The Builder Magazine 

September 1922 - Volume VIII - Number 9 


George W. Baird - A Tribute 

BY THE EDITOR 

SOMEWHERE in the back of my mind there lives a little poem that a traveling-man 
recited to me more than twenty years ago. I am afraid I shall stray far from the original 
of the simple little lines; but as I recall them now they mn something like this: 


"A rose to the living is more 
Ere the suffering spirit has fled, 

A rose to the living is more 

Than sumptuous wreaths to the dead." 


It matters not that the rendering may be far off the track, for the sentiment is preserved, 
which in these connections is the principal thing, and it is this sentiment that has 
inspired me to write a little memorial to Brother George W. Baird who has so firmly 
established himself in THE BUILDER'S great family of readers by his series on 
Memorials to Great Men Who Were Masons. This now famous series began in the first 
volume of THE BUILDER with an article on Masonic Memorials, which appeared in 
the July issue. It was followed by a second on Benjamin Franklin; and so it all began. 


The more discerning readers have long ere this discovered the inner importance of this 
series of articles. Oftentimes the greatest career transmits nothing of itself to posterity 
save a gravestone; by that slender thread the living must keep hold of the noble dead. 
But what if some group of persons, for reasons of their own, begin to cut these threads? 
Confusion is introduced into history. It becomes necessary to preserve memorials in 



books which are more enduring than stones and brasses. There are mans in our land 
who would like to forget that many of our forefathers were square-and-compass men; 
they would like the world to forget it. Brother Baird has forestalled them. Gravestones 
in New England graveyards may crumble into indistinguishable dust; the memorials 
preserved in THE BUILDER will be consulted by historians generations hence. To 
Brother Baird the Masonic Fraternity is heavily indebted for the toil he has bestowed, 
and with no thought of reward, upon this task of preserving the memory of Masons. 


George W. Baird (for portrait see frontispiece) was bom in Washington, D.C. on April 
22, 1843, which was a long while ago. John Tyler was president. It was the year in 
which Daniel O'Connell was arrested. It was one year after mbber first came into use. It 
was at the time when Dr. Long of Georgia first began to administer ether as an 
ansesthetic. For those who enjoy a bit of sly humor in their history it may be also said 
that it was one year before Ronge led his great defection from the Roman Catholic 
church and founded in Germany his new brand of it, the German Catholic Church. 
Those were stirring times, and he was a wise baby who chose such a year for his advent 
into this exciting world. 


HIS ANCESTRY 


His father was Matthew Baird, a steamship engineer and machinist who, in 1 829, fitted 
and installed the machine work on the first passenger locomotive that ever turned a 
wheel on this continent. His grandfather was also a Matthew Baird, bom of Scotch 
parents - be it noted - in Ulster, which is one of the counties of Ireland. This 
grandfather helped to draw the plans for the Executive Mansion, otherwise known as 
the White House; and he modelled the first composite column of the Capitol; and also 
did the same for the City Hall at New York. It all goes to prove that once in a while 
genius may be inherited. On the mother's side the family came from Virginia where, for 
ten generations, they had taken part in the important political, military and religious 
activities of the Old Dominion. 


After receiving his elementary education in public and private schools at Washington, 
D.C., Brother Baird was apprenticed to a printer, and later to a machinist. At nineteen 



he entered the Navy as an engineer. When the Civil War broke out he was ready to take 
a man's part. He served on the Mississippi, Calhoun, Kensington, and Pensacola, and 
was under fire more than twenty times but escaped with a whole skin, thus disproving 
Wordsworth who said the good die young. Having a genius for mechanical work he 
was detailed for duty under the famous engineer B.F. Irishwood in the Bureau of Steam 
Engineering. He accompanied Irishwood to California in 1869 and served at the Mare 
Island Yard. While on the Pacific he also served on board the Saranac and the 
Pensacola, visiting the while almost every port from Sitka to Talcahuna. For three years 
he worked on the designs of new vessels and left behind him many a now-familiar 
invention, as will be described later. He was serving on board the Vandalia when 
General Grant made his famous cruise to Cairo, where he lived in the Cal-al-noussa 
palace. If you wish to learn more about this notable trip read the excellent account by 
John Russell Young. 


After his return to the United States Brother Baird was detailed to supervise the 
construction of the deep-sea exploring ship, the Albatross, and designed most of the 
special machinery on that vessel which made such a name for itself in marine science. 
The Albatross brought out of the depths of the ocean more genera and species of 
marine life during her first year than all previous deep-sea explorations combined. She 
was the first government vessel of any nation to utilize the incandescent lamp. 


Among inventions and scientific achievements to his credit may be noted the 
following: the Baird distilling apparatus; the pneumatic tell-tale; the evaporator; and 
boiler- feeder. His experiments on the mechanical ventilation of ships began in 1864 
and reports were published in the Journal of the Naval Institute; many of these devices 
were adopted. He was a member of the board that powered the gun shops at 
Washington. He has written much for magazines: see the Franklin Institute for the 
absorption of gases by water; Science, on electric lighting, etc. The French Academy 
gave him the credit for being the first to prove, by mathematics, the actual flight of the 
flying fish, Exocetus Robustus. He designed the first anchor engine used in the navy. 


He was a charter member of the American Society of Naval Architects and Marine 
Engineers, and of the Washington Society of Engineers. He is a member of the 
Biological Society; the Washington Academy of Sciences; and the National 
Geographic Society. He is Past President of the District of Columbia Society of the 



Sons of the American Revolution, and Past Vice President of the general Society of the 
same: a member of the St. Andrews Society, which is Scotch; the John Paul Jones 
Club; the Cosmos Club, etc. 


HIS MASONIC CAREER 


Brother Baird was made a Mason in a French lodge at Lisbon, Portugal, in 1867; he 
affiliated with Naval Lodge No. 87 in California, and later with Hope, in Washington, 
D.C., of which he is a past master. He was made Grand Master in 1896; and in recent 
years has been Chairman of the Committee on Correspondence, his reports of which 
are full of information and unexpected turns, and are read with delight by all the 
members of the Round Table of Reporters. He is past High Priest of Washington 
Chapter; was knighted in Washington Commandery; is a member of all the Scottish 
Rite bodies; and was made a 33rd degree man in Albert Pike Consistory in 1893. He 
has been a member of the National Masonic Research Society from the beginning, and 
was formerly a member of the Correspondence Circle of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge 
of London, England. Needless to say, he has also traversed the sands, which journey he 
made in Almas Temple. 


After the Spanish- American War, when steam had succeeded sails as a propulsive 
power, the "Line" of the Navy and the officers of the Engineer Corps were 
"amalgamated" and Brother Baird was transferred to the Line as a commander but 
much against his wishes. He served as commander and as captain, and when he retired 
was promoted to the rank of Rear Admiral, in honor of the services he performed 
during the Civil War. 


Brother Baird has the habit of illustrating his letters, of which he writes the most 
refreshing specimens, with original cartoons done in colored ink. Upon writing this 
little sketch to express to him the appreciation felt by the members of The National 
Masonic Research Society for his long continued services, I besought him to furnish 
me with a page of these cartoons illustrating himself; but he asked to be excused on the 
ground of advancing age, rheumatism, and a sick wife. To the sick wife we send our 
sympathies; for the rheumatism we extend our regrets; but as to the old age we all 



demur. Brother Baird, for all his 79 years, does not age, but, like his Masonic 
colleague, Chauncey Depew, refuses to capitulate to Father Time. Active as ever, eager 
in all good causes, he writes many little articles for the general press on Masonry and 
Patriotism, the two of which are fused together in his mind as they should be in every 
mind, and sows these about the country. May he keep at the good work for years to 
come! Age cannot wither or custom stale his infinite variety 1 


— o — 


If you wish to get on, you must do so as you would get through a crowd to a gate all are 
equally anxious to reach. Hold your ground and push hard. - Montague. 


— o — 


THE EGYPTIAN INFLUENCE ON OUR MASONIC CEREMONIAL AND 
RITUAL 


BY BRO. THOMAS ROSS, P.G.M., NEW ZEALAND 


PARTI 


FOREWORD 


BEFORE centering on my subject I think it would be as well if I made it quite clear 
that whatever antiquity may be urged for our ceremonies and ritual, our signs, words 
and tokens, there can be no question that shortly after the formation of the three 



Grand Lodges in the early part of the eighteenth century our ritual, with all that is 
attached to it, was much as we have it today. When I therefore enter on the object of 
endeavouring to prove that much of that ritual has an Egyptian origin I want the 
brethren to know that it was not until the year 1820, or quite 100 years after the 
formation of the three Grand Lodges, before there was anything like an earnest 
attempt made to read the hieroglyphics or sacred Writings of Egypt, while it was 
quite another fifty years before the Book of the Dead was deciphered and given to the 
world by Lepsius Wilkinson, Naville, Petrie, Wallace Budge and other enthusiastic 
Egyptologists. 


The reading of the hieroglyphics or sacred writings was for centuries before the 
Christian era confined to the priests of Egypt, and was called by themselves the 
writing of the priests, so that when Christianity became the dominant religion in 
Egypt the old worship became obsolete the priests died out, and the knowledge and 
practice of the priestly writings went completely out of use, was neglected, forgotten, 
and for a period of 1500 years utterly unknown to the world. 


Egyptology, or the science of studying the ancient language, history and religion from 
the hieroglyphics, is a thing of almost yesterday, and may be looked upon as one of 
the most romantic episodes in the domain of literature. 


Most of you are conversant with the history of the finding of the Rosetta Stone by a 
French officer of artillery in 1798 in Rosetta, on the coast of Egypt. This stone is of 
black basalt, and is one of the most treasured relics in the Egyptian galleries in the 
British Museum, being the key that unlocks the mysteries of the Egyptian writings. 


The Rosetta Stone is a monumental slab or tablet set up as a record of the 
benefactions of Ptolemy V, a king of Egypt about 195 B.C.; it contains fourteen lines 
of hieroglyphics, thirty-two lines of Demotic, and fifty- four of Greek, coming in that 
order from the top. The Greek text was easily read, a translation being published in 
1801-2. Since it stated that the monument was a bilingual one (the writing of the 
priests and the writing of the books being the Egyptian identical with the writing of 



the Greeks) men of letters set themselves the task of trying to decipher the 
hieroglyphics. 


In the years 1819 to 1822 Mr. Thomas Young, an Englishman, and M. Champollion, 
a Frenchman, stated that these characters, which were generally looked upon as 
picture-writing, were letters of an alphabetic or phonetic value. Certain characters, as 
may be seen in the hieroglyphic part of the stone, were written in cartouches or 
cartridge-shaped enclosures, and these cartouches recurred in the Greek text under the 
name of Ptolemy. Eventually such names as Ptolemy, Berenice and Cleopatra were 
spelt out, and thus a key was obtained, which enabled them to unlock the secret of 
reading the records of the priests of Egypt. 


In the latter half of the last century Ernest Renan, the celebrated French water, truly 
said: "Egypt remains a lighthouse in the profound darkness of antiquity." One would 
almost think the compilers of our ritual had these words in mind when we read in our 
lectures: "The usages and customs of Freemasonry, our signs and symbols, our rites 
and ceremonies, correspond in a great degree with the mysteries of ancient Egypt." 
An assertion such as this would naturally lead one to expect in working the several 
degrees some reference or some allusion to the religion and mysteries of Egypt as the 
origin of some part at any rate of our ritual. 


On the contrary however, nearly the whole of our ceremonial is attributed to episodes 
in the life of some member of the Jewish race as narrated in the Holy Scriptures, 
while almost all our words and passwords are given as being derived from the same 
source. Not a single one of the signs, tokens or words are pointed out as 
corresponding with those used in the religion or mysteries of ancient Egypt. It will be 
my endeavour to show the brethren wherein much of our ceremonies correspond with 
the religion of Egypt, and that we can fairly claim the fundamentals of the Masonic 
ritual to have had an origin hoary with antiquity compared with the religion of Israel. 


RELIGION OF ANCIENT EGYPT 



It would be as well before going further to glance briefly at the religion of Egypt, for 
each of the Egyptian mysteries, like those practised in Syria, Greece and Rome, was 
based on some circumstance in the life of their gods and goddesses. 


The religion of ancient Egypt is to be found in a vast collection of religious texts, 
arranged in 190 chapters. They have been collected from the walls of tombs and 
temples, from papyrus rolls enclosed in mummy cases along with their occupants, and 
from writings upon the mummy cases and sarcophagi themselves. A 

very fine example of this is the picture shown in Fig. 1, being The Alabaster 
Sarcophagus of Seti I, who lived 1360 B. C. This very fine coffin has upon it extracts 
from nearly all the texts, and, many of them being illustrated, the illustrations make 
the text doubly interesting. The part presented to us shows the divine bark of Ra, the 
Sun God, being conveyed through the fourth hour of the mysteries. The bottom of the 
sarcophagus shows a beautiful full-size painting of the Goddess of the Heavens (Fig. 
2,) surrounded with texts of the same religious litany. 


The name Book of the Dead has been given to these writings, and as far back as 
Egyptian history and traditions can go the Book of the Dead appears to have been an 
integral part of the religions of Egypt. No mere man was the author of this 
remarkable collection. The texts were dictated by God Himself at the creation of the 
world, to Thoth, the Scribe of the Gods, who is shown as having the body of a man 
and the head of a bird, and is always depicted in the act of writing the decrees of the 
deities. We might style Thoth the Divine emanation of wisdom and learning, the 
inspiration of God to man, the first to fill the place ascribed by Plato to the Divine 
Logos and by St. John to "The Word." The picture in Fig. 3 represents Thoth in his 
different attributes, "Lord of Writing," "Great God," "Scribe of the Gods," and 
"establisher of millions of years." 


Thousands of years before Moses wrote, "In the beginning God created the heaven 
and the earth," the Egyptian story of the creation had been given to Egypt as we have 
it here in Fig. 4, where the god Nu is rising out of the primeval water bearing on his 
outstretched arms the boat of the sun god Ra; this is being received by the goddess of 
the heavens Nut, who again stands on the head of Osiris, whose body encloses the 
region of the underworld. In the center of the picture we have the Sacred Scarabaeus, 



symbol of the Creator raising himself out of the primeval void, and separating the 
firmament above from the waters beneath. 


The Book of the Dead contains (as we see here) a history of the creation, the 
attributes of God, the powers and functions of the attendant gods and goddesses, as 
well as the ceremonies required to enable a to live such a life on earth as shall prevent 
his soul from being cast into that pit of fire, where the doomed one must not only 
suffer eternal torment, but, as can be seen in Fig. 5, must undergo a species of penal 
servitude. 


On the other hand, a man who lives a good life and acts up to the teachings of the 
inspired writings, will obtain from Osiris, the "Lord of Everlastingness," as his final 
reward, not only the crown of immortality, but a pleasant existence in the Elysian 
fields. There he will live in the company of the gods, there his crops will grow 
luxuriantly, his cattle be sleek and docile, and there he can have the company and 
fellowship of those whom he loved and knew on earth. We find this belief borne out 
in the prayer of Sepa, as shown in Fig. 6. 


With the exception of a few tales, the records of the wars, expeditions of their rulers, 
detailed statements of the erection of their temples, tombs and monuments, and some 
hymns to the gods and goddesses, the chief and almost only literature of the 
Egyptians was the Book of the Dead. We can, therefore, realize how inseparably 
these chapters, with their formula of rubrics, litanies, ceremonies, passwords and 
signs must have entered into the minds and lives of the people. 


To an outsider the people of Egypt almost deserved the sneer of Juvenal: "Who 
knows not what monsters mad Egypt can worship; whole towns worship a dog, 
nobody Diana"; or that of Plutarch: "The Egyptians, by adoring the animals and 
reverencing them as gods, have ruled their religious worship with many ridiculous 
rites. To this Origin, one of the Christian fathers, very pertinently replies, "Many, 
listening to accounts they do not understand, relative to the sacred doctrines of the 
Egyptian philosophers, fancy that they are acquainted with all the wisdom of Egypt, 



though they have never conversed with any of their priests, nor received any 
information from persons initiated into their mysteries." 


Now, although every province, city, town, and even household had its god or trinity 
of gods, over and above all there reigned the Supreme Ruler of heaven and earth - the 
great First Cause, Creator and Preserver of all, the Great Architect of the Universe - 
Ra, the Sun God, called in Upper Egypt Amun Ra, "the hidden one." As proof of this, 
we have, in the Book of the Dead, among the many hymns to Ra, "Thou art the one 
God who didst come into being in the beginning of time." "Thou didst create the 
earth; thou didst fashion man; thou didst make the abyss of the sky; thou didst create 
the watery abyss; and thou didst give life to all that therein is." "O Thou One, Thou 
mighty One, of myriad forms and aspects." So when we contemplate the group of 
prominent deities in Fig. 7 we see Ra, the Great Architect in some of his myriad 
forms and aspects. 


Ra, or Amun Ra, and the triad of Osiris, Isis and Horns were worshipped throughout 
the whole of Egypt from the earliest pre-dynastic times to the very end of its 
civilization under its native rulers, a period of anything from 7,000 to years. The 
worship of Isis and Horns and the ceremonial of Ra and Osiris have survived to the 
present day, though under different names; the former in a branch of the Christian 
Church, and the latter, as I hope to show, in our Masonic cult. 


Having set forth this general claim for the close connection between our ancient 
moral system and that of Egypt, let me show briefly under separate headings how 
some of our more familiar symbols, traditions and ceremonies may be explained in 
the light of Egyptology. 


THE POINT WITHIN A CIRCLE 


The God Ra is written phonetically with the hieroglyphs R. and A., i.e., a mouth and 
an arm, followed by the two ideographs, a circle with a dot in the centre and a seated 
god. But on most occasions the name of Ra, the Sun God, is written with the 



ideograph of a point within a circle, as though the name was of "too essential a nature 
to be fully comprehended by human wisdom or clearly pronounced by the tongue of 
any individual." 


This sign of a point within a circle was used by the kings of Egypt for thousands of 
years as their royal title to the throne, while they did not scruple to style themselves 
(as we see in Fig. 8), sons of Ra. The same sign is even today used by astronomers in 
writing of the sun as the centre of the heavenly bodies, and is referred to in our 
Masonic ritual. 


MASTER AND WARDENS 


The sun, being the visible emblem of the god Ra, had three names or aspects. In the 
morning he was Kheper Ra, or Ra Harmachis, the opener of the day. The Sphinx, the 
oldest monument in the world, was called Ra Harmachis, the rising sun. This huge 
figure, with the face and head of a man and the body of a lion, is 140 feet long and 
over 60 feet in height. As it sits there see (Fig. 9) facing "the east, to open and 
enliven the glorious day," it represents wisdom and strength. For thousands of years 
also it represented beauty, for in 1200 A. D. the learned Arab, Abd-el-Latif, described 
the face as being very beautiful and the mouth as graceful and lovely. 


At midday, when the sun was at his meridian, he was Ra, the strong one: "When all 
beasts and cattle reposed in their pastures and the trees and green herbs put forth their 
leaves." 


At even he was Atmu, or Temu, the closer of the day: "When thou settest in the 
western horizon the earth is in darkness and is like a being that is dead." This last 
quotation is strikingly shown in the illustration to chap, xviii. of the Book of the 
Dead. The Sun God, in shape of the Sacred Eagle with disc on head and folded 
wings, is about to set in the mountains of the west. Isis and Nepthys, sister 
goddesses, are adoring two lions, representing the sun of yesterday and the sun of 
tomorrow - a fine allegory of past, present and future. 



