There is a hidden meaning in the word Freemason itself. The official line is that Freemasonry originally came from the Mason guilds, a sort of Mason Trade Union. The problem is that this doesn’t account for all the religious symbolism and secrecy within Freemasonry. If we accept the possibility that Freemasonry didn’t come from the Mason guilds then why call it Freemasonry? If we look at ancient civilisations like ancient Egypt, a large amount of information of what we know about them comes from the stones they built their temples and pyramids. As well as from the carved statues and carved writings on the walls. The sister civilisation to ancient Egypt, Sumer and Mesopotamia, which existed at about the same time, we know far less about because they built in mud brick, which eroded away far quicker than stone. So the clear message is that if you want your knowledge to last to the distant future, then use stone. And the people who build in stone are masons. So the secret meaning of mason would be, “the keepers of ancient knowledge”. This is backed up by the fact that the original meaning of mason means, “one who persists”. But why did they call themselves Freemasons and not just Masons?
In the past knowledge was rigidly controlled by the rulers and the church. Any scholar that didn’t abide by the unwritten rules given out by the ruling elite could quickly find themselves both tortured and murdered. Even today scholars can find themselves unemployed if they give out knowledge or opinions that is unpopular with the establishment. So it is clear that ordinary scholars were not free to say what they want. As Henry Ford once famously said, “history is bunk” and the reason for this is what we know of history comes from heavy controlled and censored scholarship. The Freemasons were on the other hand are free from censorship only in the sense they belonged to a secret society and could communicate censored facts and beliefs to each other in secret.
Censorship of the Goddess is not about what happened in the distant past it is still going on in more recent times. When the first palaeontologists dug into Stone-Age sites they began to find images and statues of women. These were dismissed then as just fertility cult objects and simply discarded as being of no importance. It was only the interest in the art world that we know about these objects. Art collectors began to collect them but they were lost to science as no one made a note of where or how they were discovered. In more recent times with women being present on these excavations, this is not done so readily. Though it still goes on. In Israel archaeological excavations that are funded by either the Roman Catholic Church or the Jewish state, never find any evidence of Goddess worship. But excavations in Israel funded by universities find large amount of Goddess carvings in the homes of ordinary people. So what is going on? Do the archaeologists funded by the church or state censor or even destroy anything that suggests Goddess worship?
The possibility of the Christian Church censoring or destroying archaeological evidence can be seen with the Roman Catholic Church’s behaviour with the Dead Sea scrolls. When they were first discovered the Church quickly moved in and took control of the scrolls. Then they wouldn’t release them to scholars outside of the translators they had appointed to work on them. It was over 30 years before they were released under great pressure from other scholars. So what was the reason for this remarkable behaviour? Why didn’t the Roman Catholic Church want others to examine them? The obvious answer was that the Church needed time to censor or destroy any scroll that contradicted the teachings of the Church.
Archaeologists and scholars also have problems with Amazons. To most of the general public the stories of Amazons are myths. Yet what does the public not know is that archaeologists have found graves of female warriors all over Europe. Archaeologists claim that these finds are an “embarrassment”. Resulting in reports of female warriors graves not even getting into scientific journals. The only archaeologists that have publicly reported finding graves of Amazons is archaeologists from the old Soviet Union, where graves of female warriors were found in the Ukraine and Georgia.
So where does Freemasonry stand in all this? Probably on both sides of the fence. Freemasonry rituals have been censored as well. For instance Albert Pike in USA and the Duke of Sussex in Britain lead an internal revolution to get rid of many of the ancient rituals of Freemasonry because again they were to them an “embarrassment”. What were these rituals we now don’t know because according the Freemasons they all have been destroyed.
So it is hard to know what the majority of Freemasons know about the Goddess. It has been said by Masons themselves that many of the normal rank and file members do not bother to attend Mason meetings and just pay their dues and that is all. While others just use it as a gentleman’s club. So it is possible that the vast majority of Freemasons do not think about the Mason symbols, or if they do, are satisfied with superficial explanations.
