
  
   
  
  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 run 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 born 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 rubber 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 
  1829, 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, born 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 l
   
  
  ----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
   
  PART I
   
  
  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 Horus 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 Horus 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 Horus.  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 11th 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: "I 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 burn 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 born 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, 11, 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 1850 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, born in 1711, who, after his university career at 
  Gottingen and Halle, and pastoral experiences at Franckesche Stiftung, came to 
  this land in 1742 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 born 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 modern 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 think 
  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 Modern, 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 "Modern"? 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 Burns, 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; 
  Modern, 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; Rosicrucianism, 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 learn 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 1884.  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!
   
  
  Recogrution 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 Cerneau or Cerneauism 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.L. 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 Cerneau 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. Heckethorn; "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 & Trust Co., Los Angeles, Calif.: Fascilus 2, "Caementaria 
  Hibernica," 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 & Trust 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; 
  "Bibliographie 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. 
  Burnand, 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 "freemason'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 learn 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. 
  Lemert 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 modern 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, Farnell, vols. III 
  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, Harnack; 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 1822 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 - 
  I 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 Lodge 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 Lodges, which reject our first and 
  principal great Landmark, 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 
  Lane,
  Deputy 
  Grand Master of Ireland.
   
  
  Grand Lodge 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 I 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 corner 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 Zerubbabel. 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.