Thus we see that Ra Harmachis, like our W.M. was placed in the east; Ra, like our J. 
W., represented the sun at its meridian; and Temu, like our S. W., is placed in the 
west to close the day, or, as the Egyptian ritual puts it: "I am Ra Harmachis in the 
morning, Ra in his noontide, Temu in the evening." 


THE. TWO GREAT PILLARS 


Next in importance to the worship of Ra, the Sun God, was the cult of Osiris and Isis 
and of Isis and Horns. The adoration of these gods and this goddess was not only the 
dominant religion in Egypt from the very earliest until the latest times, but during 
nearly a thousand years it had spread into Phoenicia, Greece, Rome, and throughout 
the whole of the Roman Empire. In many cases Osiris is identified with Ra, the Sun 
God, while Isis is most frequently shown wearing the disc of the moon or the crescent 
moon on her head. 


In the texts Isis is the divine consort of Ra Osiris. She is the moon who rules the 
night as the sun rules the day; and every month at Now Moon she gathered the sun 
into her lap to be impregnated anew. "That I may behold the face of the sun and that I 
may behold the moon for ever and ever," was the great wish of the pious Egyptian 
(Book of the Dead, chap, xviii). 


Osiris and Isis are often pictured as the two eyes of Ra, and in that capacity enter 
largely into the mysteries of Ra. Now, when we consider how much the sun and 
moon bulked in the worship of the Egyptians and surrounding nations, let us see what 
effect this would be likely to have on those two great pillars placed by King Solomon 
at the porchway or entrance to his temple at Jerusalem. Before the temple of the sun 
at Heliopolis (the On of Genesis), Osertsen the First (of the twelfth dynasty B. C. 
2435) set up two obelisks. One of them remains there today, the only trace left of that 
gorgeous building where Joseph's father-in-law served as priest to the Sun God, 
where Moses, as the adopted son of Pharaoh, must have worshipped and conducted 
the mysteries of the temple; and where, two thousand years later, learned Grecians 
like Herodotus came to study. These two obelisks would undoubtedly represent the 



two most important objects in the worship of the heavenly bodies, the sun and the 
moon, Osiris Ra and Isis. 


About 1000 years later, or, to be exact, B.C. 1566, Queen Hatasoo, of the eighteenth 
dynasty, set up two obelisks in front of the Temple of the Sun at Karnak. They are 
there today, the one standing, the other fallen down, a memorial to the worship of the 
two heavenly bodies. Fig. 10 gives us this obelisk as it stands to-day. 


I have a work published in 1757, "Travels in Egypt, by Frederick Lewis Norden, Capt 
Danish Navy." Captain Norden visited Karnak on 1 1th December, 1737. In his book 
he has plates in the old copper engraving, and among them he has this view (Fig. 11), 
which I have copied from his book. Speaking of this plate, he says: "1 drew 
magnificent antiquities in all the situations is was possible for me and as they offered 
themselves to my sight." 


We can see by Captain Norden's drawing that obelisks were standing at the entrance 
to the temple less than two hundred years ago. So that the artist who made for us the 
drawing of Karnak restored (which we have here in Fig. 12), placed the obelisks in 
the position they originally stood when set up by Queen Hatasoo nearly 3600 years 
ago. The queen, in an inscription on the walls of her temple, describes them as "two 
great obelisks of granite of the south, and the summit of each is covered with copper 
and gold, the very best which can be obtained; they shall be seen from untold 
distances, and they shall flood the land with their rays of light. I have done these 
things because of the loving heart I possess towards my father, Amun Ra, the Sun 
God." 


Some centuries later at Medinet Abu was placed a very fine pair of pillars at the 
porchway or entrance to the temple. We see by this that the obelisk has given place 
to a pillar with an ornamental capital. These pillars (Fig. 13) were set up by Rameses 
III about 1200 B.C., or quite 200 years before King Solomon built the Holy Temple at 
Jerusalem. 



The pillar seems to have been largely used in the religious thinking of the Egyptians, 
either as an emblem of the Deity or a thank-offering from the worshippers. In many 
of the temples to-day there are beautiful lotus and papyrus pillars, while in numerous 
vignettes in the Book of the Dead we have Osiris seated in a shrine upheld by two 
graceful pillars. Now, when we see that not only in Egypt, but in the surrounding 
countries, the worship of the sun and the moon was not only the prevailing but the 
popular religion of the people, there is little to be wondered at that when the Israelites 
left Egypt they not only carried away with them a very strong bias in favour of this 
worship, but had that propensity considerably strengthened when they settled down 
among the sun and moon worshippers of Palestine. So rampant was this prejudice in 
favour of sun and moon worship, that we find Moses denouncing it in no unmeasured 
terms, and threatening death on the "man or woman that hath brought wickedness in 
the sight of the Lord thy God in transgressing His covenant, and hath gone and served 
other gods and worshipped them, either the sun or the moon" (Deut. xvii. 2, 3). In 
spite of these warnings, however we find years afterwards "Josiah put down the 
idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to bum incense to the sun 
and to the moon" (2 Kings xxiii. 5). Again we read, "At that time, saith the lord, they 
shall bring out the bones of the brings of Judah, and the bones of his Princes, and the 
bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem out of their graves, and they shall spread them 
before the sun and the moon whom they have loved and whom they have 
worshipped" (Jer. viii. 1, 2). 


Ezekiel saw "five and twenty men with their backs towards the temple of the Lord 
and their faces towards the east, and they worshipped the sun towards the east" (Ezek. 
viii. 16). The Jewish women told Jeremiah: "But we will certainly do whatsoever 
thing goeth forth out of our own mouth to burn incense unto the Queen of Heaven 
(the moon or Isis) and to pour out drink unto her as we have done, we and our fathers 
and our kings and our princes in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem" 
(Jer. xlix. 17). One more quotation, this time from the sorely afflicted Man of Uz: "If 
I beheld the sun when it shines or the moon walking in brightness, and my heart hath 
been secretly enticed or my mouth hath kissed my hand" (Job xxxi. 26, 27). 


When we thus see the influence that sun and moon worship had upon the children of 
the Exodus, and when we consider that though settled in Palestine they were 
surrounded by nations who paid homage to the sun and moon under the names of 
Osiris Ra and Isis, Baal and Astarte, Milcom and Ashtoreth, and Adonis and Cybele, 
and when we read that Solomon took to himself wives from Egypt, Moab, Ammon, 



Edmon and Phoenicia we are quite prepared for the information given in I Kings xi. 5 
that "Solomon went after Ashtoreth, the Goddess of the Zidonians (the moon), and 
after Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites (the sun)." 


This brings us to still another consideration that, in view of these telling quotations 
from Scripture, are we not justified in assuming when Solomon put up those two 
great pillars at the porchway or entrance to the temple (as portrayed by R.'. W.'. Bro. 
Haweridge in Fig. 14) they had an esoteric meaning entirely different from that 
ascribed to them in holy writ and that only by adopting the view I shall now put 
before you as to the signification of those pillars can we bring in the meaning given to 
them in our ritual. 


We are told that the pillar on the left denoted strength, while that on the right 
signified to establish. Let us suppose that these two pillars, no matter by what names 
they were called, had also a hidden meaning, what more appropriate conception for 
signifying strength could be selected than the Sun God. The sun was all powerful, all 
beneficent, daily observing all that transpired on earth, while the pillar on the right, if 
we put it down as representing the moon goddess, would answer as the Establisher. 
The phases of the moon marked out the weeks, each moon was a lunar month, and 
with unfailing regularity she indicated the Jewish festivals, marking them to stand 
firm forever, and when conjoined with the strength of the sun what better designation 
could be applied than stability? 


If we consider the question carefully and reflect on all that the sun and the moon 
stood for to these people at this particular time, we can see that strength and stability 
would be a more apt interpretation for those bodies than could be deduced from the 
great-grandfather of David and the assistant high priest at the dedication of the 
temple. Reading certain passages of the Psalms helps to confirm us in this. "They 
shall fear Thee as long as the sun and moon endure throughout all generations." (Ps. 
lxxii. 5.) "It shall be established forever as the moon." (Ps.lxxxix. 37). "He appointed 
the moon for seasons, the sun knoweth his going down." (Ps. civ. 19). 



Another shown (Fig. 15) is from an ancient Cyprian coin depicting the old temple of 
Aphrodite, at Paphos, built about 100 years before the temple at Jerusalem. In 
addition to the pillars at each side of the entrance to the temple, the sun and moon are 
also represented as adorning the top of the building. Let us bear in mind that 
Solomon's intimate friend and adviser was Hiram, King of Tyre, that his Chief Master 
Mason was Hiram Abif, that his principal architect was Adoniram, all Phoenicians; 
that this temple of Paphos, which was at the time the glory of the Mediterranean 
Coast and lay only a short distance from Tyre, would powerfully influence the minds 
of these in the immediate vicinity. Nor is it improbable that the architecture of this 
temple, with its pillars, would appeal to the Phoenician craftsmen and would largely 
guide them in suggesting to Solomon a similar style of sanctuary in the house he was 
about to build for the Lord God of Israel. There is yet another motive that may have 
influenced Solomon in dedicating these pillars to solar deities. Professor Sayee says 
that Hadad was the Supreme Baal or sun god of Babylonia and that his worship was 
widespread in Palestine and Syria, also that the abbreviated form of the name of 
Hadad was Dad, Dadu, and the biblical David. If therefore David was the Palestinian 
name for Baal, the sun god, what more likely than that Solomon would be ready to 
take this opportunity of perpetuating the memory of his illustrious father. Fig. 16 
shows Hadad, the Syrian sun god, in the form of a pillar, with solar emblems, a solar 
crown and grasping a fiery sword symbolic of the thunderbolt. 


The Encyclopedia Biblica, in treating of the two pillars, suggests that the names given 
are enigmatical and that they must have a religious significance. That not improbably 
the full name of the pillar on the left hand is Baal-zebul (dwelling of the sun), and in 
later times probably the name of the second pillar was literately mutilated because of 
the new and inauspicious associations which had gathered round it. Solomon, to have 
been consistent with the teachings of Moses, should have erected only one pillar as a 
symbol of that unity of the Divine Being, which was so integral a part of the worship 
of the Israelites. 


In setting up two pillars he was conforming to the belief of every one of the 
surrounding nations, i.e., A duality in the divine, the sun and moon representing the 
active and passive principle in nature, the male and female element. Coming down to 
later times we find these two pillars prominent in Druidic enclosures used for the rites 
of sun worship, while the two steeples or towers at the front of our Christian 
cathedrals and churches look as if they were an unconscious survival of the votive 
obelisks or pillars erected to the sun or moon before the temples of Egypt. 



o 


THE AMERICAN MASONIC FEDERATION CASE 


BY BRO. CHARLES C. HUNT, DEPUTY GRAND SECRETARY, IOWA 


During the first two weeks of last May a trial was held in the Federal Court at Salt 
Lake City, Utah, that attracted the attention of Masons in many lands. Mathew 
McBlain Thomson, Thomas Perrot and Dominic Bergera were haled into court as 
heads of the so-called American Masonic Federation, Inc., and indicted for fraudulent 
use of the mails. The hearings showed that these men were crooks and robbers who 
had seduced men into spurious lodges for no other purpose than to mulct them out of 
their money. They were convicted and each one fined $5,000.00 and sentenced to 
Fort Leavenworth for two years, Judge Martin J. Wade saying that he would have 
given them the limit of the law had it not been for Thomson's advanced age. In the 
article which follows, Brother C.C. Hunt, who was present throughout the trial as an 
expert witness, has given a synopsis of Thomson's claims so far as the Craft degrees 
are concerned: in a succeeding article he will deal with Thomson's Scottish Rite 
claims. 


FOR ABOUT fifteen years there has been a clandestine Masonic organization at work 
in this country headed by one Mathew McBlain Thompson with headquarters at Salt 
Lake City, Utah. This man was bom in Ayr, Scotland, in 1853 or 1854 and claims to 
have been made a Mason in 1874 or 1875, in Glasgow, Melrose Sts. John Lodge, a 
pendicle of the Ancient Lodge of St. John of Melrose, Scotland. One of his own 
papers says that he went "into Newton-on-Ayr St. James No. 125, on the registry of 
the Grand Lodge of Scotland and Patna Bonnie Doon No. 565 on the same registry. 
Of the latter, Brother Thomson was Right Worshipful Master for several years. He 
was also Grand First Principal of the Early Grand Royal Arch Chapter of Scotland; 
Grand Master of the Grand Encampment of the Temple and Malta in Scotland; 
Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Grand Council of Rites, and later Grand 
Recorder of the same. Brother Thomson demitted from his Scottish membership in 



1896, affiliating with King Solomon lodge No. 27, of the Locals [Thomson called 
regular Masonic lodges by this name] at Montpelier, Idaho, in 1998 (there being no 
Scottish Rite lodges there), in which he held office, and represented the lodge in the 
Grand Lodge of the State of Idaho for several terms. During the last term he sawed as 
Grand Orator." 


On November 1, 1906, Thomson demitted from King Solomon Lodge. He organized 
the so-called Grand Lodge Inter-Montana, January 9, 1907. 


n 1919 he claimed to have ten thousand members in this country and that his 
organization had been recognized in practically every country in the world. His 
Federation was organized on the basis of a stock promotion scheme, with paid 
organizers armed with plausible arguments which only those thoroughly posted in 
Masonic history and jurisprudence could refute. He claimed that with the exception 
of Louisiana the United States was unoccupied territory Masonically and that not a 
single one of the Grand Lodges in this country had a charter authorizing it to work; 
that each of the thirteen colonies organized a Grand Lodge of its own, without the 
lodges therein first obtaining consent of the Grand Lodge from which their charters 
had originally been issued; that the lodges in the colonies, by thus breaking away 
from the home Grand Lodges of Great Britain without first obtaining consent, became 
irregular and clandestine organizations, and that therefore, the field in this country 
was open to any regular organization that chose to occupy it; that later recognition by 
the Grand Lodges of Great Britain did not make these self-formed Grand Lodges 
legitimate. In support of this argument he quotes as follows: 


"Page 302, Volume IV, Gould's History of Freemasonry: 


"'In the year 1777 application for charters of erection and constitution having been 
made by a number of Masons to the Ancient Grand Lodge, of which the late Joseph 
Warren, Esq, had been G. M., as many of the officers of that Grand Lodge as could be 
assembled, met in form of a Grand Lodge, the Deputy Grand Master then in the 
chair. And after carefully attending to the constitutions and usages of Masons in all 
ages and the principles upon which that Grand Lodge existed, they were unanimously 



of opinion that they could not legally grant charters, because the late G.M., Dr. 
Joseph Warren, held his authority by virtue of a commission given to him only as 
Provincial Grand Master, and to be revoked at the pleasure of the Grand Lodge of 
Scotland. Now the principal being dead, the commission was of consequence 
vacated. They then assumed the powers of a Grand Lodge. 


'"From the foregoing, the principles then adopted by this Grand Lodge, upon which 
they have practised and from which they have never seen occasion to recede, may 
readily be collected.'" 


"Page 517, Volume IV, Gould's History of Freemasonry: 


"'Since the beginning of the year 1850, seventeen Grand Lodges have been formed in 
the United States. In every case it has been assumed or expressly declared, that the 
proceeding was a matter OF INHERENT RIGHT, and in no case, so far as the printed 
record discloses, has the consent of the parent Grand Lodges been sought.'" 


"Page 332, Hughan and Stillson's History of Freemasonry and Concordant Orders: 


"'The Grand Lodge of Tennessee is the only Independent Grand Lodge in the United 
States that was organized by authority of a warrant; for the instrument issued by the 
Grand Lodge of North Carolina does not simply permit the lodges to withdraw their 
allegiance from it, but it prescribed conditions; in fact, it was almost identical in 
phraseology with the warrants of deputations issued by the Grand Lodges of England 
for Provincial Grand Lodges in the Colonies and Provinces.'" 


SPECIMEN OF THOMSON'S ARGUMENTS 



As an illustration of Thomson's method of describing the organization of the state 
Grand Lodges, note the following: 


"Now, let us see where Pennsylvania got its authority." 


"On the 24th day of September, 1786, the Provincial Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania 
closed its labours forever and renounced whatever authority it may have previously 
had, whether regular or irregular, and by that act its members became clandestine or 
irregular Masons. On the following day September 25, 1786, they assembled and 
formed a self-constituted Grand Lodge, from and by no Masonic authority whatever, 
This is historically the origin of Pennsylvania Grand Lodge." 


"An unbiased and full investigation into the methods in which these so-called Grand 
Lodges were formed will readily disclose to the reader just how irregularly they have 
been formed, and withal, they one and all prate considerably about regularity, and 
claim an other organizations of Craft Masonry to be irregular, when, as a matter of 
fact and of history, the shoe is on the other foot." 


Gould's Concise History, p. 338, gives the following note which has been quoted by 
Thomson as his authority for claiming the regular Grand Lodges of the United States 
illegitimate: 


"The death of Joseph Warren raised a constitutional question of much complexity. 
What was the status of the Grand Lodge after the death of the Grand Master? It was 
disposed of by the election of Joseph Webb to the position of 'Grand Master of 
Antient Masonrys in the State of Massachusetts. This, if we leave, out of 
consideration the Lodge (and Grand Lodge) of Pennsylvania in 1731, was the first 
sovereign and independent Grand Lodge in America, and the second was the Grand 
Lodge of Virginia, which was established in the following year." 



As a matter of fact, these quotations prove the very opposite of Thomson's 
contentions. They are given by Gould and his co-labourers as showing the growth of 
a principle of Masonic law that has now become established, namely, that a Grand 
Lodge cannot form another Grand Lodge; or in other words, that no Grand Lodge 
derives its authority from a charter granted by another Masonic Grand Body, but that 
such power or authority is derived from the lodges which compose the Grand Lodge 
itself. 


Before entering upon the discussion of this question, we must remember that a very 
large part of the law of Masonry is similar to the common law of a country: in other 
words, it is unwritten law which is the result of customs and usages that have 
gradually grown up and become generally recognized as law. Masonic laws may be 
divided into three classes: first, written law; second, unwritten law; third, regulations; 
and they rank in the order named. The unwritten laws consist of time-honoured 
customs and usages of general recognition, adapted to the conditions and time in 
which they live, and not repugnant to the written laws. In general, the rules 
governing the legitimacy of lodges and Grand Lodges are determined by the 
unwritten laws of Masonry. When we study Masonic authorities we find two general 
theories as to legitimacy: first, that a lodge, to be legitimate, must be able to trace its 
descent through at least one of the Grand Lodges of Great Britain; second, that it may 
either trace its origin to Great Britain or to a Supreme Council of the Ancient and 
Accepted Scottish Rite. 


The above remarks apply to the legitimacy of subordinate lodges. When one 
considers the legitimacy of Grand Lodges other principles are in effect. There are 
certain general requirements such as that the Grand Lodge must be, first, organized by 
legitimate lodges; second, organized in a governmental unit with a political 
government of its own; third, it must be supreme in its authority over its own 
members in matters Masonic, - that is, it must be subject to the laws of no other 
Masonic organization nor derive its powers from any other; fourth, it must be 
Masonic in its character. A lodge to be legitimate must have a charter from a 
legitimate Grand Lodge authorizing and empowering it to work. A Grand Lodge 
working under such a charter would not be legitimate, since it must derive its 
authority from the legitimate lodges of its territory and not from any other power, 
Masonic or otherwise. Charles T. Granger, P.G.M., and at one time a judge of the 
Supreme Court of Iowa, in a report to the Grand Lodge of Iowa in 1911, said: 



"We may state, as an axiom of Symbolic Masonic law, that Symbolic Masonry, in its 
organizations and workings, is a law unto itself, in that it looks to no higher or foreign 
fraternal source for authority, sanction or guidance, but is the creative power within 
itself of all needful agencies, and to this end the subordinate lodge is the primal 
source of authority and the only source from which can spring a legitimate Grand 
Lodge, and hence the legitimacy of a Grand Lodge depends, in the first instance, on 
the legitimacy of the lodges that gave it birth, and, of course, in addition thereto, it 
must meet the limitations and requirements of the ancient landmarks of the order." 