Yet in the heart of Freemasonry is there still a Goddess organisation? We find there has been attempt by Masons and other people to bring to the general public ideas about the Golden age and Matriarchy. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-78) in his books, “Social Contract” and “Discourse on the Origin of Inequality among Men" tried to bring back interest in the ancient golden age. He also point out the natural goodness in all human beings and how the state and religious institutions that rule our society corrupted it. While in the mid 19th century the scholar called J.J Bachofen brought together all the evidence of matriarchy in ancient times then available, and very mildly suggested a matriarchal age in the past. He was strongly criticised for this by other scholars who dismissed and discredited his work. Yet in spite of this, his work was to inspire scholars like James Frazer who wrote his famous book, The Golden Bough, and more recently Joseph Campbell. It also influenced Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who publicly praised Bachofen's work. As well as the psychologist Carl Jung who developed from it the theory that the ancient Great Mother is a very important archetype in the collective unconscious. Other scholars in the early 20th century also wrote about matriarchy like Robert Briffault, who had pointed out that anthropologists were very biased in their field studies, as they assumed that in all the Stone-Age cultures they studied they were all male dominated. And ignored any evidence when this wasn’t the case. This didn’t go down well with the academic community and again he was very heavily criticised. Yet his work was to inspire the anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski who also found Stone Age communities they didn’t fit the “normal” patriarchal model. As did Margaret Mead who again was also criticised for making observations about societies that didn’t fit into the patriarchal norm. Another anthropologist Eva Meyerowitz was to find evidence of matriarchal rule in African tribes. While Evelyn Reed, in articles, lectures and her book, “Sexism and Science” was to savagery attack anthropologists for their sexual bias against women.
Jane Harrison another scholar also suggested matriarchy in ancient Greece, but managed to escape criticism by not being too explicit. Unlike Dr Margaret Murray a respected Egyptologist also received heavy criticism for writing that Witchcraft was an ancient Goddess religion that has survived up to the middle ages. The poet Robert Graves wrote his famous book, The White Goddess. Later on Erich Fromm brought together the works of Freud, Marx and Bachofen, where he pointed out that communism and socialism could only work in a matriarchy. Then on the wave of the Feminist movement of the 1960s and 70s Feminist scholars like Merlin Stone and Barbara G. Walker also continued to dig deep into ancient history to find more evidence of matriarchy in ancient times.
After the Second World War archaeologists started to make finds supporting the idea that there was a matriarchal age in the past. This evidence was again dismissed by academics but Feminist writers began to write about it. Like Elizabeth Gould Davis who was brave enough to directly claim that women did once rule the world, and Riane Eisler who kept strictly to Feminist dogma of equality.
It is doubtful if all these people were Freemasons, but it could be that some of them were and others were encouraged by them behind the scenes.
The problem is with any secret society in that passing down any secret knowledge over thousands of years is that every generation has the problem of finding people you can trust in the next generation. Over many generations mistakes will be made so that the knowledge will get in the hands of people who will not like what they have received and either destroy it, or hand it to the authorities, or not bother to pass it on. It could even be possible that the knowledge was destroyed and only the ancient symbols have survived. Or it could survive but be in the hands of people who believe this knowledge is too dangerous to give to the general public. It can even happen that a secret society can in time have the opposite agenda to the one they started off with. Freemasonry could of started off to preserve ancient secrets but many generations later some of its members may decide that the secrets need to be destroyed because they don’t agree with them. It means like any other organisation Freemasonry can change and evolve over many generations, and so may not have the aims as it did hundreds of years ago.
As already pointed out Freemasons in the past were greatly opposed to the Roman Catholic Church, and they were active supporters of Protestant Christian sects. Now there is a real mystery about how it was possible for Martin Luther, (1483-1546) to defy the powerful Roman Catholic Church and not either be imprisoned or executed. His great success in being able to start a breakaway Church suggests more was going on behind the scene than we read about in history. If could be he was getting help from secret organisations like Freemasonry or the Rosicrucians.
