Talk:Rosicrucianism/Archive 1

message: In the point of view of the Spiritual Alchemy [1], the materia prima is the human soul, and about the athanor, it is constituted by the physical body and the subtle bodies; these last ones maintain the life of the most dense one and assure the connection with the soul. The laboratory is the human existence during which the soul has the possibility of accomplishing the learning needed to perfect itself, operating the transmutation of the vices and defects of the vil metal into spiritual, that is, into related virtues and qualities.
In his laboratory, the alchemist works on the materia prima and surrounds himself, among other tools to accomplish the operations, of a furnace with a peculiar form, called athanor.
Not quite sure exactly what this means. Tried to make it a little more gramanical. If I messed it up just put it back in. 
: - I think it is Ok, it is just to give a brief idea of the thought and conceptions conveyed in those manuscripts, at the time not easly accessible to external world understanding, maybe nowadays still not yet. Anyway, the Alchemy texts are a lot more hermetic than this one. ;)
If one abstracts from the symbolic associations of the rose and the cross which have been visioned by many since ancient epochs, it is known, as evidence, that in 1614, 1615 and 1616 there where published three treaties or manifestos, in German language, which gave rise to this movement:
: - Done: verb form "were" (published in those years).
Another point of similarty between the two groups was found, during the 18th century. The masonic circle "Gold und Rosenkreuzer" (Golden and Rosy Cross), published the Geheime Figuren or "The Secret Symbols of the 17th and 18th century Rosicrucians" in 1785 and 1788. This circle was developed along the masonic lines by Hermann Fictuld in 1777 who had important descendants in Russia. These descendants may have introduced Freemasonry and Martinisminto the region.
didn't even touch these
: - Done: rewrote (influence of this rosicrucisnist-masonic 18th century in middle Europe and Russia).
--Banana04131 01:41, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing Stuff

message: I added a rough list of things to do from the fac comments, etc.  Add to or edit the list as needed.  Strike out items as they are completed.  — RDF talk 04:08, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: - I consider them as done; however I left them as open, with the respective answer related to what was done, in order to whom made those points see if there is no objection. Should I mark them as 'Done'? --GalaazV 12:17, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you believe something is done, go ahead and mark it as done.  Someone else always can take responsibility for adding another "to do" item to the list. :-)  — RDF talk 12:40, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  - Good point! Done. :) --GalaazV 12:57, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Things to do

message: Is it worth noting that the rose and cross are symbolic of the female and male genitalia? 
Pmurray bigpond.com 04:53, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rosy Cross 

message: Am I the only one to think that this chapter may be exagerated ? Apparently, prior to the 17th century, there is no mention of the rosicrucian order. Ramon Llull for instance was known to be a christian with progressist ideas but he was a member of a known monastic order. The lack of evidence and the proeminence of very famous people in the list as well as their geographic dispersion makes me wonder if this paragraph is not just propaganda or even hot air.
----
I have just added some more :-)
But I also made it more precise by saying that some of these persons are just influences (all people who lived/published befor ethe 17th cent. cannot be considered rosicrucians, as the term was not coined yet - the manifestoes were not yet published). And in the end, you are right of course: this is mainly "hot air", as there was (probably) no real "rosicrucian order" at that time anyway.
memo 08:52, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famous persons considered to be Rosicrucianists 

message: User:Baphomet. is damaging Wikipedia: he his trying to label Religious articles as Superstition (from a POV view of positivism, that he calls Science). At the article Reincarnation he just went on to add to category "Superstition" and later on without discussion put a POV msg in the article. Please see the discussion page between both of us Talk:Reincarnation#Superstition.
Through the use of a Culture created by extremism in Science, he is clearly trying to do the job that the Inquisition did in the Middle Ages in a Culture created by extremism in Religion. He is damaging Wikipedia in a subtle invious way! 
: Please see also the Alert message I have created at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#September_4, Thank you! --GalaazV 20:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for your aid dealing with actions from a user against Religious, Spiritual and Esoteric articles 