DESCENT FROM BRITISH MASONRY 


Therefore, the most general theory is that to be legitimate descent must be traced in 
some form from the Grand Lodge of Great Britain. Here I am speaking of the Craft 
degrees only. Some Grand Lodges will, in addition to this, recognize a lodge that has 
been organized by a Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite in 
territory not occupied by a regular Grand Lodge, but they will not recognize a Grand 
Lodge formed by such a Supreme Council. If the lodges formed by a Supreme 
Council in unoccupied territory declare their independence and organize themselves 
into a Grand Lodge for that territory, some legitimate Grand jurisdictions will 
recognize them. Others will not, unless the lodges themselves can trace their origin 
from Great Britain. 


Lodges were formed in the first place by charter from one or more of the three Grand 
Lodges of Great Britain. After this country became independent of Great Britain, the 
lodges in each colony organized a Grand Lodge for themselves. This method of 
procedure has been recognized as legitimate by the Grand Lodges of England, 
Scotland and Ireland, and this is shown by the fact that in every case a Grand Lodge 
thus formed has been recognized as legitimate by the lodges of the mother country. 


The authority to form a Grand Lodge was inherent in the nature of the institution 
under the principle in the Old Charges that "Every Mason should be true to the 
government of the country in which he lives." From this charge it became recognized 



that each country should have a Grand Lodge of its own which would be supreme 
over its own members. Otherwise, Masons in different countries owing Masonic 
allegiance to a foreign power might find themselves in a position where their 
obligations to their Grand Lodge and to their country would be antagonistic to each 
other. This principle was recognized in this country before the formation of the 
Federal government, and even after its formation the principle was adhered to; and it 
was recognized that the several lodges of each state had a right to form themselves 
into an independent Grand Lodge. All attempts to form a general Masonic 
government for the United States failed. Hence, we have no General Grand Lodge. 
All legitimate Grand Lodges of England, Scotland, Ireland, and France as well as the 
colonies of Great Britain and states of the United States, have been self-constituted, 
and no question of legitimacy has ever been raised, except by Thomson, because of 
that fact. 


GRAND LODGE OF PENNSYLVANIA AN EXAMPLE 


In reference to the formation of Grand Lodges in the United States, no better 
illustration can be given of the recognition of the right of the lodges in a country to 
form an independent Grand Lodge than in the case of the formation of the Grand 
Lodge of Pennsylvania in 1786, and its prompt recognition by the Grand Lodge of 
England. The proceedings of this occasion are set out very fully in the "Memorial 
Volume" issued by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in 1912. In page 57 of this 
volume we find the declaration of independence which was passed unanimously on 
Monday, September 25, 1786. It is as follows: 


"Resolved that this Grand Lodge is and ought to be a Grand Lodge Independent of 
Great Britain or any other authority whatever, and that they are not under any ties to 
any other Grand Lodge, except those of Brotherly Love and Affection, which they 
will always be happy to cultivate and preserve with all Lodges throughout the Globe." 


On the same day, at a Grand Convention of thirteen different lodges 



"it was unanimously resolved that the Lodges; under the Jurisdiction of the Grand 
Lodge of Pennsylvania lately held under the authority of the Grand Lodge of England 
will and now do form themselves into a Grand Lodge to be called the Grand Lodge of 
Pennsylvania and Masonic Jurisdiction thereunto belonging to be held in Philadelphia 
and that the late Grand Officers continue to be the Grand Officers of Pennsylvania 
invested with all the Powers, Jurisdictions, prominence and authority thereunto 
belonging 'till the usual time for the next election, and that the Grand Lodge and the 
particular Lodges govern themselves by the Rules and Regulations heretofore 
established 'till other Rules and Regulations shall be adopted." 


A letter was then written to the Grand lodge of England announcing the action taken 
and the reasons therefor. The reply of the Grand Lodge of England was as follows: 


"...We reflect with pleasure that the Grand Lodge of England has given birth to a 
Grand Lodge in the western world, whose strict adherence to the ancient and 
immutable landmarks of our order reflects honour on its original founders. Here we 
must beg leave to state that we conceive that in constituting your Grand Lodge we 
necessarily communicated to it the same independent sovereign Masonic authority 
within your jurisdiction which we ourselves possessed within ours, amenable to no 
superior jurisdiction under Heaven, and subject only to the immutable landmarks of 
the craft. All Grand Lodges in Masonry being necessarily Free, Independent and 
Equipollent within their respective jurisdictions, which consequently excludes the 
idea of subjection to a foreign authority of the establishment of an Imperium in 
Imperio." 


It should be noted that in declaring their independence from the Grand Lodges of 
Great Britain, the prevailing motive was loyalty to the government of the land in 
which they lived. Inasmuch as loyalty to the state is one of the cardinal principles of 
Freemasonry, this action has met with universal Masonic approval. 


As a matter of fact all that the statement of Gould with reference to Massachusetts 
(quoted above) was intended to mean is that a Grand Lodge could not legitimately be 



formed from a Provincial Grand Lodge. The death of the Grand Master of the 
Provincial Grand Lodge of Massachusetts left that Grand Lodge with no executive 
officer until another could be appointed by the home Grand Lodge, but this difficulty 
was solved by the formation of an independent Grand Lodge and the election of 
Joseph Webb to the position of "Grand Master of Antient Masonry." Gould nowhere 
states, either directly or indirectly that this election or the action of the lodges of 
Massachusetts and other states in thus forming a Grand Lodge was illegal. In fact, he 
expressly states: 


"Within seven years after the close of the War of the Revolution, the system of Grand 
Lodges with Territorial Jurisdiction was firmly established. It became an accepted 
doctrine that the Lodges in an independent State had a right to organize a Grand 
Lodge; that a Lodge so created possessed exclusive jurisdiction within the State; and 
that it might constitute Lodges in another State in which no Grand Lodge existed and 
maintain them until a Grand Lodge should be established in such State." (Gould's 
Concise History, p. 339.) 


In this Gould recognized the principle that the authority to form a Grand Lodge rests 
in the lodges themselves and does not come from some outside power. 


THOMSON'S FALSE THEORY 


Thomson claimed for himself and his so-called American Masonic Federation that the 
theory of territorial exclusiveness is unmasonic and peculiar to America, in this he 
was wrong: it is also generally recognized in Great Britain, Canada and Australia. 

The basis of this theory is the same as the principle that accords to political 
governments the right of having exclusive jurisdiction over their own territory. Its 
existence is established by the fact that our right to exclusive jurisdiction is generally 
recognized by the Masonic world, and the fact that when a recognized Grand Lodge 
is established in any of the British Colonies, no other Grand Lodge will issue a 
charter for a new lodge in that territory. 



In the proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England relative to the formation of the 
Grand Lodge of Canada the fact of recognition by the Grand Lodge of England was 
expressed in the statement of the Grand Master of England that he would issue no 
more charters for new lodges in the territory covered by the Grand Lodge of Canada. 


Thomson also claimed that American Grand Lodges are clandestine because of the 
alleged fact that they are not universal, and refuse to recognize Masonry in other 
countries, because of religion, race, or some other assumed reason which is contrary 
to the principles of universality. When at his trial he was asked to define Universal 
Masonry, as used by him to distinguish himself from other Masons, he replied: 


"Masonry that knows no creed save the one belief in 
the all Father who as we express it, is the Great Architect 
of the Universe, the Creator, and leaving to every man his 
own opinion after that; that takes no stock in what country 
a man may be born, what language he may speak, or his 
politics and things like that, or anything except that he be 
a good man and a true one." 


We think no one will object to Thomson's definition of universality, but we must 
remember that it is an ideal to be striven for rather than a goal that has been attained. 
There is nothing in the law of Masonry that bars a man from being made a Mason 
because of race, polities or religion, providing that he is a "good man and a true one" 
who will exemplify in his life the teachings of Masonry; but if a man's religion, 
polities or race causes him to act contrary to the principles of universal brotherhood 
he is not a "good man and true" and should not be admitted to a fraternity with whose 
principles he is not in accord. In such a case it is his character which bars him and not 
the beliefs he may hold or the race to which he belongs. 



We must also remember that so long as man is fallible there will be men who will 
permit personal prejudices to influence their decisions when they cast their ballots, 
but this is no more an argument against Masonry and its teachings than are the sins of 
Christians an argument against the teachings of Christ. 


THOMSON'S OWN CHAIN OF TITLES 


As for his own organization, Thomson alleged, with reference to the Craft, or 
Symbolic Degrees, as follows: 


"Mother Kilwinning, being one of the thirty-three lodges forming the Grand Lodge of 
Scotland, still retained her ancient rights to charter craft and high degree lodges. 


"Mother Kilwinning, becoming dissatisfied with the Grand Lodge of Scotland, 
withdrew therefrom and continued in accordance with her ancient custom to charter 
lodges until the 14th day of October, 1807, when she surrendered all her ancient 
privileges and took her present position under the Grand Lodge of Scotland as Mother 
Kilwinning No. 0 


"Chevalier Michael Andrew Ramsay, who was initiated in Ayr-Kilwinning St. John's 
Lodge (a pendicle or daughter lodge of Mother Kilwinning), with other political 
refugees, reintroduced Scotch Masonry into France about the years 1736-1737. 


"In the year 1743, the Farl of Kilmarnock, who was Grand Master of the Grand 
Lodge of Scotland and also of Mother Kilwinning, by virtue of the authority in him 
vested, chartered three Mother Lodges in France, one of which was the Grand Mother 
Lodge of St. John at Marseilles, France. 



"In the year 1794, the Mother Lodge at Marseilles, France, granted a charter to Polar 
Star Lodge in New Orleans, Louisiana, and at a later period other Scotch lodges were 
formed and chartered." 


Polar Star Lodge here mentioned was, according to Thomson, later merged with the 
Supreme Council of Louisiana, referred to below: 


"On the 19th day of June, 1813, the Scotch Rite in New Orleans, Louisiana, applied 
for and received a charter for a Grand Consistory from the Supreme Council located 
at New York, which was established by authority of the Supreme Council of France, 
which also derived its origin through Chevalier Michael Andrew Ramsay, 
commencing in Scotland. 


"On the 27th day of October, 1839 (the New York Supreme Council having become 
dormant), the Marquis O. de San Angelo, by virtue of the authority in him vested, 
established and chartered a Supreme Council in New Orleans, Louisiana, which 
became heir to all the rights and dignities of the New York Supreme Council, and, in 
fact, was inaugurated into life as the Supreme Council for the Western Hemisphere, 
and the charter was fully recognized and de San Angelo's acts were ratified. 


"On September 14, 1906, Joseph N. Cheri Supreme Grand Commander of the 
Supreme Council of the Western Hemisphere, located at New Orleans, Louisiana, 
granted a Charter of authority to M. McB. Thomson (himself being a member of the 
Supreme Council and also Grand Representative of the Grand Council of Rites of 
Scotland) to form Craft or Symbolic Grand and subordinate lodges of Masons, and by 
virtue of that charter and also as a representative of the Supreme Council of 
Louisiana, he (Thomson) granted a charter to the Grand Lodge of Inter-Montana. 


"Thus on the 9th day of January, 1907, the Grand Lodge 'Inter-Montana' received its 
Masonic Charter. 



"On the 30th day of March, 1907, the Grand Lodge of Illinois, A.F. and A. M., 
Incorporated, applied for and was admitted to membership in the A. A. S. Rite by 
taking the oath de fideli, and again on April 5, 1907, five lodges in Boston, 
Massachusetts, applied for admission and were accepted and afterwards they obtained 
a Grand Lodge charter from the American Masonic Federation of the Ancient and 
Accepted Scottish Rite. 


"On the 31st day of August, 1907, the Supreme Lodge in the American Masonic 
Federation was formed and received its Charter from the Grand Lodge Inter-Montana. 


"On the 21st day of September, 1907, the American Masonic Federation was 
incorporated. The incorporation papers are on file in the State of Idaho. This is our 
Chain of Title." 


Thomson frequently refers to this Chain of Title as showing that, to quote himself, 
"the American Masonic Federation traces its descent back to the oldest Masonic 
Lodge in the known world, Mother Kilwinning of Scotland, coming to Louisiana by 
way of France, coming by truly lawful and Masonic charters. Can any other rite of 
Masonry show as clear a title?" 


Other claims were put forth with reference to the so-called higher degrees, but in this 
paper I shall confine my attention to the three Symbolic degrees of Masonry. 


THE CHAIN FALLS TO PIECES 


With reference to the above statements, let us see how many are true and how many 
false, or at least, not proven. Mother Kilwinning Lodge has a strong claim to being 
considered the oldest lodge in the world. She first united in forming the Grand Lodge 
of Scotland and later withdrew, until 1807, when she re-united with that Grand Body 
and surrendered all rights she might have had to charter other lodges, but she never 



had or claimed to have a right to charter lodges to confer any but the Craft degrees of 
Masonry, and she never granted to her daughter lodges the power to charter other 
lodges. In fact, Mother Kilwinning Lodge was the only lodge in Scotland that ever 
had the chartering power, and she never transferred this power to any other lodge. She 
never chartered a lodge in France, and, therefore, could not have chartered Sts. John's 
Lodge, of Marseilles. 


Chevalier Ramsay, so far as known, never introduced Masonry anywhere. He is 
principally known to Masonry because of an oration he delivered before the Grand 
Lodge of France in 1847, in which he traced the origin of Masonry to the Crusaders. 
This theory of Ramsay's, though supported by no proof, was readily accepted at that 
time, and was probably responsible for the fact that many high degrees to which the 
name "Scottish" was given suddenly sprang up in France about this time. Ramsay 
himself did not invent these degrees, nor did they come from Scotland, but the fact 
that he was a Scotchman probably had something to do with the name given to them. 
Ramsay was not a member of Mother Kilwinning Lodge, nor is it known when or 
where he received the Masonic degrees. 


Waite, in his "Secret Tradition in Freemasonry" vol. 1, p. 117, says that the Mother 
Lodge of Marseilles was established in 1750, "though there is little means of 
ascertaining the circumstances under which it was initiated." Clavel says it was 
established in 1751 by a travelling Scotchman. Be that as it may, it soon ceased, to 
exist, and it did not charter Polar Star Lodge, in New Orleans. 


Perfect Sincerity Lodge, of Marseilles, France, was organized in 1767 by the Grand 
Lodge of France. It is now, and has been since 1806, a subordinate of the Grand 
Orient of France. It was this lodge, and not Sts. John Lodge of Marseilles, which in 
1796 (not 1794) chartered Polar Star Lodge of New Orleans, an action which was 
later reported by that lodge to the Grand Orient of France and approved by that Grand 
Body. 


However, the brethren who organized Polar Star Lodge first petitioned the Grand 
Orient of France for a charter (this was in 1794), but on account of the troublous 



times incident to the French Revolution, the officers of the Grand Orient were so 
scattered that it could not then be acted upon. Therefore, the brethren applied to 
Perfect Sincerity Lodge, at Marseilles, and received a charter in 1798. In 1804 the 
Grand Orient of France acted upon the first petition, granted a charter, and the lodge 
was constituted under the charter from that Grand Body as Polar Star Lodge No. 
4263. (See History of Freemasonry in Louisiana, by James B. Scott, pp. 14 and 15.) 


STORY OF POLAR STAR LODGE 


Shortly before the organization of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, on account of some 
question having been raised as to their regularity, Polar Star Lodge applied to and 
received a charter from the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, and was by that Grand 
Lodge constituted as Polar Star Lodge No. 129, and as such it joined with the other 
lodges in organizing the Grand Lodge of Louisiana. Prior to the reception of the 
charter from Pennsylvania, this lodge had worked the French Rite. After receiving the 
charter from Pennsylvania it worked according to the York Rite only, until November 
20, 1820, when Polar Star Lodge began working three rites, but keeping each distinct. 
As Polar Star Lodge No. 5 under the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, it worked the York 
Rite; as No. 4263 under the Grand Orient of France, the French Rite; and later it 
received a charter from the Grand Orient of France as Polar Star Lodge No. 7474, 
authorizing it to work according to the Scottish Rite. (See History of Freemasonry in 
Louisiana, Scott, pp. 5, 1 1, 13, 28 and 29.) 


In 1836 the Grand Orient of France demanded of Polar Star Lodge the surrender of its 
charter from that body, and the lodge petitioned the Grand Lodge of Louisiana to 
cumulate the French and Scottish Rites. This request was not granted at that time. It 
then 

surrendered its York Rite and French Rite charters and worked according to the 
Scottish Rite, as Polar Star Lodge No. 1 under the Grand Lodge of Louisiana. Later, 
(August 15, 1840) the Grand Lodge of Louisiana permitted it to work according to 
either the French, Scottish, or York Rite by endorsing on the Scottish Rite charter 
permission so to work the other two rites. (See Scott's History, P. 49.) This lodge 
divided in 1857, part of its members voting to withdraw from the Grand Lodge of 
Louisiana and affiliate with Foulhouze's clandestine Supreme Council, and the others 



voting to remain under the Grand Lodge. Foulhouze's clandestine lodge then laid 
claim to the property and records of Polar Star Lodge but was overruled in favour of 
the regular lodge by the Supreme Court of Louisiana in 1861. (16 La. Ann. Rep. 53.) 
The records of Polar Star Lodge, when brought into court, proved fatal to the claims 
of the Foulhouze lodge. Thus, it will be seen that Thomson could derive no title 
through Polar Star Lodge. 


The Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite in Louisiana laid no claim to control over 
the Craft degrees until 1850, when the Grand Lodge of Louisiana abolished its 
symbolic chambers. These chambers were a device adopted in 1833 by means of 
which there were three chambers or committees in that Grand Lodge, each having 
jurisdiction over one of the three rites; but charters in each case were granted by 
Grand Lodge and not by a symbolic chamber. The reason for abolishing these 
symbolic chambers in 1 850 was to avoid the confusion incident to having three kinds 
of charters, but the Grand Lodge of Louisiana did then, and still does now, permit its 
lodges to work according to the rite they prefer. 


It was not until 1850 that letters purporting to establish a so-called concordat between 
the Grand Lodge of Louisiana and the Grand Consistory in 1833 were brought to 
light. As a matter of fact, no such concordat was ever adopted by the Grand Lodge of 
Louisiana, and the so-called concordat was later proved to be a fraud. (See Scott's 
History, pp. 47 and 48.) Thus no title to the Craft degrees could be derived from this 
Supreme Council even had it been a regular Masonic body. These degrees in 
Louisiana were controlled by the Grand Lodge and by that body only. 