Then having successfully split Christianity down the middle Freemasonry then strongly supported science. (Most of the men in the scientific revolution in 17th century Britain were Freemasons). Science then became a tool for attacking all forms of Christianity. With Isaac Newton proving that the planets moved by scientific laws and not the hand of god as previously thought. Then later on Darwin showed how life on Earth could be created by evolution and not by God. The success of science has greatly undermined the power of the Christian religion over the people.
So is history censored to conceal a very secret Religious war, between an Ancient Goddess religion and patriarchal religions like Christianity and Islam? Was there also an open war between Goddess religions and patriarchal religions right up to the time of the beginning of Christianity and Islam? Then with the dominance of these two patriarchal religions the followers of the Goddess religions went underground. Surviving in organisations like the Knights Templar until they were also crushed. Then in the Middle Ages they tried to bring back Goddess worship through Witchcraft but was brutally and violently put down again by the Christian Church. So the Goddess religion went underground again creating another secret organisation the Freemasons. This time they set about trying to destroy the power of the Christian religion from within. When they were successful in this they were able to give more power to women in our society. Then with religious freedom and tolerance becoming possible in the 20th century Gerald Gardener a Freemason brought back Witchcraft, which since the 1950s has been one of the fastest growing religions in the world.
Freemasons have successfully infiltrated governments and positions of power all over the world. The power of Freemasonry can be seen during the Second World War. What is not well known is that wealthy people like Henry Ford funded the Nazi party from America. They claimed they done this because they feared a communist take over of Germany. Then when Hitler took power he not only attacked the Jews he also banned many organisations like Freemasonry.
When Hitler started his conquest of Europe he was probably confident that he wouldn’t get any interference from America because both the Republicans and Democratic parties made a promise to the American people not to get involve again in any European war. He probably was reasonable confident of not getting too much interference from Britain and France as well, because as was later discovered there were powerful pro-Nazi factions in the British and French governments. He also had a treaty with Stalin for non-interference in his quest to conquer Europe. When France fell to Hitler the majority of the British Parliament wanted to sue for peace. Had Britain done this, Hitler would be free to conquer the Soviet Union and Europe would become a Nazi empire. But somehow the then British Prime Minister Churchill managed to outmanoeuvre pro-Germany faction and appealed over their heads to the British People, to keep the war going.
Now Churchill was a Freemason but claimed he wasn’t an active member. Yet there is a clue to his beliefs in the following story. In Blenheim Place the place where he was born is a small building called Diana’s Temple and it was here he proposed to his wife. Now this can be dismissed as a silly romantic gesture but Wilson Churchill wasn’t like this. He was a very emotional man and an important ritual like proposing to his wife would have to fit in with his deepest beliefs. So was he a secret member of a Goddess religion?
Meanwhile in America Franklin Roosevelt had won the USA election. It was from the Roosevelt administration that the Freemasonry symbols appeared on American bank notes. Roosevelt came to power with a promise not to go to war, but he also knew that Hitler had a treaty with Japan and he used this treaty to bring America into the war.
Roosevelt provoked Japan as much as he could, to make it want to attack America. He imposed an oil embargo on Japan, who because they were fighting a war in China, was in danger of its military machine grinding to a halt, through a lack of fuel. The resulted was the attack on Pearl Harbour and the promise of Roosevelt not to go to war was forgotten. So Hitler not only found the British Empire continuing the war against him but the American superpower joining in as well. Which is very ironic as it was American money that helped make Nazism a major party in Germany. Hitler then found himself heavily outnumbered with no chance in winning the war.
So can we claim that it was the secret manoeuvrings of the Freemasons that brought about the downfall of the Nazi party? Why not, as we know Freemasons played a important role in the English Civil war of 17th century, the America War of Independence, the French Revolution and countless of revolutions in South America. It seems that very authoritarian governments like the Kingship of Charles 1, the French monarchy and the Nazi party are the enemies of Freemasonry.
