When speaking in a Masonic context, what is a secret? Are there differences between the “secrets of Freemasonry” and the “hidden mysteries of Freemasonry”?
Should “mysteries” have been typed as “Mysteries“? If so, how does that complicate things?
On this subject, opinions and views vary pretty wildly. I figured that, since I’ve now had this blog up and running for a couple of months, I should probably share my view on the matter. This does a couple of different things:
- It gives the readers some clarification regarding the set of guidelines I’m using when I decide what I can and cannot type.
- It sets boundaries for me and will help me to hold myself accountable in the future.
The second point is the more important of the two. If I don’t come out and establish a set of rules for myself, I’m certain it will lead to confusion down the road.
Here are the rules by which The Royal Art blog will be governed:
I will not reveal modes of recognition.
I will not divulge the intricacies or mechanisms of ritual.
If information is Monitorial, it is not bound to secrecy. Ergo, it is fair for use.
I may make reference to small bits of ritual here and there, but it is not to expose their workings to the general public. These references will be made so that concepts, symbolism, and themes can be explored.
My intent with this blog is to share those things I come across that are insightful to me or to communicate the individual threads I’ve been pulling. Occasionally, I’ll loosely tie them together, but I’m really trying to leave it up to the reader to weave them.
Most Masonic principles that sit clearly at the surface aren’t intended to be veiled in secrecy. You can find this sentiment in the writings of many Masonic authors. Truth is not a secret. Virtue is not a secret. Moral philosophy, perspective, and thoughts on our place within the Universe are not secrets. I intend to approach this blog in that same manner, and I hope to make some discoveries along the way.