That the Grand Lodge of Louisiana had always claimed jurisdiction over the Craft 
degrees is shown in Scott's History, pp. 23 and 24, taken from the records of that 
Grand Lodge. That the Scottish Rite bodies recognized the right of Grand Lodges to 
control the Craft degrees is shown in Folger's History, appendix, p. 125. The Supreme 
Council of Louisiana, however, after Foulhouze and his adherents had withdrawn 
therefrom, made overtures to and was united with the Southern Supreme Council of 
Charleston, South Carolina (Scott's History, p. 87). Two years later or thereabouts, 
Foulhouze and two of his adherents formed a new Supreme Council which they 
claimed was a continuation of the one which had united with the Supreme Council of 
the Southern Jurisdiction. For this unmasonic act Foulhouze was expelled from 



Masonry by the Grand Orient of France, of which he was a member (Scott's History, 
p. 87). His Supreme Council soon became dormant, but in the early part of 1867 an 
attempt was made to revive it. Foulhouze had abdicated, and was succeeded by 
Eugene Chassaignac, who created several clandestine lodges, and by opening their 
doors to all comers, regardless of previous condition, obtained recognition by the 
Grand Orient of France (see Scott's History, p. 87). This caused the white members to 
drift away, and that body is now composed almost entirely of creoles and colored 
men. Thus it will be seen that each link in Thomson's so-called "Chain of Title" is 
defective. Each contains some element of truth, but the truth is so expressed that to 
one who does not know, it seems to lend color to the false statements with which the 
true are mingled. Also, the truths which are stated are but partial, and should be 
supplemented by other facts which Thomson did not state. 


— o — 


SCHOOLS SHOULD BE ADVERTISED 


"Education must be 'sold,' to use an advertising expression, just as automobiles, 
clothes, movies and the endless list of necessities and luxuries are 'sold.' That is to say, 
before a community or an individual will spend time, effort and money on education 
the community or individual must be convinced that education is worth having and 
must want to possess it. 


"Such a comparison is fully justified by the facts. A public school system is a form of 
public service co-operation. The owners of the schools are the tax-payers; the directors 
are the members of the board of education, elected by the people. The profits from the 
business of public education are represented in the learning power of the tens of 
thousands whose knowledge, training and preparation for the work and duties of life 
are supplied by the public schools. 


" 'Use must be made of what the schools have to offer, however, if the community and 
individuals are to get any good out of them. A public school system, the educatonal 



machinery and facilities of which are not being utilized by the people, is like a 
telephone company without subscribers or a department store without customers. 


" 'If publicity or advertising is good business for a corporation privately owned, the 
profits of which go to a few, why shouldn't it be good business for a corporation 
publicly owned, the profits of which go to all the people of the city? Specifically, why 
shouldn't the public school system of a city utilize publicity to bring about the largest 
possible use of the system's educational facilities? . . . 


"'Unfortunately, everybody in America doesn't believe in education.... 


" 'As only a small part of the people of the city have time to visit the schools, the 
majority of parents, if they are to keep in touch with the activities and policies of the 
system, must get this information in other ways. Children carry home to their parents 
much information, to be sure, but too often this is given as the child-mind and not as 
the adult-mind sees the situation. It is the daily newspapers, after all, that are depended 
upon for information of what is going on - for school news as well as other news. The 
newspapers, it might be said, visit the schools for the parents and tell them what is 
happening there. Therefore, every newspaper reporter, it is the conviction of the 
division of publications, should have every opportunity to see what the schools are 
doing. This conviction is shared by the board of education and the superintendents of 
schools." - Clyde R. Miller, director of the Department of Publicity, Cleveland Board 
of Education. - M.S.A. Bulletin No. 8. 


— o — 


MEMORIALS TO GREAT MEN WHO WERE MASONS - GENERAL JOHN 
PETER GABRIEL MUHLENBERG 


BY BRO. GEO. W. BAIRD. P.G.M.. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 



GENERAL MUHLENBERG, friend of Thomas Jefferson and of James Monroe, came 
of a great family, five of whom are known to history, and two of whom are listed 
among the great religious leaders of America. General Muhlenberg's father, Henry 
Melchior Muhlenberg, was a German, bom in 171 1, who, after his university career at 
Gottingen and Halle, and pastoral experiences at Franckesche Stiftung, came to this 
land in 1 742 in response to the call from a group of Lutherans at Philadelphia. Dr. 
Muhlenberg accepted charge of three Lutheran congregations and almost immediately 
stepped into the lead of Lutheranism in this nation. It is he, more than any other man, 
that may rightly be called the founder of Lutheranism as an organized body in the 
United States, and it was he who, in 1748, organized the first Lutheran synod. He died 
at Trappe, formerly known as New Providence, a village in Montgomery County, 
Pennsylvania. 


It was at this town that John Peter Gabriel, his oldest son, was bom in 1746. After an 
education in Germany he entered the Lutheran ministry in New Jersey and later, 1772, 
in Virginia. In 1775, while at Woodstock, Virginia, he raised the 8th Virginia (German) 
regiment. He was made a Colonel by General Washington, to whom, so it is said, he 
bore a close personal resemblance. Colonel Muhlenberg assisted in the relief of 
Charleston, took part in the battle of Sullivan's Island, and was with Washington at 
Brandywine, Monmouth, Stony Point and Yorktown. He was promoted first to 
Brigadier and then to Major General for meritorious conduct. "He was a member of the 
Virginia convention of 1776, was vice-president of the supreme-executive council in 
Pennsylvania in 1787-1788, and was a representative in Congress in 1789-1791, in 
1793-1795, and in 1799-1801. In 1801 he was elected as a Democratic-Republican to 
the United States Senate, but immediately resigned to become supervisor of revenue 
for the district of Pennsylvania." He died in 1807. 


The beautiful memorial to General Muhlenberg which stands in Philadelphia was 
erected by the state of Pennsylvania. On the pedestal of the statue, which bears a 
striking resemblance to a figure of Washington, is a record of some of the battles in 
which he was engaged. Washington was not more an idol to the people of Virginia than 
was Muhlenberg to the sturdy folk of Pennsylvania. Like Washington he was a man 
without a vice: he was one of those Christian soldiers whose faith in God was so well 
founded that he never feared danger, and he believed that God's providence protected 
him through every danger. 



In our school days we all learned by rote a thrilling poem about a minister in the early 
days of the Revolution who, after an impassioned plea to his parishioners to rebel 
against Great Britain, suddenly threw aside his clerical robes, stepped forth in the 
uniform of a Virginia colonel, and recruited almost three hundred men on the spot. 
That man was General Muhlenberg. He used as a text the Scriptural phrase "there is 
time for all things" and added, with a voice like a trumpet, "there is a time to fight and 
that time has come now ! " upon which he had drummers stationed at the church door, 
and a full recruiting outfit unlimbered. This spectacular but sincere deed sent a thrill 
through the community which was felt in every part of Pennsylvania, and made a hero 
of the martial preacher. Once in active service he more than fulfilled the expectations 
of his admirers by his skill and bravery as a fighter, and by his sagacity as a 
commanding officer. 


The engagement in which General Muhlenberg most distinguished himself perhaps 
was the battle of Stony Point in the Hudson Highlands. The attack on this position, the 
reader will recall, was led by General Anthony Wayne, one of the boldest soldiers of 
the war. When this enterprise was first planned Washington inquired of him, "Can you 
do it?" "I'll storm hell, if you'll only plan it, General," replied Wayne. Storming hell, it 
proved to be, and Wayne himself was struck in the head by a musket ball, and believed 
himself mortally wounded. "March on!" he shouted to his men. "Carry me into the fort, 
for I will die at the head of my column." But he did not die. 


At two o'clock in the morning he sent to Washington this message: "The fort and 
garrison with General Johnson are ours. Our officers and men behaved like men 
determined to be free." During this spectacular engagement General Muhlenberg was 
in charge of the rear defenses, and proved himself quite as resourceful and daring as 
Wayne himself 


Of such stuff were the Masons of Revolutionary days. General Muhlenberg was a 
member of Lodge No. 3, of Philadelphia. He was quite as earnest in lodge work as in 
church activities, and though one of the most amiable of men he earnestly and 
vigorously combatted every fad, fancy, fiction and peck-sniffery that invaded the 
Craft. 



o 


THE TEACHINGS OF MASONRY 


The following paper is one of a series of articles on "Philosophical Masonry," or "The 
Teachings of Masonry," by Brother Haywood, to be used for reading and discussion in 
lodges and study clubs. From the questions following each section of the paper the 
study club leader should select such as he may desire to use in bringing out particular 
points for discussion. To go into a lengthy discussion on each individual question 
presented might possibly consume more time than the lodge or study club may be able 
to devote to the study club meeting. 


In conducting the study club meetings the leader should endeavor to hold the 
discussions closely to the text of the paper and not permit the members to speak too 
long at one time or to stray onto another subject. Whenever it becomes evident that the 
discussion is turning from the original subject the leader should request the members to 
make notes of the particular points or phases of the matter they may wish to discuss or 
inquire into and bring them up after the last section of the paper is disposed of. 


The meetings should be closed with a "Question Box" period, when such questions as 
may have come up during the meeting and laid over until this time should be entered 
into and discussed. Should any questions arise that cannot be answered by the study 
club leader or some other brother present, these questions may be submitted to us and 
we will endeavor to answer them for you in time for your next meeting. 


Supplemental references on the subjects treated in this paper will be found at the end of 
the article. 



BY BRO. H.L. HAYWOOD, IOWA 


PART XIII-FREEMASONRY AND RELIGION 


THE EARLY operative builders of the Middle Ages were churchmen, if we may trust 
the many histories of architecture which deal with the subject. This was especially 
true after the Gothic, or pointed arch, superseded the old Romanesque style with its 
round arch and its gloomy interiors, for the advent of the Gothic coincided with a 
revival of interest in church architecture. This revival reached such proportions of 
zeal and devotion that bishops themselves studied to become architects (that word 
was not in use then, but the function was) and raised such great sums of money for 
the purpose that many little towns erected cathedral structures that would now be 
pointed to with pride by our great rich modem cities. Needless to say, these builders, 
the bishop directors and overseers along with the men who did the toil, were true and 
loyal sons of the Roman Catholic Church as it then existed. 


After a while, and through the inevitable operation of architectural evolution - there is 
no need to narrate the story of all the changes in this connection - the superintendency 
and direction of building operations (I am still referring to church and cathedral and 
similar structures) passed gradually into the hands of laymen. Of these great lay 
architects, especially those who worked in France where Gothic reached its utmost 
pinnacle of glory, we have many memorials and remains; in a large number of cases 
we have rather complete biographical sketches and even portraits. From all these 
records we know that the builders of this particular period were also loyal sons of the 
Mother Church. 


It was so in England as well as in France, for we find in the Old Charges that the 
mason, when he came to unite with the Fraternity, was required to swear to be faithful 
and true to the Holy Church as well as to the King. But after the Reformation had 
established itself in England - which was quite a while after the death of Henry VIII - 
these operative masons, along with the rank and file of men in all other walks of life, 
became Protestants, - that is, they became members of the Church of England. 



When does the story of Operative Masons begin? Give the dates of the "Middle 
Ages." What was the outstanding feature, or characteristic, of Romanesque 
architecture? Of Gothic? Who were the first architects of Gothic? What, do you 
suppose, led the bishops to take such an interest in building? To what church did 
masons then belong? Did they all have to belong to that church? If so, why? Why did 
laymen come to take the place of bishops as architects, or masters of the work? 
Where, do you suppose, may one find the records of these oldtime master builders? 
Where did Gothic architecture reach its highest development? What religion was 
enjoined by the Old Charges? What is meant by "Old Charges"? What was the 
Reformation? When did it occur? What did Luther have to do with it? Henry VIII? 
What was the difference between a Protestant church, as we now know it, and the 
"Church of England"? What effect did Protestantism have on the religion of masons ? 


In many histories of Freemasonry the account of the religious beginnings of the Craft 
stops off short at this place, but that is an error, a very misleading error, and one that 
should be carefully avoided by the Masonic student. Freemasonry as it became 
organized in 1717, and as we now know it, owed much, very much, to the operative 
builders of the Middle Ages, but it also owed, much, perhaps quite as much, to other 
sources, which had nothing whatever to do with operative building. I refer to occult 
societies and associations, and to scattered sources out of which many streams of 
influence gradually made their way into the main currents of Speculative 
Freemasonry. 


In the time of Pope Innocent III (approximately in the year 1200) there began the 
great Albigensian Crusades. The purpose of this immense military advance into 
southern France was to stamp out flourishing communities of men and women who 
had come to believe in a Christianity very different from that represented by the 
pope. These men have been described as "Protestants before the Reformation." In a 
strict sense they were not Protestant, and their ideas were very far away from those 
made familiar to us by our own great Protestant denominations, but these men 
cherished independence of mind, purity of conduct, and demanded for themselves 
liberty of worship. They were the "heretics." I am myself convinced - though there is 
not here room to furnish the data on which my conviction rests - that these "heretics" 



set loose in Europe a powerful stream of influence, some of which finally found its 
way into Freemasonry. (See "New Light on the Renaissance," by Harold Bayley, 
among scores of other books.) 


All our historians, at least nearly all of them, agree that Freemasonry owes very much 
to certain occult societies or groups that flourished - often in secret - during the late 
Middle Ages, and even into the after-Reformation times. Chief among these were the 
Rosicrucians and the Knights Templar. The Knights Templar had been in the East; 
they had come into contact with Jewish, Greek, and Arabic lore, and they had 
imbibed strange new ideas from far-away types of Christianity. The authorities of the 
Roman Catholic Church attacked these knightly orders on the ground that they had 
become heretics - "Gnostics" was the exact word used. Those who have most 
carefully examined the evidence (some Henry Charles Lea's great works on the 
period) are inclined to believe that the charges were more or less well grounded. The 
Knights Templar had become infected with heresy. 


As for the Rosicrucians, not much is known about them and it is doubtful if much 
ever will be known about them, but it is certain that during the seventeenth century 
there were many powerful and original thinkers in Europe, especially in Germany, the 
Low Countries, and in England, who called themselves "Rosicrucians" and who made 
wide use of a (now) strange system of symbols and esoteric means of 
communication. It is believed by some that Francis Bacon was a Rosicrucian. I said 
that not much is known with certainty about them; of this one thing, however, we can 
be certain: they were Protestants, when they were not altogether outside the bounds of 
Christianity. 


About the Kabbalists more is known. The literature called the Kabbala came into 
existence in Spain during the thirteenth century, or thereabouts, and won its way 
among the Jews who had grown weary of the sterile rationalism of Maimonides and 
his school. The Kabbalistical literature was dramatically brought to the attention of 
the intellectual circles of Europe by Reuchlin when, in or about 1500, he caught it up 
as a means of preventing a terrible slaughter of Jews by the papists. The Kabbala is a 
work of Jewish mysticism. From it there came into Freemasonry, so there is good 
reason to believe, the Legend of the Lost Word, the Tradition of Solomon's Temple, 
the Tradition of the Substitute Word, the Great Pillars, etc. 



Can you name three Masonic histories? Which one is supposed to be the best? What 
is meant by "occult"? Can you tell anything about Pope Innocent III? What is meant 
by the word "heretic"? Can you tell anything about the Albigensian Crusades? Do you 
believe that Freemasonry connects in any way with the Knights Templar? Are the 
Masonic Knights Templar identical with the Order spoken of above? Why was the 
Order suppressed? Who was the last Grand Master of the Knights? Have you ever 
heard of Jacques de Molay? What can you tell about the Rosicrucians? Where were 
the Rosicrucians strongest? Describe the Kabbalists? Where did Kabbalism originate? 
When did Reuchlin live? What did he do? What does Freemasonry owe to 
Kabbalism? Was the Kabbala Jewish or Christian? If Freemasonry descended from 
the Kabbalists, and the other sources named above, as well as from Operative Masons 
of the Middle Ages, what, would you say, was the first religion of Freemasonry? 


It should be further noted that during the century immediately preceding the famous 
Revival (1717) many men came into the Fraternity who where - to a certain extent - 
what would now be called Free Thinkers. This is not to say that they were atheists or 
anti-religious; it means that they chose to thi nk for themselves, and were not able to 
accept many things officially taught by the churches. Quite a number of the founders 
and early champions of the Royal Society (this fact is overlooked so often) were 
active Freemasons, and so were many other learned men in different quarters who, in 
that period of rationalism, did not adhere to any religion at all, albeit, like Voltaire 
and the Deists, they believed in a Supreme Being. It is certain that many of these 
men found their way into the Fraternity at a period before the Revival and I have no 
doubt that they had something to do at the time with the complete releasing of 
Freemasonry from adhesion to any one religion whatsoever. The great paragraph 
"Concerning God and Religion" which Anderson (or whoever it was) incorporated in 
the first Grand Lodge Constitutions, is a frank statement to the effect that whereas in 
ancient times Freemasons had been obliged to be of the religion of the country in 
which they lived, that now no religious demands would be made of them save that 
they were not to be stupid atheists or irreligious libertines. The adoption of the 
paragraph marks an epoch in the evolution of religion in the English-speaking world. 
It was a great magna charta of spiritual liberty proclaimed at a time when religious 
bigotry was more bigoted than ever, and when men were suffering all manner of 
persecution for daring to disagree with the official dogmas of the churches. The 
Masonic student should make the most careful study of this period of Masonic history 



because it was at this time that the constitutions and landmarks were adopted (many 
of them, anyhow) that are still in force, and it is to that period that Grand Lodges 
almost always turn when seeking for precedents whereon to establish new laws or 
regulations or interpretations. Unless one clearly grasps the principles built into 
Speculative Freemasonry at that time, he will ever remain hopelessly in the dark 
about the underlying principles of Freemasonry as it now exists. 


What is meant by a Free Thinker? Is he anti-religious? Who are some typical Free 
Thinkers now? What was the Royal Society? When and by whom was it founded? 
Who were the Deists? What did they believe? What was the substance of the famous 
paragraph "Concerning God and Religion"? Who wrote the Constitutions? Who was 
Anderson? In what sense was that aforementioned paragraph a great religious magna 
charta? Why do Grand Lodges seek precedents in the period of the Revival? When 
and what was this Revival? 


As time went on it came to pass that Freemasonry began to grow at a great rate, and it 
was inevitable, owing to the serious and religious character of the ritual, that many of 
the men drawn to it should be churchmen, or otherwise devout. A trend toward 
Christianization of the Order set in. In 1760 the Holy Bible was made a Great Light. 
In 1813, at the time of the famous Union of the two Grand Lodges, the Antient and 
the Modem, Freemasonry was specifically declared to be consecrated to the glory of 
God. After this the tide toward Christianization set in with new power until it at last 
culminated in the work of Dr. George Oliver, whose name should be held in 
everlasting remembrance among Masons. To Oliver the whole Masonic system was 
essentially biblical and wholly Christian. He was so fruitful in influence, his books 
were so many, and his followers so numberless, that for decades men entirely lost 
sight of the original principles of Speculative Masonry - that Masonry, I mean, that is 
usually referred back for its origin to 1717. Indeed, that impulse has not yet by any 
means spent itself; many brethren, misled by the predominantly Scriptural cast of the 
Work, and misunderstanding a few scattered references here and there, assume that in 
some sense Freemasonry is specifically a Christian institution, and forget, the while, 
the presence of a great number of Jews in the Order, not to mention many who adhere 
to no one religion whatsoever. So late as 1887 Brother H.J. Whymper published a 
book since become standard, "The Religion of Freemasonry," in which he boldly 
upheld the thesis that Freemasonry is a specifically Christian institution. The work 
was introduced by W.J. Hughan, and edited by G. W. Speth. 



It is probable that Brother Whymper (I join with all in honouring a name so illustrious 
in our annals) forgot the great and epoch-making Proclamation issued by H.R.H. the 
Duke of Sussex, M.W. Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England, 
published from Kensington Palace, July 2, 1842, which Proclamation plainly declared 
that Freemasonry is not the property of any one religion, and that those subjects of the 
Crown in India who were otherwise eligible and who could make a sincere profession 
of faith in one living God, be they Hindus or Mohammedans, might petition for 
membership in Freemasonry. That Proclamation established a precedent of vast 
influence, so that today the Fraternity flourishes in the Far East to an undreamed of 
extent, and it is quite impossible, in view of the fact of Masonic universality, to claim 
for any one religion, as against all others, the adhesion of this Order. 