The war between patriarchal religions and governments and the secret Goddess Religion can be charted throughout the 20th century. In the women’s movement we can see its success in the vote for women at the beginning of the 20th century. In Hollywood in the 1930 and 40s we see a large number of powerful women on the screen. Like Betty Davis, Joan Crawford, Mae West, Marlene Dietrich, Katharine Hepburn and Barbara Stanwyck, all becoming successful film stars and were referred to as “love Goddesses”. Some of the story lines were far ahead of their time in portraying strong women, and they became powerful role models for ordinary women. So what were these film producers in the 1930s and 40s doing promoting strong women?
Then a change came after the second world war, America was taken over by McCarthyism who not only attacked communism but women as well. At the beginning of the 1950s, women were encouraged by women's magazines and films to become more "feminine". Betty Friedan exposed this in her book "The Feminine Mystique" which helped create the women's Liberation Movement. The powerful female film stars in the 1950s found it harder to get film-roles and more passive women like Doris Day, Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe became the new female film stars. The film industry declined as fewer people wanted to see these passive women on screen. By the 1960s all major female stars were eclipsed by the male stars, some of them, like John Wayne, Sean Connery and Clint Eastwood playing extremely macho roles. In the 1970s-80s, more powerful female film and TV stars have reappeared like Barbara Streisand, Fay Dunaway, Sigourney Weaver and Roseanne Barr, but these women have had to fight hard to get film roles, while the very macho film stars like Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger had no trouble with this and money is thrown at them to make very big budget movies. Which surprisingly enough don’t make much of a profit. The macho stars are there to encourage males to be "real" men and to keep women in their place. Unfortunately, to keep their popularity, over the years these films have become more and more violent, encouraging young men who see them to be violent as well, as we can see in the growing rate of violent crime today.
In the beginning of the 21st century we are now finding more assertive women on the screen. Whether this is to do with the power of Feminists or the secret Goddess religion or both is hard to know. As Feminists have pointed out since the beginning of the 1980s there have been a backlash against Feminism. With Feminist legislation of the 1970s being repealed in the 1980s. With increasing right wing governments who have promoted, “family values” and waged a propaganda war against single mothers, so Feminists have had a hard time during the 1980s and 90s.
In the 1960s archaeologists discovered Catal Höyük and as I mentioned before the Turkish government soon had the site closed down when it discovered what was being found. After this it was like Catal Höyük didn’t exist, it was very hard to find any archaeologist book that would mention this excavation. Even though it was the oldest civilisation that was ever found. But now we see a change in the 1990s the excavation was reopened and now I find it is far easier to get information on this site. Recently I was to see the Catal Höyük mentioned on a science TV program and in a children’s history book. It even mentioned the fact the people of Catal Höyük worshipped the Mother Goddess without denigrating the Goddess as a fertility cult. So it seems after more than 30 years since it was first excavated Catal Höyük is now becoming, “respectable”.
Also now there was now a younger group of scientists who wasn’t so opposed to the theories of Marija Gimbutas. Richard Rudgley recently wrote two books and made a TV program called “The Secrets Of The Stone Age” that broadly supported Marija Gimbutas theories. So in recent years there are many people in the academic world who are now more accepting of the evidence that the first civilisations live in peace.
Richard Rudgeley comes straight to the point when he says, “The widely accepted view of the human story is wildly inaccurate.” He then goes on to point out that because historians have ignored what happen during the Neolithic age, it seems that to the general public that civilisations suddenly appeared out of no-where. Because we are taught that the people in the Stone Age were ignorant savages, who then suddenly created sophisticated civilisations like ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Because orthodox archaeology gives no explanation to the public of how this suddenly happened, in this vacuum people outside science have invented their own theories. Like Erich Von Daniken in his book “Chariot Of The Gods”, or the many theories of a lost continents like Atlantis, Mu and Lemuria.
The point he is trying to make is that if the general public was aware that Stone-Age people were not ignorant brutes and that civilisation didn’t start with the Egyptians or Sumerians, but thousands of years earlier in the Neolithic age. Then we would not need aliens from outer space or lost continents to explain how civilisation got started.
