And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.
This is why the apron made of skin is important. It was given to us by God Himself. There is no higher honor than we, as spiritual beings, received the skin garment to experience human life. And not only receive it but to live a fully life, because there is no higher honor than to be called a Man (not in the gender meaning, but as Mankind).
Your reference to the Universities Presidents was reassuring! I also find it hard to understand that in this current times the definitions of what is a man, and what is a woman, male or female is so hard to explain. When being in the world around us seems a bit confusing (whacky); being in Lodge is a good place to confirm my moral compass!
I fear that in our society today we are idolizing the wrong people, and that is driving us away from what is important. We should be seeking to emulate those who quietly work to make the world around them into a better place, but I fear that we are in far too many cases, looking instead to those who make the biggest 'splash.'
These scholarly institution can teach and provide erudition but a little short on everyday nous. In Gnostic cosmotheology and Neoplatinism, nous was the first emanation of God. This is one of many things that can be recieved from within vs without.
It seems that they have, over the course of decades, created echo chambers within these institutions, where true challenge never happens. The lack of that challenge of course works against self reflection.
As Fracis Bacon once said, many teachers are orators of empty rhetoric rather than teachers of factual scientific information based on proven theory. Bacon also points out that all teaching is acquired knowledge from God, and that we should seek knowledge (Gnosis) in wisdom and reason (Nous), turning to religion and emphasizing that acquired knowledge is called wisdom and reason according to the scriptures. There, perhaps these institutional presidents mentioned in your article may have learned about what it means and significance regarding the intent of the heart. It's been dually noted that the American educational system is flawed- being one example found in operation varsity blues.
Like you, those words "Live Respected and Die Regretted" have been my north star ever since first becoming a Mason and hearing them reverently spoken. I can't think of a better description or goal for a Freemason.
I want to preface this commentary by stating that I agree with you so far as calling for genocide is despicable and seemingly defending it at prestigious institutes of higher learning doesn't sit right with me either.
At the same time, however, I recall several years ago when colleges where then under fire for doing the exact opposite of what you're damning here and censoring this type of speech by disinviting speakers who were affiliated with and/or espoused opinions of neo-Naziism, white supremacy, and anti-Semitism because they were "stifling free speech on college campuses" and "creating safe spaces when that shouldn't be a thing on college campuses" and etc.
So my question to the wider populace is which way do we want it? Do we want these institutions putting their collective foot down and censoring hate speech or don't we? If so, who decides what gets censored. Should speakers get to say whatever they want but not students? What topics are off limits? What opinions cross the line?
It's an age-old problem and I don't have a good answer because while I wholeheartedly believe we must have freedom of speech to be a free society I also don't believe we should allow hate speech of any type anywhere near our institutions and while I've tried to keep this apolitical I also question why a certain segment of the political spectrum was fighting against "censorship" before but is now arguing for it.
Lastly, is it fair to these University presidents to call for their heads, call them amoral or immoral, for, essentially, towing the line for free speech on college campuses? I'm not sure about that either.
Thanks for this comment, it is fun, and I appreciate it!
In fact, given your turn of phrase, I had to interrupt my time working magic in my basement chamber to subscribe to your new Substack.
Genesis 3:21
And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.
This is why the apron made of skin is important. It was given to us by God Himself. There is no higher honor than we, as spiritual beings, received the skin garment to experience human life. And not only receive it but to live a fully life, because there is no higher honor than to be called a Man (not in the gender meaning, but as Mankind).
This is an interesting perspective that I'd not considered. Thank you!
Only if it means the same to the new Brother
Yes, I agree, 100%.
Your reference to the Universities Presidents was reassuring! I also find it hard to understand that in this current times the definitions of what is a man, and what is a woman, male or female is so hard to explain. When being in the world around us seems a bit confusing (whacky); being in Lodge is a good place to confirm my moral compass!
I fear that in our society today we are idolizing the wrong people, and that is driving us away from what is important. We should be seeking to emulate those who quietly work to make the world around them into a better place, but I fear that we are in far too many cases, looking instead to those who make the biggest 'splash.'
These scholarly institution can teach and provide erudition but a little short on everyday nous. In Gnostic cosmotheology and Neoplatinism, nous was the first emanation of God. This is one of many things that can be recieved from within vs without.
It seems that they have, over the course of decades, created echo chambers within these institutions, where true challenge never happens. The lack of that challenge of course works against self reflection.
As Fracis Bacon once said, many teachers are orators of empty rhetoric rather than teachers of factual scientific information based on proven theory. Bacon also points out that all teaching is acquired knowledge from God, and that we should seek knowledge (Gnosis) in wisdom and reason (Nous), turning to religion and emphasizing that acquired knowledge is called wisdom and reason according to the scriptures. There, perhaps these institutional presidents mentioned in your article may have learned about what it means and significance regarding the intent of the heart. It's been dually noted that the American educational system is flawed- being one example found in operation varsity blues.
"Realize that being a good man and true, a man who *lives respected and dies regretted* is all that is important."
--Words so important that I have them tattooed on my arm. Memento Mori within the S&C and "Live Respected Die Regretted" are my only masonic tattoos.
Like you, those words "Live Respected and Die Regretted" have been my north star ever since first becoming a Mason and hearing them reverently spoken. I can't think of a better description or goal for a Freemason.
Thank you so much for this essay! Very valuable thoughts. I'm glad I could read it.
Thank you Brother! I appreciate your kind thoughts.
I want to preface this commentary by stating that I agree with you so far as calling for genocide is despicable and seemingly defending it at prestigious institutes of higher learning doesn't sit right with me either.
At the same time, however, I recall several years ago when colleges where then under fire for doing the exact opposite of what you're damning here and censoring this type of speech by disinviting speakers who were affiliated with and/or espoused opinions of neo-Naziism, white supremacy, and anti-Semitism because they were "stifling free speech on college campuses" and "creating safe spaces when that shouldn't be a thing on college campuses" and etc.
So my question to the wider populace is which way do we want it? Do we want these institutions putting their collective foot down and censoring hate speech or don't we? If so, who decides what gets censored. Should speakers get to say whatever they want but not students? What topics are off limits? What opinions cross the line?
It's an age-old problem and I don't have a good answer because while I wholeheartedly believe we must have freedom of speech to be a free society I also don't believe we should allow hate speech of any type anywhere near our institutions and while I've tried to keep this apolitical I also question why a certain segment of the political spectrum was fighting against "censorship" before but is now arguing for it.
Lastly, is it fair to these University presidents to call for their heads, call them amoral or immoral, for, essentially, towing the line for free speech on college campuses? I'm not sure about that either.