When was the Holy Bible made a great Light? Why is it called The Volume of the 
Sacred Law? Are there other Volumes of the Sacred Law? What book is so used by 
Jews? By Mohammedans? By Hindus? When was the lodge formally declared 
consecrated to God? Why do Masons speak of Him as T.S.G.A.O.T.U.? What was the 
"Antient" Grand Lodge? The "Modem"? What is the Grand Lodge of England now 
called? What position did Dr. Oliver take? Do you agree with him? What book did 
Whymper publish? When? What was his position? When did H.R.H. the Duke of 
Sussex publish his Proclamation? And where? What was the significance of it? What 
does that proclamation mean for us? Does the Grand Lodge of England recognize 
lodges that accept men other than Christian? 


The Bible is the sacred book of Christians; the ritual of Freemasonry is steeped in the 
Bible: therefore Freemasonry must be considered a Christian institution; this is the 
logic, expressed or implied, by which men have been led to hold that the Craft 
adheres to that one religion as against all others. These brethren should be made to 
understand the facts in the case. It is true that the Holy Bible was the ultimate source 
of much in the ritual but one needs only try to test the ritual by biblical references to 
find that after all the ritual is not built on the text of the Bible, for the great major 
incidents in the ritual - and this applies to all the grades - are not found in the Book at 
all. To cite but one example; the tragedy of Hiram Abiff which is so central to all the 
mysteries of Masonry, is not met with in any of the sacred books. The explanation of 



this lies ready to hand. Traditions and legends, suggested long ago by incidents in the 
Bible, were taken up here and there by different groups and worked over into new 
shapes and to new purposes. A luxuriant undergrowth of legend and myth sprang up 
about the feet of the old Bible stories, of which fact the rich old tales of Arthur and 
his Table and of the Search for the Grail, woven by Tennyson into the deeply 
-coloured and mystical poems of The Idylls of the King, may serve as a familiar 
example. Medieval religion, art, and architecture, as everybody knows, are all steeped 
in these old traditions, many of which had undergone an evolution that led them to 
become completely cut away from their original sources in the Sacred Writings. 


The biblical traditions in Freemasonry did not come into it directly from the Bible, 
but from these other and secondary sources, and in long round-about paths, so that, by 
the time they had come to be incorporated into the ritual, they had undergone many 
profound transformations, so that it is no longer possible to call them biblical, save as 
such traditions as the above mentioned Holy Grail may also be called biblical. The 
Legend of the Lost Word, of the Substitute Word, of the great Temple of which 
Hiram Abiff was Grand Master, etc., etc., all had, no doubt, their first inspiration in 
the biblical narratives, but they have since travelled so far away from their sources 
that they may be thought of, like the old myths of the Greeks, as belonging to the 
whole world, and to men of all religions. 


But while it is true that Freemasonry cannot be claimed by any one religion - no 
intelligent Freemason will make such a claim, however devout he may be in his own 
faith - it has a religious foundation that is all its own. Believing that there is under all 
the creeds one universal religion, which may be described as a belief in one God as 
the Father of all, in the immortality of the soul, and in the brotherhood of man, it 
demands of all its initiates adhesion to these root truths. What other things they may 
choose to believe, and how they may interpret or elaborate these fundamentals, is left 
wholly to their own private judgment. It is as if the Fraternity said to its children, 
"Here is the great substructure, the mother rock under your feet, on which you must 
each one build your own house of religion; what manner of temples you build, and in 
what style, and where, and how high, that I shall leave to you individually; but on the 
substructure of belief in God, in brotherhood, and in immortality, you must build, else 
you do not belong to me. 



Give examples of biblical references in the Work. Recite portions of it that are drawn 
directly from the Bible. Have you ever sought for the origin of the Hiram Abiff 
tragedy in the Old Testament? What did you find? Does our account of Solomon's 
Temple agree with the account in the Book of Kings? How have you explained this to 
yourself ? What do you think of the explanations as given above? Have you ever read 
Tennyson's Idylls of the King? Who was Tennyson? When did he live? Can you give 
the story of the Holy Graal (sometimes spelled "Grail"? Retell in your own words the 
account of how traditions, originally from the Bible, reached us by circuitous paths, 
and after they had become worked over and changed. What is the religion of 
Freemasonry? There will be men of several different religions in a Study Club; it 
would be interesting to have them tell you how they have found their own beliefs not 
to conflict with Freemasonry and its teachings. 


SUPPLEMENTAL REFERENCES 


THE BUILDER: 


Vol I. - The Two Paths, p. 37; The Spirit of Easter, p. 92; A Twentieth Century 
Masonic Philosophy, p. 106; Prayer in Masonry, p. 186; The Bible in Masonry, p. 
254; The Spiritual Side of Masonry, p. 256; Masonic Meditation, p. 298. 


Vol. II. - The Religion of Robert Bums, p. 3; Masonry and Religion, p. 50; Some 
Deeper Aspects of Masonic Symbolism, 107, 144, 175; Sectarianism and 
Freemasonry, p. 109; St. Johns Day, p. 185; The Church and the Craft, p. 191; 
Toleration, p. 265; Non-Christian Candidates, p. 302; The Church and Freemasonry, 
p. 318. 



Vol. III. - The Fellowship of Masonry, p. 41; Religion and Philosophy, p. 234; 
Masonry's Great Book, p. 347. 


Vol. IV. - Prayer, Feb. C.C.B., p. 7; The Divine Geometry, p. 159; Symbolism of the 
Master Mason Degree, p. 291. 


Vol. V. - The Catholic Treatise on Masonry, pp. 180, 210, 247, 272. 


Vol. VI. - The Letter G, Feb. C.C.B., p. 3; The Lost Wod, May C.C.B., p. 3; Sacred 
Symbol, p. 288. 


Vol. VII. - The Religious Teachings of Freemasonry, p. 82; Emblematic 
Freemasonry, Building Guilds and Hermetic Schools, p. 160; T.G.A.O.T.U., p. 169; 
Toleration and Free Thinking, p.196; Masonic Prayers, p. 206; Material for Masonic 
Sermons, p. 271. 


Vol. VIII. - Religious Beliefs, p. 62; The Roman Catholic Articles, p. 94; Masonic 
Toleration, p. 137; Toleration and Freemasonry, p. 150; The Holy Sts. John, pp. 170, 
202; Religion and the Grand Orient of France, P. 189; Hughan's Introduction to "The 
Religion of Freemasonry," p. 282. 


Mackey's Encyclopedia-(Revised Edition): 


Antient, p. 55; Bacon, Francis, p. 89; Bible, p. 104; Builder, p. 123; Christianization 
of Freemasonry, p. 148; Church, Freemasons of the, p. 150; Consecration, p. 175; 
Craft, p. 184; Craftsman, p. 184; Creed, A Mason's, p. 184; Deism, p. 204; Gnostics, 



P. 300; God, p. 301; Gothic Architecture, p. 304; Hiram Abiff, p. 329; Hughan, 
William James, p. 338; Kabbala, p. 375; Knights Templar, p. 404; Knights Templar, 
Masonic, p. 410; Lost Word, p. 453; Modem, p. 488; Oath, p. 521; Oath, Corporal, p. 
524; Oath of the Guild, p. 524; Oath, Tyler's, p. 524; Objections to Freemasonry, p. 
525; Obligation, p. 525; Old Charges or Old Manuscripts, p. 527; Oliver, George, p. 
527; Religion of Masonry, p. 617; Resurrection, p. 621; Revival, p. 622; Roman 
Colleges of Artificers, p 630; Rosicmcianism, p 639; Scriptures, Belief in the, p. 672; 
Scriptures, Reading of the, p. 672; Stone Masons of the Middle Ages, p. 718; 
Substitute Word, p. 734; Travelling Freemason, p. 792. 


— o — 


— o — 


OUR STUDY CLUB PLAN 


"The Bulletin Course of Masonic Study," of which the foregoing paper by Brother 
Haywood is a part, was begun in THE BUILDER early in 1917. Previous to the 
beginning of the present series on "Philosophical Masonry," or "The Teachings of 
Masonry," as we have titled it, were published some forty-three papers covering in 
detail "Ceremonial Masonry" and "Symbolical Masonry" under the following several 
divisions: "The Work of a Lodge," "The Lodge and the Candidate," "First Steps," 
"Second Steps," and "Third Steps." A complete set of these papers up to January 1st, 
1922, are obtainable in the bound volumes of THE BUILDER for 1917, 1918, 1919, 
1920 and 1921. 


Following is an outline of the subjects covered by the current series of study club 
papers by Brother Haywood: 


THE TEACHINGS OF MASONRY 



1 . - General Introduction. 


2. - The Masonic Conception of Human Nature. 


3. - The Idea of Truth in Freemasonry. 


4. - The Masonic Conception of Education. 


5. - Ritualism and Symbolism. 


6. - Initiation and Secrecy. 


7. - Masonic Ethics. 


8. - Equality. 


9. - Liberty. 


10. - Democracy. 


11.- Masonry and Industry. 



12. - The Brotherhood of Man. 


13. - Freemasonry and Religion. 


14. - Universality 


15. - The Fatherhood of God. 


16. - Endless Life. 


17. - Brotherly Aid. 


18. - Schools of Masonic Philosophy. 


This systematic course of Masonic study has been taken up and carried out in monthly 
and semi-monthly meetings of lodges and study clubs all over the United States and 
Canada, and in several instances in lodges overseas. 


The course of study has for its foundation two sources of Masonic information, THE 
BUILDER and Mackey's Encyclopedia. 


HOW TO ORGANIZE AND CONDUCT STUDY CLUB MEETINGS 



Study clubs may be organized separate from the lodge, or as a part of the work of the 
lodge. In the latter case the lodge should select a committee, preferably of three "live" 
members who shall have charge of the study club meetings. The study club meetings 
should be held at least once a month (excepting during July and August, when the 
study club papers are discontinued in THE BUILDER), either at a special 
communication of the lodge called for the purpose, or at a regular communication at 
which no business (except the lodge routine) should be transacted, all possible time to 
be devoted to study club purposes. 


After the lodge has been opened and all routine business disposed of, the Master should 
turn the lodge over to the chairman of the study club committee. The committee should 
be fully prepared in advance on the subject to be discussed at the meeting. All members 
to whom references for supplemental papers have been assigned should be prepared 
with their material, and should also have a comprehensive grasp of Brother Haywood's 
paper by a previous reading and study of it. 


PROGRAM FOR STUDY CLUB MEETINGS 


1. Reading of any supplemental papers on the subject for the evening which may have 
been prepared by brethren assigned such duties by the chairman of the study club 
committee. 


2. Reading of the first section of Brother Haywood's paper. 


3. Discussion of this section, using the questions following this section to bring out 
points for discussion. 



4. The subsequent sections of the paper should then be taken up and disposed of in the 
same manner. 


5. Question Box. Invite questions on any subject in Masonry, from any and all brethren 
present. Let the brethren understand that these meetings are for their particular benefit 
and enlightenment and get them into the habit of asking all the questions they may be 
able to think of. If at the time these questions are propounded no one can answer them, 
send them in to us and we will endeavor to supply answers to them in time for your 
next study club meetmg. 


FURTHER INFORMATION 


The foregoing information should enable study club committees to conduct their 
meetings without difficulty. However, if we can be of assistance to such committees, or 
any individual member of lodges and study clubs at any time such brethren are invited 
to feel free to communicate with us. 


— o — 


SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC LIBRARIES SHOULD WORK TOGETHER 


"The measure of success of a school or of a school system is the extent to which it 
brings about the true life success of the pupils. There is, therefore, no matter of greater 
importance to the public than the success of the schools. 


"It has been found by careful investigation that it has been impressed on those who 
visit many schools that schools are least successful in the upper grades. This is 
especially shown by the large number who drop out of these grades and by the 



relatively large proportion who must repeat them before passing on. The failure of 
schools in the adolescent or uppergrade period has recently been stressed by Edison in 
his criticism of present educational methods. Since the pupils in the upper grades are in 
the most critical period of life, it follows that schools are least successful for the very 
years when success is of the greatest concern. 


"One of the principal reasons for this condition is not far to seek. As children pass from 
the lower to the upper grades they need more and more ability to help themselves in 
their school work. The one most important source of self help in this connection is the 
ability and opportunity to use books and libraries, including magazines and 
newspapers. Children will not learn how to use books and libraries effectively without 
a definite and carefully graded course of lessons on the subject, any more than they 
would leam arithmetic without such a course in arithmetic. 


"Since schools do not yet offer a course in the use of books and libraries, we need not 
be surprised that there is so much failure in the upper grades and high school. Since the 
use of books and libraries is of vital concern for life purposes, we have here a matter of 
fundamental importance to true success in education. We need to prepare pupils for the 
wise use of leisure as well as for the active duties of life. 


"The school library cause presents to normal schools a duty and an opportunity which 
are exceeded in importance by none other of their functions. In their model schools 
they should give a definite, properly graded and comprehensive course in the use of 
books and libraries. They should exemplify in the model schools a well devised plan 
for pleasure reading which will produce a lasting taste for good reading. They should 
provide a course, required of all prospective teachers, in which this vital feature of 
education is given adequate attention, including observation and practice teaching in 
the model school." - O.S. Rice, in address to Normal School Librarians, American 
Library Association, Chicago. - M.S.A. Bulletin No. 8. 


— o — 



ROOSEVELT 


BY BRO. GERALD NANCARROW, INDIANA 

Great Brother whom death has translated 
From this known to that mystical shore; 

Great Soul you have won your awaited - 
The realm only victors explore. 

Great Brother, the life that you mastered 
Gained you life on that Glorified Plane 
Where the Truths that you tested and fostered 
Now ring as your labor's refrain. 

And there you shall raise a new building 
On a firmer foundation than earth; 

Assist in adorning and gilding 

The sphere you attained by your worth 

The Master of all life's servers, - 
He who passed on your efforts below 
Who filled you with patriot fervors, - 
Will keep your bright beacons aglow. 



Full lettered in Heavenly glory 
That all mortals who follow may read. 
Is written your immortal story - 
Great Brother, in heart and in deed. 


— o — 


HUGHAN'S INTRODUCTION TO "THE RELIGION OF FREEMASONRY" 


One of the most famous pronouncements on the subject - a delicate one, and 
susceptible of many misunderstandings - about which I have endeavoured to write in 
this month's Study Club was that contributed by Brother William James Hughan as an 
Introduction to a book written by his friend and colleague, Brother Henry Josiah 
Whymper, and entitled "The Religion of Freemasonry." In that now famous volume 
Brother Whymper undertook to prove that Freemasonry should confine its 
membership entirely to the adherents of one religion. In taking friendly issue with 
this thesis Brother Hughan gave expression to his own view of the subject in a 
statement of the case which I am fain to reproduce here, not only because it brings the 
weight of his great authority to the support of my own position but because it is in 
itself of such intrinsic value, as deserves a much wider reading than is ever accorded 
to the Introduction to a book. I may add to this the further fact that Brother 
Whymper's book was edited by Brother George William Speth, the brilliant and 
beloved first secretary of the Quatuor Coronate Lodge of Research, whose 
attainments in Masonic scholarship gave him a place not far behind that of Hughan 
himself. In a "Note by the Editor" Brother Speth frankly expresses himself 
concerning Brother Whymper's thesis as not being "in complete accord with him." It 
is good for us to study carefully the opinions of all our leaders in Masonic thought on 
this subject because, though it is probable that ninety per cent of competent Masonic 
opinion is in agreement with Hughan's position rather than with Whymper's, the 
subject is still so acrimoniously debated in some quarters that it behaves a sober- 
minded student to see to it that his own opinions are of light rather than heat. The 



whole subject is one about which we must learn to disagree without being 
disagreeable. Brother Hughan's Introduction follows. 


H.L.H. 


IN AGREEING to write a short introduction to Brother Whymper's work, I had no 
idea the latter was to be of such an extensive character. As it is, however, nothing 
appears to be needed to ensure its careful perusal, for the volume tells its own tale in 
unmistakable language, and requires no sponsor. This is fortunate, as it is rather 
awkward for my part to be done when not quite in full sympathy with the author on 
the general question. 


It is quite clear that my friend has every confidence in the stand he has taken and fears 
no opposition, so that my task is certainly the easier under such happy circumstances, 
and the more so, when it is noted how thoroughly Brother Whymper has treated this 
confessedly difficult subject. His industry and perseverance have been enbounded, 
and no researches or enquiries appear to have been spared to make the work 
thoroughly comprehensive and authentic. The result is an invaluable repertory of 
facts, which constitute an excellent and trustworthy foundation on which to build our 
theories and opinions, whether favourable or otherwise to the views prepounded by 
the enthusiastic and distinguished author, besides furnishing us with the matured 
observations and convictions of a zealous Masonic student. 


One of the chief objects of the work is to illustrate "the circumstance that the original 
principles of Freemasonry were based on Christian Catholicity," as evidenced by the 
premier "Constitutions" of 1723, and more distinctly by the 2nd edition of 1738; 
several portions of which, submitted for that purpose, are given in parallel columns, 
with some later variations, to 1 884. To my mind, however, they all tend in the 
direction of cosmopolitanism and religious universality, save the copy of 1722 (which 
is scarcely suitable for comparison with the Modern Speculative Regulations), that of 
1723 particularly, being indicative of the altered conditions of the Society of that 
period. 



That English Freemasonry was Christian prior to the organization of the premier 
Grand Lodge cannot be doubted by those who are familiar with the "Old Charges" 
used by the Craft during the preceding centuries. In this respect, as in several others, 
I entirely concur with Brother Whymper, and am, moreover, bound to admit that no 
record exists of any express agreement to change the Fraternity from an exclusively 
Christian to a religious or theistic organization. 


ORIGINAL MASONRY WAS TRINITARIAN 


But if the original Christian basis of the Society should be continued, because never 
expressly altered by the "Revivalists," it appears to me that logically such a condition 
could not be observed by favouring the platform of Catholicity, inasmuch as 
Freemasonry until the era of Grand Lodge was distinctly Trinitarian, and hence 
Unitarians were but little more suitable as members under the old system than Jews or 
men of other faiths. Precisely when other candidates than Jews were admitted into 
the Brotherhood with professed Christians it is not easy to determine, but as respects 
our Israelitish members, we shall not be far wrong if we date their first welcome into 
the Fraternity as far back as one hundred and fifty years, or even more. 


The R.'. W.'. Brother McIntyre, Q.C., P.G.W. (as Grand Registrar), declared in Grand 
Lodge (5th Dec., 1877) that "up to 1813, the two Grand Lodges of England were 
Christian Grand Lodges. In 1813 we became a Universal Grand Lodge, and Jews 
were admitted amongst us." I am not aware of any facts to corroborate such an 
assertion, the simple truth being that they are all in the opposite direction, the less 
exclusive Constitution having been in force before the "Union." 


The lamented Lord Tenterden, K.C.B. (Prov. G.W. Essex), declared at the same 
Communication that "when Freemasonry was introduced into Germany last century, 
it was constituted on the Christian system of St. John.... The Three Globes Lodge was 
constituted in 1740 as a Christian lodge." According to Brother Gould, P.G.D. (and 



there is no better guide), this lodge was started by the sole authority of Frederick the 
Great, so that we are not much concerned with what was done under those 
circumstances; but in reference to the introduction of Freemasonry into that country 
we may be assured that, so far as England was concerned, there was no departure 
from the ordinary usage of that period, and that no Warrants of Constitution were 
granted of a different character to those authorized for other countries by the premier 
Grand Lodge. 