He explains that the first large stone structures were not built in the Nile Valley but in the island of Malta. When the first archaeologists first excavated the Temple complex of Malta they assumed it was a crude attempt to copy what was built in ancient Greece. Then when it was carbon dated it was found to be built 5,500 years ago. A thousand years older than the Great pyramid in Egypt. He then says that the comment of archaeologists hearing this news was that is was the wrong date in the wrong place. The reason apparently for this attitude for this is that Malta is off the beaten track. Which is strange because Malta is just off the coast of Italy and not that far from Ancient Greece and Egypt. A more plausible explanation is that the archaeologists didn’t want to know that Malta had the oldest freestanding stone buildings in the world, because the Temples in Malta are Goddess Temples, with Giant statues of the Great Mother.
Can it be, that the reason we have such a large gap in our history that Richard Rudgley complains about, is because it is an age when people clearly worshipped the Great Mother? As all the lost Civilisations that he writes about were all full of feminine images, it strongly suggests that this silence is simply male bias. In men who discovered these sites wanting males to be the ones who created the first civilisations and not women, or they’re more to this than that? Archaeology like most science is very expensive, so most archaeologists are either very rich individuals like they were in the 19th century, or they rely on funding from universities, governments or religious sects like the Roman Catholic Church. As in everything else in life, “he who pays the fiddler calls the tune”. Archaeologists finding the “wrong” things or advocating the “wrong” theories, in the eyes of the people who sponsor them, could have their funding cut off.
The First person to do a “scientific” excavation on Malta was a Jesuit priest called Father Emmanuel Magri in 1903. His form of excavation was to rub off paintings on the walls of the largest Goddess temple in Malta. Then to dig up the floor of the Temple and what he discovered there mysteriously disappeared. In other words, his work was to destroy the site for its archaeological value. This is not unusual. In the 19th century European explorers discovered in Zimbabwe an ancient city that was built by African kings between the 12 and 16th century. European archaeologists and treasure seekers then carelessly destroyed nearly evidence that it was Africans who built this city. Because of a theory that Zimbabwe was the lost King Solomon’s mine. They didn’t want to contemplate that Africans were able to create civilisations in the past, as it would undermine the right of European countries to colonise Africa, because the justification of colonialism at the time, was that they were civilising the people of this continent, whom were called savages.The times have changed all the efforts on the part of the establishment to return us to the “good old days” of patriarchy are failing. Women today are becoming even more assertive and ambitious. Already girls are out performing boys in school and university in western countries. This means that in the future it is more likely that the top jobs will go to women and not men, as young women today are better educated and better qualified than young men.
Yet “uppity” women, who don’t know their place, can still come under brutal attack as we can be seen in the death of Princess Diana.
The genius of Princess Diana was that she was able to portray herself in the media as a genuine caring and loving person. Something any politician or spin-doctor would give their right arm to have. Although she didn’t have any political power, in the way she was able to use and manipulate the media made her a very powerful person. And she was able to use this power to further her own agenda to create a more caring and loving world. Yet in so doing she was making an attack on the patriarchal society. Because once you give people that a loving caring world is possible then it undermines the power of the ruling elite. As it no longer become acceptable for a small minority of people to hold wealth of the world in their hands while other people live in desperate poverty.
From the very beginning when she became a royal she responded to people in a very caring way. Now this is not unusual with famous people in the media, but the difference was that she was able to put it across to the degree that people believed it was genuine. This made her from the start the most popular royal in the world. At first she was just content with this but then she was to learn a trick from another royal Princess Ann.
In the early 1980s there was a great famine in the Sudan, but the media ignored this famine so the people in the West were unaware of the millions of people dying of starvation in the Sahara desert region. Princess Ann as president of the Save The Children Fund visited Sudan and the media went with her as they wanted a story on the break up of her marriage. Then reporters personally saw the great suffering going on in the area. As the result of this visit, the media all over the world began to report on the famine and this in turn got the Band-Aid movement off the ground. As the result millions of pounds were donated to try and save the people in the area.
