|
Post by paul on Feb 3, 2013 7:06:37 GMT 9.5
From what I have read it seems that the Operative Masons in 1700 had 7 degrees with 3 Grand Masters one of whom was ritually slain each year. The signs, grips and tokens of their lower degrees seem to have been very similar to those of the EA, FC and MMM. The Operatives were divided into square Masons, represented by the square, and arch Masons, represented by the compasses. Each degree had highly technical skills that needed to be demonstrated before progression.
Could it be that London speculatives post-1717 possessed a degraded form of operative Masonry?
|
|
|
Post by Desaguliers on Feb 3, 2013 14:49:54 GMT 9.5
Could it be that London speculatives post-1717 possessed a degraded form of operative Masonry? They were journeymen's lodges and they had what was appropriate to them. The changes of the 1720's were new to Freemasonry. They had nothing to do with earlier guild practices. It was this new form of Freemasonry which became popular among the wider public and which we continue.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 3, 2013 17:25:28 GMT 9.5
...The changes of the 1720's were new to Freemasonry. They had nothing to do with earlier guild practices. .... I don't know about guilds but from what I have read of the the degree structure and rituals of the Operatives they were/are more extensive with strong overlaps of the speculative and additional esoteric material not present in the speculative rituals. I particularly liked their having 3 GMs and ritually killing and replacing the most junior each year.
|
|
|
Post by Operatives on Feb 3, 2013 19:58:09 GMT 9.5
Do not confuse the rituals of The Worshipful Society of Free Masons, Rough Masons, Wallers, Slaters, Paviors, Plaisterers and Bricklayers, a.k.a. the Operatives, with those among historical operative stonemasons. The Operatives' ritual arose relatively recently among Speculative Freemasons attempting to selectively reconstruct guild practices which were beyond those with which the premier grand lodge was acquainted.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 3, 2013 20:11:38 GMT 9.5
I rather thought Harry Carr gave some details on Operative Masonry about 1700.
Even if operative ritual post dates 1717, it still contains esoteric knowledge not present in mainstream speculative Masonry as well as expanding on matters not very clear in speculative ritual.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 3, 2013 20:41:41 GMT 9.5
...The changes of the 1720's were new to Freemasonry. They had nothing to do with earlier guild practices. .... I particularly liked their having 3 GMs and ritually killing and replacing the most junior each year. I think I must have missed something ?
|
|
|
Post by Speculatives on Feb 3, 2013 21:00:28 GMT 9.5
I rather thought Harry Carr gave some details on Operative Masonry about 1700. Harry Carr was the chief proponent of a link between the operatives and speculatives. The trouble is there is no historical link between the two in England. For example The London Company of Masons still exists as a livery company and has never had any association with U.G.L.E. or its modern and antient predecessors.
|
|
|
Post by Speculatives on Feb 3, 2013 21:04:35 GMT 9.5
Even if operative ritual post dates 1717, it still contains esoteric knowledge not present in mainstream speculative Masonry as well as expanding on matters not very clear in speculative ritual. The point is that these so-called operatives are in reality speculatives. Many of the appendant orders expand on matters of craft ritual and introduce new material.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 4, 2013 7:21:33 GMT 9.5
>The point is that these so-called operatives are in reality speculatives.
So is the official position of the speculatives that there is nothing to be learned from operative ritual (or indeed any ritual outside speculative Masonry)?
I am reminded of one of the slogans from George Orwell.
|
|
|
Post by pointless on Feb 4, 2013 9:45:11 GMT 9.5
>The point is that these so-called operatives are in reality speculatives. So is the official position of the speculatives that there is nothing to be learned from operative ritual (or indeed any ritual outside speculative Masonry)? I am reminded of one of the slogans from George Orwell. You have again missed the point. The Worshipful Society of Free Masons, Rough Masons, Wallers, Slaters, Paviors, Plaisterers and Bricklayers are operatives in name only. It is a modern society of speculative masons.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 4, 2013 10:14:16 GMT 9.5
>The Worshipful Society of Free Masons, Rough Masons, Wallers, Slaters, Paviors, Plaisterers and Bricklayers are operatives in name only
Were they always operatives in name only?
Were there no operatives with ritual?
|
|
speculative operatives
Guest
|
Post by speculative operatives on Feb 4, 2013 12:48:40 GMT 9.5
[quote author=paul board=esoteric thread=929 post=16275 time=1359938656Were they always operatives in name only?[/quote] This lot have.
|
|
|
Post by category error on Feb 4, 2013 12:53:53 GMT 9.5
[quote author=paul board=esoteric thread=929 post=16268 time=1359928293So is the official position of the speculatives that there is nothing to be learned from operative ritual (or indeed any ritual outside speculative Masonry)?[/quote] As you well know there is no official position.
From operative ritual we learn about operative ritual. Not about the mysteries introduced in the 1720s.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 4, 2013 12:55:19 GMT 9.5
So what were the mysteries introduced in the 1720s?
|
|
|
Post by Pet subject on Feb 4, 2013 12:57:02 GMT 9.5
This is one of your favourite subjects. You tell us.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 4, 2013 13:29:15 GMT 9.5
I had thought from your authoritative statements that you would be better positioned than myself to give an account agreeable to the London brethren.
|
|
|
Post by Xenophanes on Feb 4, 2013 17:36:55 GMT 9.5
It is one of your favourite subjects. You will notice I have not touched on what the introduced mysteries are only on what they are not. To be blunt. I have no intention of encoding such pearls to you as it is principally YOU I consider unworthy of them. I say this because I have been taught it is improper to press such inquiries as you are doing. You and more often your fellow Admin. have occasionally touched upon some aspects of those mysteries here, but no sooner are they mentioned than they are overwhelmed by rubbish. "And even if by chance he were to utter the final Truth, he would himself not know it; for all is but a woven web of guesses."
|
|
|
Post by paul on Feb 5, 2013 7:50:36 GMT 9.5
You and more often your fellow Admin. have occasionally touched upon some aspects of those mysteries here, but no sooner are they mentioned than they are overwhelmed by rubbish. It is an occupational hazard
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 5, 2013 22:59:17 GMT 9.5
You and more often your fellow Admin. have occasionally touched upon some aspects of those mysteries here, but no sooner are they mentioned than they are overwhelmed by rubbish. It is an occupational hazard What occupation?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Feb 6, 2013 7:57:11 GMT 9.5
Running a forum.
Re the Mysteries ... our physical bodies are composed of invisible whirling masses of invisible atoms - nothing more. What we see as our body is a conglomerations of energy. Likewise, the Universe I assume. Stellar and planetary bodies are conglomerations of energy/force.
What happens when the natural flow of the energy/force of these star/planet bodies is interferred with? What happens when we disturb the natural flow of energy/force in our own bodies? Ill health and disease for starters.
Surely it is in our own interest and in the interest of others to promote well being ... order out of chaos. Ordo ab chao.
Or as we say in lodge "All is in order ... " It is only then that the Work of the lodge is able to proceed.
|
|