what they intended to do to the Church, so it is no conspiracy theory, just basic european history.Call of Duty 02:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, if the documentation is there, but that points out a major flaw in the paragraph, and that being that while the charge doesn't appear to apply to countries outside Europe, it is not clarified as such (this is actually the reverse of a point made earlier about the Freemasonry article being too US-centric).  The other need for documentation is because a single member does not speak for the organization as a whole, and thus there is a big difference between a personal position taken by a man who is a Mason, and a position taken by a Masonic jurisdiction, neither of which points to legitimate criticism of Masonry worldwide as a general statement. MSJapan 04:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Anti-clericalism]]

message: Citation as requested, you may go through the various church's.
All of the Church's mentioned in the para rewrite have issued formal pastoral letters on Freemasonry.
00:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that's helpful. The sources may have been misguided, but the charge was leveled as you said.--SarekOfVulcan 00:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism by various church's of syncretism in Freemasonry