Princess Diana followed on doing the same as what Princess Ann had done but with far greater publicity. One of the most important acts she done was change people’s opinions on the Aids epidemic. When Aid first started to spread in the West people greatly feared it and believed that they could catch this disease by touching people with Aids. Also as it was mostly homosexual men who got Aids and this increased homophobia. Some Church followers were even suggesting that Aids was the way God was punishing deviants like homosexuals. The media in Britain was encouraging these stories and I can remember reading one scare story in the British newspaper suggesting that people could catch Aids from toilet seats, if a homosexual man sat there previously.
At the height of the homophobia frenzy whipped up by the British press, Princess Diana fearlessly met this hysteria head on. She visited a hospital with Aids patients inside and talked to and shook hands with patients dying of Aids. Pictures of her doing his was in the newspapers and on the TV and in one stroke she had given homosexual men Royal approval and had destroyed the myth that you could catch Aids by touching.
She was later to do the same with leprosy as in many part of the world people still believe it is possible to catch leprosy but touching a leper. She again appeared on TV touching shaking the hand of a leper and help overcome prejudice against people with this disease. Charitable organisations were finding that if Princess Diana took a active interest in support of them, she was able to generate large amounts of contributions for their cause. So they became very aware of her power to help the causes she believed in.
She also started to move into politics. In the 1980s in Britain there was high unemployment as well and an increasing number of homeless people living on the streets. The right-wing press in Britain was whipping up a hate campaign against unemployed people, claiming that they were scroungers and work-shy. Princess Diana showed the world clearly where her sympathies laid by again visiting and talking to homeless people. Though by this time the media was now wise to her tactics and wasn’t so keen on reporting her doing this. So she didn’t get the media coverage in this, which she normally expects. The British media also tried to start a hate campaign against Princess Diana but the newspapers who attempted to attack her found that they were unable to dent her popularity with the common people.
I personally do ask myself why British newspapers want to whip up hate campaigns against people like homosexuals during the Aids scare, the unemployed, Moslems and now it seems against asylum seekers. These campaigns of hate sound suspiciously like the hate campaign the Nazis mounted against the Jews.
She was to move more into politics towards the end of her life. Charitable organisations had for years campaigned against the production and use of land mines, but had never got anywhere with this. In all conflicts all over the world countless land mines were buried indiscriminately, then after the war the land mines are left in the ground with no one knowing were they were. So the civil population living in the area would continue to be killed and maimed by treading on these mines. (It is claimed that in recent years only 2% of the people who are kill and maimed by land mines are soldiers. 98% of deaths and injuries caused by land mines are civilians long after the war had finished.) Princess Diana then decided to get involved; in simply by visiting an area where land mines are been buried, she focused the world’s media on this problem and got governments all over the world to take notice.
She was warned by conservative politicians not to get involved in politics. She herself was to claim before she died that she feared she would be killed, and when it did happen the circumstances of her death suggested a government cover up. This has been covered in other books, TV programmes and articles where it strongly suggests that Diana was murdered by a professional hit squad. I am aware that many people do not want to believe this, as it suggests that Western Governments are far more corrupt than we like to believe. Yet the very suspicious deaths of John and Robert Kennedy as well as Martin Luther King, suggests that such things are possible.
She was a real danger to the ruling elite because she has somehow managed to tune into a powerful Goddess archetype. She was demonstrating the power of a compassionate and caring Goddess icon and this was a danger to all patriarchal political parties and religions.
We can see this through the great emotional effect of her death had on people, which was to surprise everyone. But thinking about it is not so surprising. We do live in a uncaring world, where selfish and corrupt industrial and political leaders are commonplace. Princess Diana was one of the few people in establishment who showed that she genuinely cared and loved people. The very large numbers of people that publicly mourned the death of Princess Diana gave a clear message to the politicians that the people wanted to live in a more caring world. This was picked up by the British Prime Minster who stated that people loved Diana because she genuinely cared. But he didn’t learn from this himself and his actions have since shown he is a normal selfish, uncaring and cynical politician.