It must be conceded that even now Freemasonry is "simply and purely Christian" 
under some Grand Lodges, but so long as such organizations are willing to admit 
visitors from England and other countries, where the Craft is established on broader 
lines, it is not for us to object to their narrower system. The late Earl of Zetland, as 
Grand Master, obtained all necessary concessions from such Grand Lodges during the 
fifth decade of this century by securing the recognition of all regular brethren as 
visitors, without regard to their religious faith and creed. More than this we cannot 
fairly require; though it leaves much to be desired. 


It was distinctly announced by authority of the M.'. W.\ Grand Master in 1865 that 
there was nothing to prevent anyone "who believes in the Omnipotent, Omniscient, 
and Omnipresent God, and who in private life practices the sacred duties of morality, 
from being initiated into the secrets and mysteries of our Order." This decision was 
officially communicated, because the then District Grand Master of Bengal objected 
to Hindoos being proposed as candidates for initiation, notwithstanding one of that 
number had offered to make a declaration that "he was not a Pantheist or Polytheest, 
and did not identify the Creator with any of his creatures, but believed in 
T.G.A.O.T.U." 


Lord Zetland but followed in the steps of his illustrious predecessor, H.R.H. the 
Duke, of Sussex, M.'. W.'. Grand Master, who aided in the arrangements for the 
initiation of a Mohammedan in 1836, and was in full sympathy with those who 
desired to extend rather than curtail the foundation on which Freemasonry rests. 



It is clear, however that such authoritative decisions presuppose that candidates 
cherish or have adopted some particular form of religious faith, and are not simply 
Deists, because the obligation to secrecy and fidelity is to be taken on those "Sacred 
Writings" which to them are binding on their consciences. 


THE CHRISTIAN FLAVOUR REMAINS 


Still, with all the predilections for a comprehensive and cosmopolitan basis, nothing 
can obliterate the evidences of the Christian origin of our Fraternity, and hence, 
whilst prepared to the fullest extent possible to accept worthy neophytes without 
respect to their creed, colour, or clime, one cannot but feel that those brethren who are 
neither professed Christens, nor Jews, will meet with numerous references in our 
ceremonies founded on the Old and New Testament Scriptures, which will not favour 
their own notions of theology. 


The Bible should always be "the Great Light of the Craft," and never be closed in 
open lodge, whatever volumes else may be at times essential for the purposes of 
reception. I have never heard of any objections to such a rule, and trust that none will 
ever be urged, for unless other religionists are prepared to practice as well as expect 
toleration by thus maintaining the actual and obligatory foundations of the Society, 
the continuity and identity of the Institution cannot be permanently and uniformly 
preserved. 


Brother Whymper evidently favours separate Jewish, Parsee, Hindoo, and 
Mahommedan lodges, but would such a plan really meet his objections to the present 
regime? He emphatically states that "It is impossible for any man, no matter what his 
former religion may have been, to become a Fellow Craft Mason in English Masonry 
and refuse to accept both the Old and the New Testaments." How, then, would those 
distinctive combinations provide for such a contingency? If we cannot do with these 
religionists in our lodges, I do not see how we can do without them - i.e., in separate 
lodges. We meet on the Level or not at all, and therefore, if we cannot as votaries of 
various faiths become members together in lodge, and thus illustrate the "Brotherhood 



of Man," better far to refrain from all attempts at universality, and revert to an 
exclusively Christian Constitution, as in the olden time. 


I am anxious to look at the question in all its aspects, and do not mention difficulties 
because of any fondness for them, but simply to suggest that if a return to the old 
system is to be recommended, and primarily because it prevailed prior to the 
inauguration of Grand Lodges, it is well we should understand what is involved in 
such a course. 


At all events, it seems to me that we are at the present time observing the old rule of 
1723, in promoting the "Religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular 
opinions to themselves," as well as respecting some of the usages and customs of our 
Grand Lodge. Besides which, by thus extending the scope of our Ancient and 
Honourable Society, we are adding immensely to its beneficial influence and practical 
usefulness, especially abroad. 


Holding this view, and bearing in mind the esteemed brethren who hold and advocate 
otherwise, I am prepared to accept the opinion and advice of the revered Brother, the 
Rev. A.F.A. Woodford, M.A., P.G. Chap., who maintained that "the Christian School 
and the Universal School can coexist in Freemasonry. Though their views are 
necessarily antagonistic, yet they need not be made the subject of contention; they can 
be held in peace and consideration, and all fraternal goodwill. Indeed, we think, upon 
the whole, that Freemasonry has, curiously enough, a two-fold teaching in this 
respect" 


According to Brother Whymper's convictions, the spread of the Craft in India 
amongst Parsees, Hindoos, and Mahommedans calls for serious consideration, and 
increasingly so when brethren of each of those faiths become sufficiently numerous to 
support lodges composed mainly of members of their own persuasion. 


Should difficulties arise in consequence, we may yet have to try the ingenious 
suggestion of chartering lodges for each particular faith, subject to the rights of 



mutual visitation; but I confess to the feeling that, should ever such be deemed 
requisite, an element of religious distinction and classification will be of necessity 
introduced, which will considerably modify or weaken the unsectarian character of 
the Institution. 


Clearly, then, this important subject deserves - fact, demands - our earnest attention 
and careful consideration, and our hearty thanks are due to Brother Whymper for 
having so fraternally introduced the matter to our notice in the following pages. 


— o — 


EDITORIAL 


RECOGNITION AND COOPERATION 


IF THERE is anything dear to the mind of a Freemason it is the ideal of a great world- 
wide Fraternity, a deep-based, all inclusive Order of lofty purposes and unselfish aims, 
that might house under its one roof picked men from all the peoples of the world. 
Freemasonry itself, in its ritual, its landmarks, and its laws, holds this mighty ideal 
evermore before itself and its children, and inspires them to strive to bring it some day 
to fulfillment. 


But alas, those same children, many of them, find themselves in an impasse, so far as 
the universality of the Masonic Order is concerned. For if there is anything certain 
about the laws of Freemasonry it is that one Grand Lodge cannot extend formal 
recognition to another Grand Lodge the Masonry of which it deems to have departed 
from the landmarks. And if there is anything certain about Grand Lodges as they now 
exist, it is that there are several which cannot therefore recognize each other, because in 
their technical definitions of Freemasonry they are widely sundered. 



On the other hand, and to the contrary, it is also a certainty that members of two Grand 
Lodges that cannot recognize each other may be at the same time members of the great 
Brotherhood as a whole, and in a large sense fellow Masons, in that they believe in the 
same noble beliefs, and work for the same high ends. And if the universality of 
Freemasonry is ever to be anything more than a tantalizing phantom of the brain, the 
members of all Grand Lodges must somehow find a way to get together. 


Here is the impasse in which a Mason finds himself. He desires a world-wide 
Fraternity, with all the bodies of Freemasonry acting together. But he knows it to be 
impossible for his own Grand Lodge to extend formal recognition to certain other 
Grand Lodges. It is a painful dilemma! 


Is there a way out of that dilemma? 


There is, and it consists in fashioning in ourselves a new understanding of what is 
implied in recognition. To refuse recognition to a Grand Body asking for it may mean 
to read that body out of the Order, but it doesn't often mean that. Usually it means that 
one Grand Lodge refuses to place its stamp of approval upon some one action taken by 
another Grand Lodge, as when certain states withdrew recognition from the Grand 
Lodge of Washington on account of Negro Masonry. But the refusal on the part of 
those Grand Lodges to recognize Washington did not imply that all Washington 
Masons had ceased to be Masons! Far from it! 


Recognition belongs to the technical side of Masonry, and that is a most important 
side; but after all there are other and equally important sides. 


A Grand Lodge might very well take the position that in a case where, for technical 
reasons, it is unable to extend formal recognition to another Grand Lodge, it 
nevertheless knows that other Grand Lodge to be a par of the great family of Masonry, 
and stands willing to cooperate with it in whatever way remains possible. In this wise 



the landmarks would be duly preserved as each Grand Body understands those 
landmarks, and a due regard would be had for all technical matters, but at the same 
time the larger unity of the Fraternity would be preserved. Cooperation is often 
possible where recognition is impossible. 


This principle, so it would appear, might very well be put into practice by American 
Grand Lodges now in their dealings with Grand Lodges in Europe. European 
Freemasonry has had much to contend with that has never seriously troubled us. 
Freemasonry in America came into existence already formed, like Athena from the 
temple of Zeus; but in Europe it came to birth after many throes and passions, and on 
the original soil many of those passions and divisions have naturally a long while 
persisted. But more important still is the fact that in Europe Freemasonry has been at 
grips with an enemy which has sought to divide it and to keep it divided in order to 
control it; whereas in this more favored land that enemy has been far less powerful. 
Owing to these two causes of the divisions that inevitably have existed from within, 
and the divisions that were caused by enemies from without, European Masonic 
organizations are, as compared with the rigidly defined Grand Lodges of this land, in a 
state of chaos. It is almost impossible to apply to them the straight test of the landmarks 
which are (comparitively) so easy to apply to our own Grand Lodges. 


But at the same time Europeans are Masons after all, and are recognized as such by us 
whenever we speak of them unofficially, even at the very time that our Grand Lodgeg 
(it may be) do not recognize them as such officially. And these brothers of ours across 
the sea, who are children of the same great mother as ourselves, were never so badly in 
need of our help and sympathetic encouragement as now, when the world in which 
they exist is a wrecked world, and when their enemies are enjoying such an 
opportunity as never before, and when they are confronted by obstacles almost 
insuperable, and must carry burdens almost impossible to bear. 


Grant that we cannot recognize many of them! grant that it is as much for their good 
as for ours that Freemasonry be kept pure! Cannot we at the same time hail them as 
brethren of the Mystic Tie, who, by virtue of having assumed that Tie, are members of 
our Fraternity, and deserving of all the relief, aid and succor that we can give them? 
Cannot we learn to co-operate with them, even when we cannot recognize them? 



o 


THE LIBRARY 


WAITE'S ENCYCLOPEDIA 


"A New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry" by A.E. Waite. Published in two volumes by 
William Rider, Cathedral House, Paternoster Row, London, England, 1921; price 
$15.00. 


IT WILL conduce to a clearer understanding of this work of 977 pages if I give the title 
in all its completeness: 


"A New Encyclopedia of Freemasonry (Ars Magna Latomorum), And of Cognate 
Instituted Mysteries: Their Rites, Literature, and History." 


The two volumes are well made; bound in blue cloth; lettered and decorated in gold; 
and the print and paper are alike excellent. 


The key to a proper understanding of this work is to be found in the fact that the author 
begins and ends with a well-defined thesis of his own, about which he is careful to see 
that we have no misunderstandings. The preface to every book deserves reading; in the 
present case it is absolutely necessary that it be read, unless one is to blunder about 
through the dark for endless pages. After a brief description of the plan and scope of 
the undertaking Brother Waite goes on to write, on page six, this most significant 
paragraph: 



"One thing remains to be said, for - although it lies within the region of personal 
explanation - it is a matter of justice alike to readers and myself - to readers, that they 
may be under no misapprehension as to the motives by which I am actuated in my 
several contributions to Masonic subjects; to myself, that I may bear witness at need to 
the knowledge that has reached me from various cardinal quarters of intellectual life 
and experience. I have undertaken this work, a very large part of which has involved 
anxious research, with its concomitants of reference and cross-reference, the sifting of 
authorities and the search after some kind of mean between counterviews, not because I 
am drawn naturally into archeological paths but because they offer an opportunity to 
put forward what I am very certain is the true view of Freemasonry. Were it 
[Freemasonry] merely - as so many believe - an ethical and benevolent society, the 
only issue concerning it would be whether it fulfills that role in the living present: 
origin and past history could be matters of no moment, or at least none which - from 
my point of view - would warrant such a book as this. BUT MASONRY IN MY OWN 
UNDERSTANDING, IS PART OF A DIVINE QUEST; IT COMMUNICATES 
KNOWLEDGE OF THAT QUEST AND ITS TERM IN SYMBOLISM; WHILE 
THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE THAT SYMBOLISM INTO THEIR 
HEART - THEIR INMOST HEART - OR IN OTHER WORDS TO TRANSLATE IT 
INTO LIFE, MAY FIND THAT IT BECOMES AN OPEN GATE INTO A REAL 
WORLD OF KNOWLEDGE, WHERE THE DIVINE QUEST ENDS IN DIVINE 
ATTAINMENT." 


There can be no possibility of misunderstanding about these words, especially about 
those that I have capitalized; Brother Waite believes that the heart of Freemasonry is a 
system or way of life, which if a man follow, will lead him to a frst-hand knowledge of 
God. It is - behind all its veils - a life of religion. Nay, more! he makes it plain, here 
and there throughout the two volumes, that for him it is a path toward the Christian 
religion, as "Catholic Mystics" have understood that faith. He developed the same idea 
several years ago in his "Studies in Mysticism" wherein, on page 346, we may read to 
this end. 


"Though I have described Masonry as the mirror of instituted initiation, it has been 
with no idea of transcendence, to which it is indeed without a title. It is the most 
proximate and available of the illustrations, and its reflection is fairly complete, as of 
great things by little. In its development it has never succeeded in completing the house 



which it set out to build, and it is only as something very far away that it recalls - in 
part by antithesis - that which is the mystery of all in exaltation, the nearest indeed of 
all, but the least comprehended. I suppose it is unnecessary to say that I speak of the 
one Master who was neither Hiram nor another; those who enter into the 
comprehension of this mystery and, in fine, of all that which is veiled by the symbolic 
resurrection of the first Easter morning, will have no need of Masonry or the other 
instituted systems...." (Hodder and Stoughton, 1906). 


Brother Waite is a Christian in the manner in which any Mystic can be a Christian; and 
he believes that the Soul of Masonry is just that in it which, in its own manner, leads a 
man into the path of the Christian Mystic, or does in him and for him that which 
Christian Mysticism does. This is the thesis of the New Encyclopaedia. 


It is a most difficult thesis to understand and to follow, especially if a reader has not 
already made himself somewhat at home with mysticism in general and Christian 
mysticism in particular; and the language in which it is expressed will confuse a man 
altogether unless he has mastered its patois. I recommend that before the uninitiated 
reader undertakes these two volumes he first try a course in reading Waite. He can 
begin with the articles that have appeared in THE BUILDER, especially those that 
have been published in pamphlet form and are now in our Monthly Book List. 
Thereafter he can undertake "Studies in Mysticism," the latter chapters of which 
present in connected form that which is the main contention sustained through the 
various articles of the Encyclopaedia Next might come "The Hidden Church of the 
Holy Graal," and after that the two thick volumes of "The Secret Tradition in 
Freemasonry." At the last one should read and retread "The Way of Divine Union," 
which is the author's greatest work, and his original contribution to the rapidly growing 
literature on Mysticism. Having become thus accoutered with Brother Waite's ideas 
and with some understanding of his vocabulary - which is of an extremely symbolical 
character - one may approach the Encyclopaedia prepared to read and to understand it 
and its thesis. Who is equal to these things? not many: and this fact is the principal 
handicap under which the Encyclopaedia will have to make its way. It is an 
encyclopaedia for the few, which is almost a contradiction in terms. 


When one, thus equipped, reads through the interesting pages of these two volumes, he 
will discover the Encyclopaedia to be a controversial treatise designed to uphold a 



thesis by means of a series of articles arranged alphabetically. To my own way of 
thinking the thesis is not proved, and in the nature of things cannot be, but that is 
neither here nor there; the thesis is the key to the compilations and the articles, and it 
must be kept firmly in hand lest one misconstrue the work altogether. 


Brother Waite believes that Freemasonry, save in its more external and less important 
sense, did not originate with medieval building guilds. Under the influence of 
Christianity in the West there became established a Secret Tradition, which consisted 
of a knowledge of the Way of Union with God held in custody by certain groups who 
transmitted to others from time to time and from generation to generation their living 
secrets. This was the "Church behind the Church," the power of the spirit that gave life 
to all churchly forms and ordinances, and preserved alive in a hostile world the clue of 
Christian living, and Christian knowledge of things Divine and Ineffable. At one place 
in its development this Tradition gathered into itself that form of Mysticism which had 
first developed among the Spanish Jews, known as Kabbalism. Some group or groups, 
or perhaps outstanding personalities, caught up the Masonic operative lodges and 
transformed them into vehicles whereby the Secret Tradition might be preserved and 
propagated. 


“I know that the Secret Tradition in Israel has its vital side, that it came into the hands 
of Christian scholars, who adopted it to their Christian Purpose; and I believe that 
round about the year 1725 it was from the records of this scholarship that some one, 
other or several of Masonic literati drew material for ritual developments. They have 
been even in touch with one or two, who knew more than they on the traditional 
subject.... If ever we can take the Craft Legend behind the year 1717, it is my hope that 
we can reach a fuller light on Secret Doctrine in Masonry and its connection with that 
of Israel reviewed in the Light of Christ." (Vol. II, page 487.) 


In dealing with the Third Degree he remarks (Vol. I, page 383): "As it stands before us 
and is worked now among us, after many processes of editing, it bears the seals of 
Christianity." On page 33 of the same volume he writes on a cognate theme, and to the 
same effect: "The Catholic scheme of Masonry in its root-understanding and in its 
upward growth from that root, as this will unfold in the Brotherhood with the help of 
those forces which are now at work in the world, is one at the root with the Church 
behind the Church, and will yet - as I hold - enter into one consciousness therewith." In 



other words, Masonry is essentially a system of Christian Mysticism, as understood in 
the sense of a Secret Tradition, and it consequently must be understood as having been 
created by such mystics in the beginning, who, for reasons of their own, concealed their 
identity; or else, having left records, these were lost, and remain so. 


This thesis serves as a criterion whereby the author evaluated subjects and persons, and 
it explains why many things have been omitted, or quickly passed over, while others, 
less familiar to the Masonic student, are dwelt on at great length. One is surprised to 
find no articles on Gould, Speth, Crawley, Sadler, et al, whereas pages and pages are 
devoted to St. Martin and to Martinism, a subject not at all within the province of 
important Masonic research, as that term is usually understood. The explanation is 
simple; St. Martin has a high value from the point of view of the development of the 
thesis; the other literati - those usually considered among the masters - are deemed of 
little value. In Volume I (on page 279 ff.) there is an article on "First and Third 
Degrees"; when one inquires the reason for the very singular omission of the Fellow 
Craft rite the answer is forthcoming, and stands square with the all-dominating thesis: 

"I have headed this note with a reference to the First and Third Degrees, because the 
Second is after all nothing and leads of itself nowhere, neither to the Mysteries of 
Nature and Science nor yet to the Master Grade, as by any natural path or in virtue of 
any evidential development." 


Many subjects are omitted on which one naturally expects light in a Masonic 
Encyclopedia. The apron is lacking altogether: it is not even mentioned in the Index: 
neither will one find anything about the square or the compasses. On Anti-Masonry - 
one of the themes of major importance to an American reader - there is nothing, except 
here and there a brief reference to such matters as the Leo Taxil fiasco. There is no 
article on the Ashlars. If one is looking for light on the interesting history of Cemeau or 
Cemeauism he must seek elsewhere. On Albert Pike there is a page: on Krause there is 
a paragraph: on Albert G. Mackey there is nothing. In a work of comprehensive 
reference the many omissions of which the few named are typical would be a distinct 
loss, and hard to explain: in the present work one may suppose that they have no value 
to the central purpose. The same explanation, perhaps, accounts for the editorial 
character of the articles, and the abeyance of facts where one most confidently expects 
them. 



