1. The religious requirement is belief in a supreme being, a single deity. I know Masons who are Catholic, Protestant, Greek Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and none of the above.
2. When a Mason takes his oaths, he can use the sacred text of his faith, whatever that may be. If he does not request a specific book, the default is the Christian Bible (I have the King James Bible I took my oaths on).
3. We are not nearly organized enough to dominate the world. Most lodges are too busy making sure they have enough food and beverages for their next meeting. Whenever I watch something like “National Treasure” I think, “If only.”
I tackled some of these themes today, thinking about Santa Claus as a myth but one with radical political potential. I'd be curious to know what you think of an approach like this Damir. I won't repost the whole damn argument here, but here's a link if you want it. I really appreciate the openness and freedom of all the conversations on Wisdom of Crowds. Ya'll discuss the stuff we're not supposed to, which is exactly why we should.
Great pod as always. I've been listening to you all for a long time. I always comment whenever Weber's view on Protestantism comes up. He was wrong :) Anyone who is descendant of the church historian Heiko Oberman has proved that. I'd suggest reading his works, specifically on the Protestants use of tradition. Protestants conceived of tradition differently than Catholics in the 16th Century. In fact, one could argue the polemics throw against each other were readings of the Church Fathers. My favorite chapter in Calvin's Institutes is on the Church as Mother where he is reading Scripture with Cyprian in a distinctly Protestant way. What was described as "Protestantism" I'd argue is more descendant of The Enlightenment. The Reformers saw the minister as the authorized ordained individual who taught the congregation to read Scripture well. I'm a minister in the Presbyterian church and always telling my congregation to be more children of the church (little "c") than The Enlightenment. The idea of "personal relationship with Jesus" comes into reception history from psychological readings of the bible. In fact, I'd argue Rudolph Bultman (20Th Century German Liberal) and Billy Graham basically read the bible the same way. Damir, I'd recommend you read Bruce Metzger and Bart Erhman's book on the text of the New Testament. It's a classic. Also, I'd challenge you to read Heiko Oberman's magisterial work Luther: A Man Between God and the Devil. I'd even buy you a copy for Christmas :) Cheers and sorry for the lame handle. I can't figure out how to change it. Merry Christmas Douglas Kortyna
As a Freemason, I can tell you:
1. The religious requirement is belief in a supreme being, a single deity. I know Masons who are Catholic, Protestant, Greek Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and none of the above.
2. When a Mason takes his oaths, he can use the sacred text of his faith, whatever that may be. If he does not request a specific book, the default is the Christian Bible (I have the King James Bible I took my oaths on).
3. We are not nearly organized enough to dominate the world. Most lodges are too busy making sure they have enough food and beverages for their next meeting. Whenever I watch something like “National Treasure” I think, “If only.”
I tackled some of these themes today, thinking about Santa Claus as a myth but one with radical political potential. I'd be curious to know what you think of an approach like this Damir. I won't repost the whole damn argument here, but here's a link if you want it. I really appreciate the openness and freedom of all the conversations on Wisdom of Crowds. Ya'll discuss the stuff we're not supposed to, which is exactly why we should.
https://platoforthemasses.substack.com/p/the-most-radical-christmas-movie
Great pod as always. I've been listening to you all for a long time. I always comment whenever Weber's view on Protestantism comes up. He was wrong :) Anyone who is descendant of the church historian Heiko Oberman has proved that. I'd suggest reading his works, specifically on the Protestants use of tradition. Protestants conceived of tradition differently than Catholics in the 16th Century. In fact, one could argue the polemics throw against each other were readings of the Church Fathers. My favorite chapter in Calvin's Institutes is on the Church as Mother where he is reading Scripture with Cyprian in a distinctly Protestant way. What was described as "Protestantism" I'd argue is more descendant of The Enlightenment. The Reformers saw the minister as the authorized ordained individual who taught the congregation to read Scripture well. I'm a minister in the Presbyterian church and always telling my congregation to be more children of the church (little "c") than The Enlightenment. The idea of "personal relationship with Jesus" comes into reception history from psychological readings of the bible. In fact, I'd argue Rudolph Bultman (20Th Century German Liberal) and Billy Graham basically read the bible the same way. Damir, I'd recommend you read Bruce Metzger and Bart Erhman's book on the text of the New Testament. It's a classic. Also, I'd challenge you to read Heiko Oberman's magisterial work Luther: A Man Between God and the Devil. I'd even buy you a copy for Christmas :) Cheers and sorry for the lame handle. I can't figure out how to change it. Merry Christmas Douglas Kortyna
Speaking of crazy, have you all considered Pentecostalism?