In the past, patriarchy made no apology for its brutality and selfishness, today it can’t get away with this. Patriarchal leaders today have to attempt to justify their actions to the people and they way they do this is to claim they are doing their best in a difficult world. Princess Diana was either unconsciously or consciously leading a campaign that this wasn’t good enough. By her actions, she was whipping up strong emotions within the people that they wanted to live in a more caring world.
Another Women was the have the same effect before Princess Diana was Evita Peron. It would be easy to be cynical and say that she was only a mistress and later wife of a South American dictator. But the emotion effect she was to have on Argentina, the country where she was the first lady, shows she was more than this.
Like Princess Diana the political influence she had was very limited. But unlike any other politician she was able to show to the people that she genuinely cared. The people respond greatly to her and although she was unable to do a lot for the people of Argentina, the fact that she came across as a person who genuinely care about the people. Made her very popular. With her early death, again like Princess Diana, people showed clearly how they felt about her at her funeral. That gave a message to the politicians that people do want to live in a caring society. Something I’m afraid the Argentina politicians ignored.
The story of Evita Peron was given publicity by the stage musical Evita written by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice. The genius of this musical was it portrayed clearly the emotion effect Evita had on the people of Argentina. Unfortunately when it was make into a film the producers had little understanding of what the story was about. They put a pop star in the title role who didn’t have either the singing voice or acting ability to do justice to the music and lyrics.
So it seems there is a secret war with both sides fighting behind the scenes for power and control over governments, the media, religions and financial institutions. But the will of the common people also have a say in this, as well. In the West it is unlikely that the majority of people will accept any effort to push us back to the “good old days” of patriarchal values. It seems that the patriarchal forces have become more powerful since the beginning of the 1980s in that they have taken control of all mainstream political parties as well as the media in the West. But somehow they are still unable to change the will of the common people in wanting to return to good old fashion patriarchy.
Also there are signs that the people are restless. People are becoming disillusioned with politics because it is being realised that it doesn’t matter which political party you vote for, the policies of governments will be exactly the same. Also people are starting to be more informed of the stories that the mainstream media give little coverage. Like the third world debt problem that ensures that third world countries cannot climb out of poverty. The effect of globalisation is that gives power to international corporations and undermines the power of sovereign governments. Since the 1980s most countries in the world have scrapped Keynesian economics and adopted Monetarism instead. The result has been high unemployment; a world wide recession and the gap between rich and poor has slowly became greater.
Greater numbers of people are now protesting against this and there is revolution in the air, like we saw in the early 1960s. There is a powerful anti-capitalism movement now that is still growing in spite of the fact the mainstream media gives it not coverage whatsoever.
The problem today is that with the collapse of communism and with socialist political parties who have sold out completely, and have become new conservative parties. There isn’t any political party people can turn to that will change anything for the better. The same is true for religion, as all patriarchal religions can only offer people more of the same. The same very negative messages about human beings, which religions have been spouting for the last two thousand years. Surely the time has come for a religion based on a compassionate and caring Mother Goddess, or a matriarchal political party, where women can point out; men have done a really terrible job in ruling our world and it is about time women took over instead.
In recent years a few Masons have began to admit there is a Goddess within their movement. Robert Lomas a Mason author willing to write about the Goddess in his book, Turning The Hiram Key. Alan Butler in his book, The Goddess, The Grail And The Lodge is more explicit in saying that Freemasonry is a secret Goddess organization. Other authors are now saying similar things, like Graham Hancock and Robert Bauval in their book, Talisman where they claims that after the French Revolution, Robespierre attempted to replace Christianity with a religion based on the Goddess Isis. Many people today are getting introduced to these ideas through the great success of Dan Brown’s book, The DaVinci Code, which is a fictional version of the book, Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln. Through these books many people are learning about how important Mary Magdene was in early Christianity and how her role was later downgraded. Other authors are also touching on this subject like Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince in books like, The Templar Revelation.
So we can see the ways the Goddess is returning to consciousness, in recent years but it is still happening very slowly. Though whether Freemasons are united in wanting a Goddess religion and matriarchy to return is debatable. Many are very rich and powerful men and will not want to do anything to undermine their wealth and power.