I have hinted above that Brother Waite is often hard to read. He himself has made a 
similar complaint in his "Studies in Mysticism," where, on page 337, one may find this 
sentence: "The gift of speaking or writing in unknown tongues used to be regarded as 
exceptional, but it seems rather common with the specialist, and he has a luckless habit 
of lapsing into it unawares." Alas and alack ! the prophecy has come back to plague the 
prophet! The style of writing in The New Encyclopedia should be imitated by nobody, 
not even by Brother Waite himself. It is an involved cryptic manner with scores of 
obsolete words trailing after it: it stumbles into elliptical constructions; and it lends 
itself very easily to sarcasm. 


If a reader has a love for American Masonry and an admiration for the great names of 
its history he will often wince while reading these two volumes. "The unholy rubbish 
which is met with from time to time in Masonic periodicals - those of America 
especially - is only a degree less stultifying than the Anti-Masonic gutter-press of the 
Continent until it was swamped by the War. I do not wish to be invidious, but the 
illiterate vaporings and ravings of writers like J.D. Buck - who has the plaudits of the 
Southern Jurisdiction per saeculas et aionas - is one case in point." Those sentences - 
they occur on page 37, of volume I, - are a little rougher than the paragraphs in which 
we (American Masons) are otherwise dealt with, but they may represent in a large way 
the general tone adopted by the author toward us and our heroes. We admit our 
shortcomings - Dr. Buck, perhaps, used to be one of them, though his is a rapidly 
fading name - but this is too summary a manner of disposing of them! 


I may be permitted to state in this connection, and without interruption to a review that 
holds such matters as a part of its business, that we American Masonic students have a 
deeply-rooted reverence for the great men of English Masonic scholarship living and 
dead: but I submit - and this is informally addressed to those now living, among whom 
are personal friends who will read the words in the spirit in which they are written - 
that little, very little indeed, is known across the waters about the Masonic institutions 
on this side, or ever has been known. 


Of all the Masonic institutions here flourishing the least understood among these trans- 
marine friends is, I believe, the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Why do they so 
often shy away from it as if it were something dangerous? I believe that Brother Waite 
himself would appraise it in an altogether different manner were he to live in the Rite 



for a year or two as we know it over here. The rituals revised by Albert Pike are one 
thing on paper: they are another thing in breathing and acting men, and flashing about 
the ears and eyes of a candidate; and he who has thus known them will experience a 
start of painful surprise to read on page 278, of volume II, these words: "No man had a 
greater opportunity and no one a freer hand when he (Pike) undertook to revise the 
rituals of the Scottish Rite, and he scored only failure. It would be hard and 
unnecessary to say that he never improved the originals: the case against him is that he 
reconstructed and did not change.... [He] lacked the spirit and the fire, the informing 
fire and the shaping spirit: the result is therefore that he has bequeathed us Pike's 
revision. 


The New Encyclopedia, as I said in the beginning, is a controversial work to be read 
from first to last like any other treatise: there are references back and forth to weave the 
separate articles together, and there are hints and directions here and there to indicate 
that the author has expected the volumes to be thus read. But there are also a number of 
features of great value for reference purposes that reflect only credit on the author, 
whose immense erudition is everywhere in evidence. There are sixteen full page plates, 
and thirty illustrations in the text, all of fresh interest, an uncommon quality in Masonic 
illustrations, and all of these are carefully explained by the author, after the fashion 
employed in his "Secret Tradition in Freemasonry." There is a Technology of Rites and 
Grades, very useful to the novice; a very complete Masonic chronology; and an Index 
that borrows much value from the fact that the articles are neither titled nor arranged in 
a familiar manner. 


This is a magnum opus to have been performed by one man, and reflects great credit on 
a name already illustrious, whatever may be chalked against it by way of shortcomings, 
and however groundless may prove the thesis that binds it all together: the core of the 
book is sound, and its spirit is salutary. Brother Waite has no more reverence for the 
fables of Freemasonry than for any other fables, and shouldn't have: he is militantly 
impatient with the mummeries of the Masonic pedantry that moves a mountain to 
prove the date of a manuscript, but stands helpless to breathe one breath of life into 
men, and he should be. Masonry is that which goes on in a man's soul under the 
influence of Masonic rites and practices: if the man have not a soul, or if nothing go on 
therein, all the rest is a mere fritinancy, signifying absolutely nothing, save self- 
deception and fraud. H.F. Haywood. 



O 


PUBLICATIONS WANTED, FOR SALE, AND EXCHANGE 


We are constantly receiving inquiries from readers as to to where they may obtain 
publications on Freemasonry and kindred subjects not offered in our Monthly Book 
List. Most of the books thus sought are out of print, but it may happen that other 
readers, owning copies, may be willing to dispose of the same. Therefore this column is 
set aside each month for such a service. And it is also hoped - and expected - that 
readers possessing very old or rare Masonic works will communicate the fact to TUE 
BUILDER in behalf of general information. 


Postoffice addresses are here given in order that those buying and selling may 
communicate directly with each other. Brethren are asked to cancel notices as soon as 
their wants are supplied. 


In no case does TUE BUILDER assume any responsibility whatsoever for publications 
thus bought, sold, exchanged or borrowed. 


WANTED 


By Bro. D. D. Berolzheimer, I Madison Ave., New York, N Y ! "Realities of 
Masonry." Blake, 1879; "Records of the Hole Craft and Fellowship of Masons," 
Condor, 1894; "Masonic Bibliography," Carson, 1873; "Origin of Freemasonry," 
Paine, 1811. 


By Bro. G. Alfred Lawrenees 142 West 86th St., New York, N. Y.: Proceedings of the 
Scottish Rite Body founded by Joseph Cemeau in New York City in 1808, of which De 



Witt Clinton was the first Grand Commander, and which body became united, in 1867, 
with the Supreme Council of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction, A. & A. S. R. Also 
Proceedings of the Supreme Council founded in New York by De La Motta, in 1813, 
by authority of the Southern Supreme Council, of which he was Grand Treasurer- 
General, these Proceedings from 1813 to 1860. 


By Bro. Frank R. Johnson. 306 East 10th St., Kansas City, Mo.: "The Year Book," 
published by the Masonic Constellations, containing the History of the Grand Council, 
R. & S. M., of Missouri. 


By Brother Silas H. Shepherd, Hartland, Wisconsin: "Catalogue of the Masonic 
Library of Samuel Lawrence"; "Second Edition of Preston's Illustrations of Masonry"; 
"The Source of Measures," by J. Ralston Skinner 1875, or second edition 1894; "Ars 
Quatuor Coronatorum," volumes I to XI, inclusive; "Masonic Facts and Fictions," by 
Henry Sadler; "The Kabbalah Unveiled," by S. L. MacGregor Mathers. 


By Bro. Ernest E. Ford, 305 South Wilson Avenue, Alhambra, California: "Ars 
Quatuor Coronatorum," volumes 3, 6 and 7, with St. John's Cards, also St. John's Cards 
for volumes 4 and 5; "Masonic Review," early volumes; "Voice of Masonry," early 
volumes; Transactions Supreme Council Southern Jurisdiction for the years 1882 and 
1886; Original Proceedings of The General Grand Encampment Knights Templar for 
the years 1826 and 1836. 


By Bro. George A. Lanzarotti, Casilla 126, Rancagua, Chile: All kinds of Masonic 
literature in Spanish. Write first quoting prices. 


By Brother L. Rask, 14 Alvey St., Schenectady, N. Y.: "Remarks upon Alchemy and 
the Alchemists," by E. A. Hitchcock, Janesville, N. Y., about 1865; "The Secret 
Societies of all Ages and Countries," by C. W. Heckethom; "Lost Language of 
Symbolism," by Harold Bayley, published by Lippincott; "Sacred Hermeneutics," by 
Davidson, Edinburgh, 1843; "Solar System of the Ancients Discovered," by J. Wilson, 
published by Longmans Co., London, 1856; "The Alphabet," by Isaac Taylor, Kegan, 



Paul, Trench & Co., 1883, or the edition of 1899 published by Scribners, New York; 
"Anacalypsis," by Godfrey Higgins, 1836, published by Longmans, Green & Co., 
London; "Ars Quatuor Coronatorum," any volume or volumes. 


By Bro. J. H. Tatsch, Union Bank & Tmst Co., Los Angeles, Calif.: Fascilus 2, 
"Caementaria Hibemica," by Chetwode Crawley; Volumes 1, 2, 5 and 8, Quatuor 
Coronati Antigrapha; "Some Memorials of Globe Lodge No. 23," Eenry Sadler; 
"Constitutions of the Freemasons," Hughan, 1869; "Numerical and Medallic Register 
of Lodges," Hughan, 1878; "History of the Apollo Lodge and the R. A., York," 
Hughan, 1894; any items on Anti-Masonry, especially tracts, handbills, posters, old 
newspapers, almanacs, etc., relating to Morgan incident, 1826-1840, and recurrence of 
same from 1870 to 1885. 


FOR SALE 


By Bro. J. H. Tatsch, Union Bank & Tmst Co., Los Angeles, Calif.: "Ars Quatuor 
Coronatorum," volumes 6 to 26, in parts as issued, with St. John Cards; "Masonic 
Reprints and Revelations," Sadler; "The Natural History of Staffordshire," Dr. Robert 
Plot, 1686, folio; "The History of Freemasonry," Robert Freke Gould, Yorston edition, 
4 volumes; "History of Freemasonry in Europe," Emmanuel Rebold, 1867; 
"Bibliographic der Freimaurerischen Literatur," August Wolfstieg, 1911-13, two 
volumes and register, paper, as issued; "History of Freemasonry," Mackey, 7 volumes; 
"History of Freemasonry and Concordant Orders," Hughan and Stillson; fascimile 
engraving Picard's "Les Franemassons," 1735, fine copy. 


By Brother A. A. Bumand, 690 South Bronson Ave., Los Angeles, California: Various 
Masonic publications including such as a complete set of "Ars Quatuor Coronatorum"; 
"History of Freemasonry in Scotland," by D. Murray Lyon, (original edition); Thomas 
Dunckerley, Laurence Dermott, etc. 


By Brother Frank R. Johnson, 306 East 10th St., Kansas City, Mo.. "History of 
Freemasonry," Mitchell, 2 volumes, sheep; "History of Freemasonry," Robert Freke 



Gould, 4 volumes, cloth, in good condition; "History of Freemasonry," Albert G. 
Mackey, 7 volumes, linen cloth, new; Addison's "Knights Templar," Macoy, 1 volume, 
cloth; "Museum of Antiquity," Yaggy, 1 volume, morocco; "History and Cyclopedia of 
Freemasonry," Macoy and Oliver, new, full morocco. Also miscellaneous books. 


— o — 


HOW CAN WE BRING BACK THE MAN TEACHER? 


" 'There are other reasons why men shy at any suggestions that tend to influence them 
to become teachers. 


" 'One reason for the laek of response in this matter is due to the popular conception of 
the teacher's job. Business men, particularly, seem to think that any fairly well educated 
man can teach. Many of these gentlemen go back to earlier years and remember that 
they earned money for college expenses by teaching. They were fortunate to get away 
with it. If those whom they taught learned much they were fortunate too. Of course 
some of these men were fairly good teachers. 


"'But the mere fact that the opinion does prevail - that anyone can teach - belittles the 
profession. What real live man wants to tackle as a life job something that anyone can 
do ? We are, unfortunately, inclined to accept such general opinions as representative. 
Men must be made to realize that teaching is a man size business. Popular opinion 
expressed broadcast is the only way to bring this about.... 


" 'A business man would resent having a public school teacher come into his office to 
tell him how to run his business. Teaching is a skilled profession. A teacher also resents 
incompetent suggestions from those who advise and comment merely as their opinion 
dictates. Men are needed as teachers who know their job and who know it well enough 
to protest against interference from those who have not taught. Men won't come back 



until they know they can be let alone to work out their own plans and ideas. They do 
not care to be obliged to follow the dictates of boys and girls and their parents.... 


" 'Teaching must be generally regarded as a high-class and honorable profession if men 
are to be attracted by it.... 


" 'Boys and girls of high school age and beyond, need contact with real men. This can 
be obtained only as public opinion desires. Public opinion can accomplish that which 
often, before its accomplishment, seems impossible. Public opinion can bring men back 
into the teaching profession.’ “ - A Massachusetts Educator - M.S.A. Bulletin No. 8. 


— o — 


GOD'S DREAMS 


Dreams are they - but they are God's dreams, 
Shall we decry them and scorn them ? 

That men shall love another, 

That white shall call black man brother, 

That greed shall pass from the market place, 
That lust shall yield to love for the race 
That man shall meet with God face to face - 
Dreams are they all; 

But shall we despise them - God’s dreams? 



Dreams are they - to become man's dreams; 
Can we say nay as they claim us? 

That men shall cease from their hating 
That war shall soon be abating, 

That the glory of kings and lords shall pale, 
That pride of dominion and power shall fail, 
That love of humanity shall prevail - 
Dreams are they all; 

But shall we despise them - God's dreams? 

- Thomas Curttis Clark. 


— o — 


THE QUESTION BOX 


THE BUILDER is an open forum for free and fraternal discussion. Each of its 
contributors writes under his own name, and is responsible for his own opinions. 
Believing that a unity of spirit is better than a uniformity of opinion, the Research 
Society, as such, does not champion any one school of Masonic thought as over against 
another, but offers to all alike a medium for fellowship and instruction, leaving each to 
stand or fall by its own merits. 



The Question Box and Correspondence Column are open to all members of the Society 
at all times. Questions of any nature on Masonic subjects are earnestly invited from our 
members, particularly those connected with lodges or study clubs which are following 
our Study Club course. When requested, questions will be answered promptly by mail 
before publication in this department. 


SOME "SCOTCH” FREEMASONRY? 


I had an old uncle from Scotland who told me that he could remember that in Scotch 
taverns they sold a drink called "freemason's-drink." Perhaps somebody can inform me 
through your columns about this curious old beverage. M.K.T., New Jersey. 


Alas, such matters now belong to a vanishing time and all ye editors have been 
canvassed in vain for any information about what must have been a very appetizing - 
and apparently hypnotizing - concoction. To judge from one of our dictionaries, the 
proper name for your uncle's drink was "ffeemason's-cup": what it was like you can 
judge yourself from the prescription as given in the aforesaid dictionary. "A drink made 
of ale, especially Scotch ale, and sherry in equal parts, with the addition of some 
brandy, sugar and nutmeg." 


* * * 


A POPULAR USE OF THE WORD "FREEMASONRY" 


I am inclosing a clipping from the "Cincinnati Enquirer" which gives a description of 
an organization of London crooks in which you will note the following sentence: "The 
secret of their appearance is the freemasonry which exists among the regular crooks of 
London." The question has arisen, are these crooks Masons or does the writer of the 
article wish to impress the reader of the mysterious manner in which a crook secures 
aid ? F.A.T., Indiana. 



In the "Literary Digest" for April 1,1922, page 36, you will find an article on "The 
Papacy's Program" in which occurs this sentence: "Pius XI belongs to the freemasonry 
of scholars and that is always a band of union." Is the present Pope a regular Mason? if 
so, in what lodge? A.B., Kansas. 


In both of the above quotations, the word "freemasonry" is used in a sense that has no 
reference whatsoever to our fraternity. The Century Dictionary gives as one of its 
definitions of the word, "secret or tacit brotherhood"; and in illustration of this use of 
the word gives the following quotation from a book by A. Rhodes: "There is a 
freemasonry extending through all branches of society in the quick comprehension of 
significant words." In connection with this, one is reminded of the famous couplet from 
Alexanders Pope's Dunciad," IV, 671: 


"Some, deep freemasons, join the silent race, 
Worthy to fill Pythagoras's place." 


Pius XI is not a Mason. 


* * * 


WHY IS JEPHTHAH’S DAUGHTER NAMED ADAH? 


Where do you find authority for giving the name "Adah" to Jephthah's Daughter? T.E. 
McM., Arkansas. 



Kenaston's "History of the Order of the Eastern Star," published by The Torch Press, 
1917, has this to say on page 47: "The portion of the Bible upon which the theory of 
the first degree is founded points to Judges XI: 29-40. The impressive history of that 
excellent woman instructs us in obedience, the virtue of which is particularly cultivated 
in this degree, it being the degree of obedience or Jephthah's Daughter - called for want 
of any special name, Adah." So far as we are able to leam this is a true account of the 
matter. The name "Adah" was arbitrarily chosen for Jephthah's daughter, and has no 
special significance at all. 


* * * 


INFORMATION WANTED ABOUT CABLE TOW, TEMPLE RUBBISH, ETC. 


I am very much interested in Masonic symbolism and would appreciate receiving from 
learned brethren and through your columns some instructions regarding the meaning of 
Cable Tow, the Seafaring Man, The Embargo, Burial in Rubbish of Temple, Burial on 
Mt. Moriah, and of the reason for the dimensions of a certain grave. Answers to the 
above will be of interest to young Masonic students of which I am one. 


B.B.J., Florida. 


Will such readers as have thought about these matters come forth with their ideas? 
THE BUILDER has published a number of articles about the Cable Tow, as follows: 
Vol 1, Cor. Dept., page 276, Q. B. Dept., pages 215, 278; Vol. 2, Library Dept., page 
155; Vol. 3, page 341, April CCB., page 6, December CCB., pages 4 and 5; Vol. 4, 
pages 238, 354, June CCB., page 4, Cor. Dept., page 310, Q. B. Dept., page 62. 



THE DIONYSIAN ARTIFICERS 


Is it possible to secure a copy of The Dionysian Artificers by Da Costa? I see so many 
references to the work that I am curious to read it. F. P., Washington. 


The book itself is rare and next to impossible to buy. Fortunately for the Craft the book 
has been republished in monthly sections by The Montana Mason, of which Brother R. 
J. Femert is editor. The series began with the issue of last November. Address The 
Montana Mason. Box 1572. Great Falls. Montana. 


* * * 


BOOKS ON ANCIENT MYSTERIES 


Will you please give me a list of modem books in English on the Ancient Mysteries? I 
should like such titles as one may easily find in any fairly complete public library. 
R.H.S., Louisiana. 


The list here given is not at all complete but it is representative and reliable. Any 
volume not in your public library can be obtained for you by your librarian from the 
Congressional Library at Washington, D. C. 


Saint Paul and the Mystery-Religions, H.A.A. Kennedy; Kings and Gods, Moret; 
Mysteries, Moret; Paul and His Interpreters, A. Schweitzer; Religious Development 
Between the Old and New Testaments, R. H. Charles; The Conflict of Religions in the 
Early Roman Empire, T. R. Glover; Religious Experience of the Roman People, W. W. 
Fowler; Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius, Sir Samuel Dill; The Mysteries 
of Mithraism, Franz Cumont; Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion, E. Jane 



Harrison; Oriental Religions, Franz Cumont; The Mysteries, Pagan and Christian, 
Cheetham; Cults of the Greek States, Famell, vols. Ill and V; The Great Mother of the 
Gods, Showerman; Adonis, Attis, Osiris, J. G. Frazer; Isis and Osiris, Plutarch; The 
Burden of Isis, Dennis; The Realms of Egyptian Dead, Wiedemann; Light from the 
Ancient East, Deissmann; Thrice Greatest Hermes, Mead; Introduction to the Study of 
Religion, Jevons; Psyche, Rohde; The Gods of Greece, Dyer; Myth, Ritual and 
Religion, Andrew Lang; The Mystery Religions and the New Testament, Henry C. 
Sheldon; Astrology and Religion Among the Greeks and Romans, Cumont; The 
Forerunners and Rivals of Christianity, F. Legge; The Mission and Expansion of 
Christianity in the First Three Centuries, Hamack; Studies in Mysticism, A. E. Waite; 
Christian Mysticism, Inge; Mithraism, Adams; Eleusinian and Bacchic Mysteries, 
Thomas Taylor; Eleusinian Mysteries and Rites, Dudley Wright; Morals and Dogma, 
Albert Pike. 