message: Dear user Goblin, the article Fellowship of the Rosy Cross you purpose to be merged is POV about a modern group which is stated, and linked, already at the related Modern groups section: AMORC (which entitles themselves as the real Order; which is their own POV). If you'd like to merge it, you should do it into the article about this refered modern organization and not in the article about the Rosicrucian Order ("Rosicrucian") - legend, history, movement, 19th/20th century modern groups, etc. - presented in a NPOV way. Following this explanation I'm reverting the merge tag. Regards, --212.113.164.104 16:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fellowship of the Rosy Cross 

message: One being the lack of citations.  There's a 200 year discrepancy in the dating of the College of the Invisibles that isn't explained, but there seems to be solid proof that they were responsible for the movement, or si it is claimed.
Unintentional weaseling (i.e., vagueness) - "a lesser-known Masonic legend in literature"?  If its existence and content is known, why can't it be sourced any better than this? 
Also, some real factual issues and /or weaseling (probably also due to sourcing):  Why is it that the alchemical/hermetical Rosicrucian groups are called psuedo-Masonic, and the Christian ones are not, especially when the modern link is tenuous at best, and the split in interpretation was historical according to the article?  Colleges have degrees, but I don't see those societies being called "pseudo-collegiate".  It makes it look like the alchemical Rosicrucians are a bit sinister, while the Christians are OK, since they get glossed right ove when it comes to the section on Gnosticism and trans-Christians
Weaseling: Current-day Rosicrucianists (like modern Freemasons, who do not construct cathedrals anymore) direct their concentration toward the work of spiritual alchemy. --> Which is what exactly, since it's not explained, and what exactly is the relevance of Freemasons in particular to this?  Modern stonemasons don't build cathedrals anymore either.
Writing process: The "Rose Cross: Alchemy..." section has no lead-in whatsoever, and therefore doesn't make a lot of sense, and the last three paragraphs of the section have nothing to do with anything as it is written (it's spiritual alchemy, most likely, but there's no indicatrion).
I have a feeling, given the size of the source list, that all this problematical material exists as it has been written, but has simply not been attributed properly to an author and has instead been called a general statement, or simply has not been organized properly.
List of groups -- may violate WP not being a collection of lists, and also ascribes importance to certain groups over others.  It should probably get taken out, or at least only be minimal in coverage.  The people need to go, as they don't belong in a list of groups, and I will take them out. MSJapan 14:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rewritten it was 1. Donnot forget the words once applied by a Mason at heart toward the Masonic Legend: "Every mystic movement has its legend, which tells in symbolic language its status in the cosmic order and the ideal which it tries to realize" 2.  We may not quite understand it, yet, but as Shakespeare points out: "There are more things in heaven and earth... that are dreamt on your [the world] philosophy". Regards, my friend.  --Rosaecruz 19:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  There's some fundamental issues in this article... 

message: The article is pretty good, but I'm still unsure of exactly what kind philosophy and beliefs Rosecrucians (particularly, modern ones) tend to have.  From a personal standpoint I would like to know more about Rosecrucians because this article sparked a deep fascination for me.  I'm Catholic, and don't consider myself to be very 'mystical', but the idea of Rosecrucianism has piqued my interest. ChildeRolandofGilead 12:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome dear friend. Hope this required edition 1 may be helpfull. Regards, In Christian Fellowship. --Rosaecruz 19:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are there any Rosecrucians here? 

message: I find it very hard to believe all of those links are either necessary or have relevant information.  I'm going to start paring them down a bit once I read up a little more on how all these things interrelate. MSJapan 21:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also links... 

message: We've got some new additions to the page, which seem a bit problematic. Talking about most groups claiming lineal descent from the original rosicrucians:
:However, one of them did not claim such heritage and metioned to be a renaissance of the Order in the Western World.
Which one? It seems like a very pointed statement, but then it doesn't get explained. Then discussing the esoteric Christian movement:
:The esoteric Christian movement may be defined as representing a "rebirth" in the New World of the Rosicrucian Order, formed in the year 1313, and it states that it has the mission to prepare the whole wide world for a new phase in Religion, man's awareness of the inner worlds and development of the related subtle bodies, during the next six centuries toward the coming Age of Aquarius.
Several groups are mentioned as fitting into the category of esoteric Christian Rosicrucianism, but do they really all state their mission in these words? And how was the date 1313 arrived at, seeing as this predates both the Rosicrucian Manifestos and the discovery of the new world by Columbus! I don't suppose Leif Ericcson was a Rosicrucian? There's a lot of explaining to do here, or failing that, the article needs to be reverted back to a previous version.
Please remember that all information in Wikipedia needs to be verifiable. The best person to find the source documents needed for verification is generally the editor who first submits the information, seeing as they generally know where it comes from. Thanks, Fuzzypeg 00:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I've sourced the sentences. In order to understand more, we have to study deeper into the Mason Word and live the life needed to acquire the Second sight ! ;) --Rosaecruz 05:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, this encyclopedia has a policy of no original research. The submitted material will have to be removed. Fuzzypeg 21:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh my dear Friend, is this cold excuse originated in the same individual who once wrote the warm lovely inspired words: "Starting down this path is simple: just start practicing complete honesty, and try to always do good. It is a very long road (some say endless), but travelling along it is also an end in itself. This approach is vastly transformative - there is great joy, great sorrow, and constant learning."? Original or not, the "material" is sourced in human fellows, already gone into the Great Beyond, recognized to have been above the average in the occult field. Are you so eager to do the job that our all western civilization has been doing since its inception? Yes, the world does not look for Truth, because Truth shows to them the illusions the world lives in. Do what you have you to do; there was a time that those who did it had to carry blood in their own hands: Fortunatly, today it is little more than words, not lives anymore, taken by the wind (or the wire). If this is to be the case, my only deep sorrow is to have unveiled here, at the Free Encyclopedia, so peaceful and sacred Symbols to those who, by their own actions, proved not to be yet prepared to be acquainted with their presence. Oh great Shakespeare, how difficult is to all of us to understand the beautifull Truth you revealed to us all "All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players...". Regards, In Christian Fellowship --Rosaecruz 00:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, like it or not, the same policy that requires material to be sourced from something tangible is the same policy that prevents people from claiming nonsense like "Christian Rosicrucians are Satanist pagan baby-eaters" as truth without any proof provided. MSJapan 00:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The challenge here is to figure out how to use this tool (Wikipedia) properly. With each mode of communication there are things one can communicate and things one can't. Please don't see me as the Adversary here, or else remember that the Adversary is also the teacher, looked at another way, for he causes you to build better than before (Demon est Deus inversus). I doubt if what you had written would bring anyone any revelations – it read like a poorly-edited Wikipedia article and would most likely just make people distrust the whole article. We live in a world of forms, and these forms dictate the way people perceive things. Struggling to express spiritual truth through these forms can be terribly frustrating, however one can learn how to turn the forms of the mundane world towards spiritual effects. This is a fairly basic alchemical concept. Wikipedia, with its various policies and operating procedures, is merely another piece of alchemical apparatus for one who recognises it as such. It has its particular application, and can be powerful if used well, but if applied incorrectly will not yeild any useful results. Fuzzypeg 01:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where does this new info come from? 