* * * 

WHY NO HAMMER WAS HEARD IN THE BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE 


Why was not the sound of a hammer, ax, or anything of iron heard during the building 
of King Solomon's Temple? H.D.A., Michigan. 


The text on which your query is based is found in I Kings 6:7. "And the house, when it 
was in building, was built of stone made ready at the quarry and there was neither 
hammer nor ax nor any tool of iron heard in the house while it was in building." The 
usual explanation is taken to be the statement in the early part of the verse to the effect 
that the Temple was built of stones "made ready at the quarry." The Hebrew itself reads 
instead of quarry, "when it was brought away"; that is, at the place where the workmen 
were assembled, and consequently could apply to woodwork as well as to stone. Like 
every other statement concerning the building of the Temple this has been fertile in 
producing legends and myths, some of them of singular and great suggestiveness. 
Examples of such may be found on page 44 of Brother Dudley Wright's "Masonic 
Legends and Traditions," a book that may be heartily recommended to the student. 



"The stones for the Temple were hewn in the quarry, and there carved, marked, and 
numbered. The timber was felled and prepared in the forests of Lebanon, and conveyed 
by floats from Tyre to Joppa. The metals were fused and cast in the clay ground 
between Succoth and Zeredatha. The whole was then conveyed to Jerusalem; and when 
put together on Mount Moriah each part fitted with such perfect exactness as to make it 
appear like a work of the Supreme, rather than an exertion of human skill. 


"One tradition says that the stones had been prepared with such perfect accuracy that 
when fitted together the joints could not be discovered: - 


If on the outside I do cast my eye, 

The stones are joined so artificially, 

That if the mason had not chequered fine 
Tyre's alabaster with hard serpentine, 

An hundred marbles no less fair than firm, 

The whole, a whole quar one might rightly term. 


"There is a Jewish tradition that the stones were not so framed and polished by human 
art and industry, but by a worm called Samir, which God created for the purpose. They 
also state that the stones came to the Temple of their own accord, and were put together 
by angels. The word Samir (known in Masonic lore as the insect Sharmah) signifies a 
very hard stone that can be cut and polished to great perfection. 


"It is asserted by the Rabbins that King Solomon received a secret from Asmodeus, an 
evil spirit, mentioned in the Book of Tobit, who had usurped his throne and afterwards 
became his prisoner. By the utilization of this he was enabled to finish the Temple 
without the use of axe, hammer, or metal tool; for the stone schamir, which had been 
presented to him by a demon, possessed the property of cutting any other substance as 
a diamond cuts glass." 



FREEMASONRY IN RUSSIA 


Has Freemasonry ever had a foothold in Russia? If so, will it be possible for you to 
give me a little history of it? I am often wondering if Masonry will not grow there after 
the present unsettled conditions have passed away. My brother went to Russia as a Y 
worker and remained there in business. He thinks the country has a wonderful future. 
D.R.C., Indiana. 


Freemasonry existed in Russia early in the eighteenth century, Christopher Wren, 
according to a groundless tradition, having been one of its founders when he initiated 
Peter the Great into the Craft. It was in 1777, however, that Russian Masonry made its 
first great advance, for it was in that year that the Great Duke of Sudermania, who had 
accompanied Gustavus III, his brother, on a mission to Petrograd, lent his powerful 
influence to the movement. The English Grand Lodge chartered lodges in Russia early 
in the same century, only a few years after the Revival. In 1721 a Provincial Grand 
Lodge of Russia was founded, under the English Constitutions, and Captain John 
Phillips was made Provincial Grand Master. In 1776 the National Grand Lodge of 
Russia was formed, and in 1779 a rival grand body, propagating Swedish Masonry, 
also made its advent. When the anti-secret-society law was passed in 1782 
Freemasonry was exempted, but in 1797 this same law was revised, and Paul I closed 
up all Masonic lodges. However, after the accession of Alexander in 1801 legal rigors 
were relaxed and many lodges resumed operations. But in 1 822 the Czar issued a ukase 
forbidding all lodges to open at any time or anywhere. According to recent advices the 
ban has not get been removed, but such a step appears likely. 


— o — 


CORRESPONDENCE 



MASONIC FURNISHINGS BORROWED FOR A ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH 
SERVICE 


I am translating a truly remarkable letter that is due to the researches of our good 
friend, Oswald Wirth, editor of "Symbolisme" of Paris. I do not doubt that the mention 
of the word "church" to a Frenchman has necessarily a more Roman Catholic 
implication than it has to us and in that attitude I suggest it be read. The letter is 
unearthed from La Legitimite, No. 11, page 216, of November 1907, but the original is 
dated January 16, 1816, and was addressed by the Mayor of Marseilles, the Marquis de 
Montgraud, to Mr. John, the keeper of a restaurant on Vacon street, and in English runs 
about as follows: 


"I am informed, Sir, that you have obtained some black tapestries or hangings which 
formed a part of the ornaments or equipment of the Scottish Lodge of this city. 


"I shall be obliged to you for the loan to the city of these hangings that they may serve 
for the decoration of the Church of St. Martin, the twentieth of this month, the day 
fixed for the ceremony of the funeral service in commemoration of the death of Louis 


XVI. 


"If, as I hope, you agree to my request, I beg of you to entrust these objects to Mr. 
Dufey, bearer of the present communication. 


"Accept, Sir, my thanks in advance for your compliance." 


One cannot, as a Scottish Rite Freemason, but be interested in this appropriation of the 
symbolical draperies of a Lodge of Perfection for use in a Roman Catholic Church 
during a Service of Sorrow. What a curious mixture from our present point of view is 



there of the apt and the inept of this certainly very peculiar instance! Robt. I. Clegg, 
Illinois. 


* * * 


MASONS PERSECUTED IN IRELAND 


I think it would only be in justice to our brothers in Ireland for you through THE 
BUILDER to give some publicity to conditions as they exist over there at the present 
time, and also the cause of the trouble. A large number of the Masons in America do 
not know how conditions are in Ireland, neither do they know the real cause back of it 
all, and I think they should know. George A. Anderson, Pennsylvania. 


The above was accompanied by a letter from a personal friend of Brother Anderson 
now residing in Belfast. Except for the omission of two or three personal items it is 
here painted in full: 


The condition of things over here has not improved very much of late, except that there 
are not so many shootings in our own city. The last new order issued which renders 
anyone liable to arrest who is not staying in his own home has done a great deal of 
good. All the shootings in Belfast are carried out by "gunmen" from the South and 
West. The difficulty was that the authorities would not put their hands on these men. 
When a raid was made on a house that was suspected and strangers found there, these 
strangers posed as friends or relatives up from the country on a visit. Now they can be 
arrested for identification. Genuine visitors can always avoid trouble by notifying the 
police beforehand. The result has been that most of the gunmen have left for fear of 
arrest. 


But they have only changed their locality and still carry on in the South where 
Protestants are being murdered every day in one place or another. The Masonic Halls 



are being raided, and in many cases destroyed. The Grand Lodge premises in Dublin 
are at present in the occupation of the I. R. A. There was a curious result of that the 
other day. We were starting a new preceptory in Belfast in connection with our lodge 
and had applied for a warrant. Before the warrant could be issued the premises in 
Dublin had been seized, and all the forms were kept there. The Masonic authorities had 
to get a copy of the latest warrant issued, and from this they made a fresh copy all in 
the writing of the Grand officer. This warrant was used last Saturday and is in the 
possession of our Registrar. 


The Masonic authorities here, for some reason or other, do not want to appeal to 
Freemasons outside or to make "political capital" of the seizure, but I think that it 
would be well if the Freemasons of America were freely told of the campaign that is 
going on against the Order in Ireland. Perhaps you could help a little in this in a quiet 
way among your own associates. There was one man, whom I know personally, who 
had a narrow escape in the recent murders in County Cork. He is a Methodist 
clergyman, and was in one of the houses that were visited. He escaped from bed in his 
night shirt and got away into the fields. It was the middle of April and the weather was 
very cold at the time. Three or four others were shot dead the same night. His brother is 
a member of my lodge, is Registrar of my chapter, and first Preceptor of the new 
preceptory. He is a past Provincial Senior Grand Warden of the Province of Antrim. 
That is the Masonic province of course, which is practically the same as the ordinary 
County of Antrim. 


Yours sincerely, 


W. J. Allen. 


Brother Anderson enclosed a clipping from a Belfast paper of May 18th. It contains the 
description of a deplorable condition: 


Recently one of the South of Ireland gun clubs issued a statement boasting that they 
were going to compel all Freemasons and Unionists in the "Free State" to supply food, 



clothing, and housing accommodation to Roman Catholic unemployed. Their fellow 
ruffians had for a long time been burning down Masonic and Orange Halls and 
persecuting Freemasons, along with other Protestants. 


The continuance of these outrages, which there is no evidence to show the Free State 
forces now responsible for law and order ever tried to stop, has caused the Earl of 
Donoughmore, Most Worshipful Grand Master of Irish Freemasonry, to issue an order 
suspending all meetings of Masonic lodges in Southern Ireland. 


Extensive cattle drives have taken place on lands held by Protestants in parts of 
Counties Kildare and Mayo, and threatening notices have been posted. 


Heathfield, a large property in Ballyeastle, County Mayo, has been seized by a number 
of the Southern unemployable. The owner is a Protestant lady. She was given forty- 
eight hours to clear out. 


Other gunmen have seized business premises and land at Belmullet, also in County 
Mayo. The owner in this case is a Protestant, too. 


* * * 


Irish brthren and members of the National Masonic Research Society have sent to THE 
BUILDER many newspaper clippings and letters similar to the above. Owing to 
limitations of space it is impossible to publish many of these communications, but our 
thanks go to these thoughtful brothers nevertheless. Meanwhile, there are other angles 
of the story, one of the most authentic of which is the following, and which explains 
itself. It was published in the LONDON FREEMASON, June 3rd, 1922. 



To the Editor of The Freemason: 


Dear Sir and Brother - 1 am glad to be able to inform you that Freemasons' Hall, 

Dublin, was yesterday handed back to me by the section of the Irish Republican Army, 
which has been in occupation since 24th April. I am also glad to say that the damage 
done has been very much less than we anticipated. The structural damage is very slight, 
and our lodge and chapter rooms, with their contents, have been respected. For 
instance, the magnificent Grand Fodge Room, with its splendid furniture and historic 
portraits, seems practically intact. Of course you will understand that it will be some 
time before the whole extent of the damage can be ascertained. 


It is only right that I should say that during the whole period of the negotiations leading 
up to the evacuation I was treated with the greatest courtesy and sympathy by the 
Provisional Government, especially by Mr. Michael Collins, who was always ready to 
see me and do all in his power to help. I believe that if the existing Government were 
only firmly established, Irish Freemasons have nothing to fear in the future. The 
outrages have, in my opinion, been entirely the work of those criminal bodies which 
always spring into existence when a disturbed state of affairs exists in any country. 


I do not believe there is any general hostility to the Order in Southern Ireland, nor do I 
believe that any feeling of the sort is encouraged by the Roman Catholic Church, which 
fully appreciates the difference between Irish Freemasonry and that carried on by the 
so-called Continental Grand Fodges, which reject our first and principal great 
Fandmark, and consequently are not recognized by us. I must also say that the officers 
who were charged with the duty of handling over to me, treated me and my staff most 
courteously. Yours fraternally, 


Claude Fane, 

Deputy Grand Master of Ireland. 


Grand Fodge of Freemasons of Ireland, 



Dublin, 30th May, 1922. 


* * * 


THE GREEK CHURCH AND THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 


There is a statement on page 187 of the June BUILDER which is not quite correct: "3. 
There is as much difference between the Church of England and the Greek Church as 
between the latter and the Roman Church." I have seen an Episcopal minister assist in 
the service of the Russian Church and the Russian priest assist in the Episcopal service 
When the last Bishop of New York was consecrated the Russian Patriarch and several 
other clergy formed in the procession in their official robes. Such an interchange 
between the Roman and the Anglican churches would be inconceivable. 


I am enclosing a letter from the Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Diocese of New 
Hampshire on this subject. 


Oscar C. Taylor, New Hampshire. 


The letter referred to in the above is from Edward M. Parker, Concord, New 
Hampshire, Bishop of New Hampshire. It is in full as follows: 


My dear Mr. Taylor: 


It is not true to say that we are in full communion with the Orthodox Churches, for as 
yet nothing official has developed to make the statement entirely correct, but between 



the Anglican and Orthodox Churchs there is the most cordial feeling of sympathy and 
fellowship, and there have been many acts of courtesy and recognition on both sides, 
and the move towards unity is growing on both sides. In many places in this country, 
where there are Orthodox Christians with none of their own clergy at hand, the people 
have been told by their Church authorities to look to the Episcopal Church for such 
ministrations as they need and cannot obtain from their own clergy. We have an 
occasional wedding or funeral, or even baptism performed by one of our clergy for 
some of the Greek or Russian Christians. The matter of full intercommunion, that is, 
freely receiving Orthodox Christians at our altars or the reception of the Blessed 
Sacrament by Anglicans at an Orthodox altar is a different matter. Until both Churches 
have made official proclamation of some sort, this cannot come. The recently elected 
Patriarch of Constantinople, Meletius, left this country to assume his high position full 
of the thought that it might be within his new power to promote full union between 
Anglican and Orthodox. 


The Church of Rome has set herself like adamant against any thought of unity with the 
Eastern Churches and it unless they would accept in their fullness the papal claims. 
This the East will not do and we cannot do. 


Faithfully yours, 


Edward M. Parker, Bishop of New Hampshire. 


The statement made in paragraph numbered three on page 187 of THE BUILDER of 
last June is based on the very best authorities, and was carefully considered. By 
"difference" was meant unlikeness, not that the two communions are in a feud. 


* * * 


JOHN S. WISE NOT A GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA 



In the June issue, page 186, you speak of John S. Wise, author of "Recollections of 
Thirteen Presidents," to the effect that "unless you are off the track," he was one time 
governor of Virginia. It was Henry A. Wise, the father of the author, who was governor 
of Virginia, to which office he was elected in 1855 on an "anti-Know Nothing" 
platform. If you will turn to page 56 of the above work you will find an account of the 
bitter juvenile warfare that waged in Richmond between John and the young Whig and 
Know Nothing hopefuls during his father's term as governor. Governor Wise was, like 
his son, a writer of some ability and published in 1872 a volume of reminiscences 
under the title "Seven Decades of the Union." This volume also is of some Masonic 
interest in that it gives some interesting side lights on the life and character of Brother 
Andrew Jackson, although Masonry is not mentioned. I wonder if Brother Baird can 
tell us if either of the Wises was a Mason? 


B. W. Bryant, California. 


Brother Baird, it is your turn. To the above items of information may be added the facts 
that it was during Governor Wise's term in office that John Brown made his raid, and 
that the Governors refused to reprieve the old enthusiast, though a vast deal of pressure 
was brought to bear upon him. Governor Wise was opposed to secession but 
nevertheless voted in favor of making Virginia a part of the Confederacy. He was made 
a brigadier-general in the Confederate army and was in more or less active service 
throughout the Civil War. 


* * * 


THE IRISH MASONIC MEDALLION 


I was very much interested in the cuts of a Masonic Medallion found in Ireland, 
described by Brother Carson in the April number of THE BUILDER. 



The reverse side of the medallion has the symbols of the Rose Croix and Royal Arch. 
As both these orders did not form part of organized Freemasonry till along about 1747, 
how can the medallion possibly be of the sixteenth century? 


If the figures on the obverse are really 1516, with which 1 do not agree, they are either a 
date or the number of a lodge. I have shown that they cannot possibly be the date the 
medallion was carved. If they are a lodge number they must represent lodge 1516 of 
the English Constitution. But lodge 1516 of England was warranted in 1874 and 
removed from the roster in 1878, so bang goes the sixteenth century theory. 


If you will examine the print in your issue thru a magnifying glass you will come to the 
conclusion that the figure 1 before the contended figure 6 is not carved but is a scratch. 
Remove this 1516 idea for a moment and examine it again having in mind that the 
two columns are represented and I think you will come nearer the truth and agree that 
what is intended are the letters B and J carved in a fancy style, the name of which I do 
not know. We know what those letters mean. 


The figure above the sun and moon is doubtless intended for the all-seeing eye. 


The X shaped figure at the immediate left of the sun is very possibly a rough attempt 
at a representation of two skirrets which are the working tools of a Master Mason in 
English working. 


The object at the foot of the steps is undoubtedly intended to represent a coffin with a 
sprig of acacia at the head which is to be found on all tracing boards of the English 
working. 



Why five steps ? Those who know the English working recognize this as pertaining to 
the second degree. Maybe it is evidence that at that time the lodge to which the 
Masonic sculptor of the medallion belonged worked but two degrees, or more likely 
there is no particular significance to the five steps. 


Turning to the reverse side we have in the triangle all the symbols of the Rose Croix. 
The winged figure is a rude attempt at a pelican. At the apex of the triangle we have 
an attempt at portraying a rose. Then there is the ladder, spear-head and chalice, all 
significant in English Rose Croix work which, unlike that of the A. & A. S. R., is 
decidedly orthodox Christianity. The "H" at the right hand comer I take to stand for 
Heredom. What the "I" stands for I cannot guess. 


Below the triangle we have the letter "Z" within a square which we can guess stands 
for Zembbabel. At the left is a defective attempt at the triple tau. To the right the "W" 
is possibly not a W at all but two triangles. The arch is the old one of the early days of 
the Royal Arch and is more like the arches of Enoch than the Royal Arch of Solomon. 


Chevalier Ramsey is credited with introducing the Royal Arch degree, which many 
dispute, obtaining the idea from France where he became acquainted with the degree 
which is now the thirteenth of the A. & A. S. R. This depiction may be taken by some 
as evidence in that direction. 


As to the letters round the triangle I guess these to be the name and title of the owner 
written in Latin. It matters little anyway. 


It is stated the medallion is made of petrified oak. I would hazard a guess without 
seeing it that it is made of black bog oak, which is very hard, almost like ebony. It has 
probably lost much of its color through being buried. 



From other facts, tool lengthy to go into here I would put the age of the medallion as 
having been made around 1820. 


(Brother Murray later sent a postscript to the above, which is given herewith.) 


It may be that the figures are 156, representing a lodge number. Lodge 156 in the 
English Constitution is holden at Plymouth and was warranted in 1778. It has a Royal 
Arch Chapter attached to it. If this is the lodge, my guess as to the date the medallion 
was made would not be far out. 


As to Lodge No. 156 in the Irish Constitution my records show it was stricken off the 
list a good many years ago, while such a number appears in recent list of lodges as 
being held at Belfast. Maybe a new lodge has been given a vacant number some time. 
Ernest E. Murray, Montana. 


* * * 


HELP LOCATE THIS MAN 


I have been advised to write you by the Grand Secretary of Montana, and by Brother 
Bell, Secretary of Lodge No. 29, Billings, Montana. I am trying to locate my father, 
Patrick Collins. He was made a Mason in Fall River, Kansas, in 1886. Soon 
afterwards he demitted to Oklahoma. If any brother knows of his whereabouts please 
notify me. Matt Collins, 607 North 26th Street, Billings, Montana. 


— o — 



Ability is of little account without opportunity. - Napoleon I.