message: I'm wondering why this article should be featured under a different language than english. Anyone? Zos 05:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article 

message: Some however know from first-hand, personal and familial experience that the Rosicrucians are very real. 
:Clearly the existance of Rosicrucians (or followers, or whatever) today is not disputed; the details of their existance in the 17th century are. Therefore either that sentence is useless or talking about those of the 17th century. No-one, of course, can have had first-hand  or personal (what's the difference?) experience with them then and still be around now, and familial experience is at best nothing more than hearsay. That sentence is therefore useless and POV, since it's sounding as though there's a lot of anecdotal evidence for them of people around today.
:Useless or just silly, I'm taking it out.
:fel64 23:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal Experience

message: Is this link acceptable for this article (link-owner):
Philosophy and fraternities (contains section on rosicrucianism):
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pvosta/pcrhum.htm
Pvosta 08:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, for the same reason that this link was not acceptable on Freemasonry or anywhere else on Wikipedia -- it violates WP:RS, and frankly, most of site is a links collection. MSJapan 23:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for clarifying things to a Wikipedia newbie. I apologize for the inconvenience caused by my Wikipedia guideline infringements. Pvosta 07:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link suggestion 

message: I rm'ed  "the Rosy Cross is found in rituals beyond Blue Lodge Freemasonry" for a few reasons:  one, it's weaselly and uncited; two, I can only think of its appearance in one place, and it is not associated with Rosicrucianism at all in that context, and to state otherwise requires interpretation that violates WP:OR; and three, appearance in one area in one country does not make a generalization like that valid, and lastly, it really makes no sense in context of the article. MSJapan 21:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Freemasonry reference 

message: There are huge similarities between the organisation and ideals of the Fraternity of the Rose Cross in the Manifestos and the original organisation and ideals of the Knights Templar when it was only nine rather penniless knights. Given the link between the use of the image of the Rose Cross by the Lisbon Templars this might have some credence behind it. The Portuguese Templars, along with the Scots Templars, were one of the branches which didn't get arrested and put on trial. The King of Portugal thought the charges were fake and found his Templars not guilty, no-one knows quite why the Scots Templars got away... ahem... Scot-free. :-) If there is a link between the Templars and the Rosicrucians it would make sense of the legend that Christian RC spent a lot of time in the Middle East talking to Arab mystics and doctors. The Templars were accused of spending a little too much time with the Sufis, as did St Francis of Assissi apparently. ThePeg 17:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rose Cross & the Templars

message: Has someone deleted all the See Also links? ThePeg 10:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See Alsos

message: The intro was reworded according to my best knowledge  (the English usage may need some tune up:) in an attempt to present to the reader the two main perspectives involved in current times, from 'inside' [as far as i was able] and from the outside, when trying to understand the immense Work of this Noble Order. I think most this data, if not all, can be factually documented in published works of individuals who tried also to analyze the Rosicrucian Tradition during the last centuries (some of those works are even in the literature reference section at the end of the article). Thank you for your attention and patience; Regards. --Lusitanian 02:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What was brought into here, by this little servant, under the ideal of a so much sought spirit of an universal friendship, is being rejected by those individuals so attached to the illusion of materialism dogma (see here, here and here); yet, dear reader, inside they all feel the Truth of these things in heaven and earth; still the majority of us sleeps... Once more at this time the friendly words of advice of Our Lord are brought into my mind: "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."... --Lusitanian 11:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: I think an extended listing is needed. The last one was erased without any justification. The one that is listed now is only a partial listing.
-Bill
Friday, 25 May 2007
:Frankly, I wouldn't list any at all.  Modern Rosicrucianism is so politically fragmented that it is ridiculous, and Wikipedia is not a collection of links.  Moreover, I did explain in my edit summary that one SRIA group is no more notable than any other.  See Wikipedia's external links policy for more details. MSJapan 01:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing of Rosicrucian Organizations 

message: This article opens, "The Rosicrucian Order is a legendary"... it can't be legendary if there are adherents. --194.176.105.40 13:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply not true. The original order is legendary and may not even have existed except on paper as manifestos. The subsequent orders calling themselves Rosicrucian are not the original legendary order. And please get an account if you wish to discuss further. IPSOS (talk) 22:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't be ridiculous and biteish. IPs are welcome to contribute to Wikipedia. --Dweller 21:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "legendary" 

message: Substituted at 15:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment