The Builder Magazine

January 1924 - Volume X - Number 1

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FRONTISPIECE - THE NATIONAL CAPITOL

SPURIOUS, OR ASSOCIATED FREEMASONRY - By Bro. Sir Alfred Robbins, England

THE LE PLONGEON THEORY OF FREEMASONRY - By Prof. Herbert J. Spinden, Massachusetts

AN UNIQUE MASONIC MEETING IN FRANCE.

FREEMASONRY AND TOLERATION IN THE COLONIES - By Bro. Benjamin Wellington Bryant, California

THE COMACINE MASTERS: A REPLY - By Bro. W. Ravenscroft, England

ENTERED APPRENTICE DEGREE WITH ITS GROUPS OF THREE - By Bro. Charles E. Boyden, North Dakota

SIGNOR MUSSOLINI RECEIVES MASONS

GREAT MEN WHO WERE MASONS - ADLAI EWING STEVENSON

THE STUDY CLUB - By Bro. Geo. W. Baird, District of Columbia - Chapters of Masonic History  -  Part VIII, The Operative Masons - By Bro. H. L. Haywood

 

EDITORIAL

Freemasonry's Work in the World

Masonic Service Association

 

THE CORNERSTONE OF THE NATIONAL CAPITOL

 

THE LIBRARY

James Anderson and His Book of Constitutions

Ammunition for Speech-Makers

Bound Volume of THE BUILDER for 1923

The English Ritual

 

THE QUESTION BOX AND CORRESPONDENCE

The Prentice Pillar

Missouri "Blue Lodges" and Slavery

Authentic Books on Folklore, etc

Was Daniel Hunt First Knight Templar..

Lodges Not Involved in Oklahoma Trouble.

Information Wanted Concerning Chart

Lincoln, Farragut, Grant and Burr

The American Lodge in London....

Commends Block's Article

"How Do You Examine Visitors?"

"The Greatest Danger"

 

BOOKS WANTED

 

YE EDITOR'S CORNER

 

----o----

 

Spurious, Imitative, or Associated Freemasonry

 

By Bro. SIR ALFRED ROBBINS, England

 

THE BUILDER is privileged, through the intermediary kindness of Bro. Dudley Wright, to publish here the Installation Address delivered Nov. 8 last by Sir Alfred Robbins, when installed as Master of the famous Lodge of Research, Quatuor Coronati, No. 2076, London, England.  This frank utterance from a Masonic statesman of the first rank will have all the wider hearing in this land in view of his approaching visit to our shores.  He is a Past Grand Warden of the United Grand Lodge of England, President of the Board of General Purposes of that body, and a journalist of note.  For all his many activities he has found time to take a keen and absorbing interest in Masonic research, more especially of latter day Masonry, as his present paper will testify.  A magnificent address of his on "English and American Brotherhood; a league of Masons" was printed in THE BUILDER, July, 1918, page 191.

 

 

I CANNOT begin my inaugural address as Master of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge without acknowledging in all cordiality and with all sincerity the pleasure and pride that have been given me by acceptance of the position.

 

To be chosen as chief officer for the year of a lodge which has contained some of the most eminent students of the immediate past, and has produced fruits of research of the highest importance to Freemasonry, is an honour to which an ordinary Mason hardly dares to aspire, and an honour for which, when conferred on him, he cannot be anything but deeply grateful.

 

It has been the custom in this lodge for each succeeding Master on the night of his installation to address the brethren upon some subject of Masonic interest which, as a rule, has been one of research.  Tonight I will follow that example, but with the idea of searching, not so much into the past as into the present of Freemasonry.  Every historian in the Craft, I think, will agree with me in thinking that if our departed brethren had concerned themselves with various phases of its evolution, as that evolution proceeded and developed, we should have been spared today much speculation and error.  I, therefore, propose to take as my theme on this occasion the problems presented to the Craft today by spurious, imitative or  associated Freemasonry. In this regard, I do not think it necessary to deal specifically or at any length with those bodies that all of us would recognize as covered by the eighth in order of the summarised Antient Charges and Regulations which are promised to be supported by every Master-elect on his coming into the Chair.  This clause gives a pledge to respect genuine and true brethren and to discountenance all impostors and all dissenters from the original plan of Freemasonry.  All of us have a fairly clear idea of the bodies embraced in that category, but the organizations which are now to be subjected to review are those on the border-line.  It was told me in my youth by an elementary science teacher that there was no difficulty, broadly speaking, in saying what was an animal and what was a vegetable; but the question became more difficult when one was asked exactly to place a sponge.  It is with, what I may term the sponges of Freemasonry, that I wish now to deal - absorbent bodies, difficult to define, possibly having their uses in certain directions, but apt to become dangerous if allowed to spread with too great ease and rapidity.

 

IT IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM

 

This problem is not merely speculative.  It may seriously affect the immediate future of the Craft in this country, as it already is doing our brethren in other countries in friendly relationship with ourselves.  In our own jurisdiction, specifically according to the first clause in our Book of Constitutions, it is "declared and pronounced that pure Antient Masonry consists of three degrees and no more, namely, those of the Entered Apprentice, the Fellowcraft and the Master Mason, including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch." This extremely limited provision would seem to exclude from strict contemplation, not only Mark Masonry, but all those associated with our body which work what are variously termed, "the allied", "the higher" or the additional degrees.  In point of practice we know that the exclusion is not of so rigid a kind.  The Mark Degree, for example, along with its subordinate part, the Royal Ark Mariners, are informally acknowledged as kindred organizations by even strict Craftsmen.  Many of our most excellent and eminent brethren are Knights Templar, or members of the Rose Croix, the Royal Order of Scotland, the Red Cross of Constantine, the Rosicrucian Society, the Order of the Secret Monitor and the Order of the Scarlet Cord.  Some of our most eminent brethren belong to the Grand Council of Royal and Select Masters and the Grand Council of the Allied Degrees; while there is the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, with its nominal thirty-three degrees, the Supreme Council of which avoids conflict with our Grand Lodge by not working the first three.

 

As long as brethren who own allegiance to those respective bodies have done nothing specifically to forfeit their allegiance to the United Grand Lodge of England, no objection is taken, but, by the Book of Constitutions, it is strictly enjoined that "No honourary or other jewel, medal device or emblem shall be worn in Grand Lodge or any subordinate lodge which shall not appertain to or be consistent with those degrees which are recognized and acknowledged by the Grand Lodge as part of pure and antient Masonry." In practice, this regulation prevents the wearing of any insignia in lodges which are not those of the Craft and Royal Arch, and strict action has been taken in the past on more than one occasion against brethren who have infringed this condition.  In one instance this regulation was carried to such a length that it is to be found recorded in the Grand Lodge Proceedings for the Quarterly Communication of December, 1853, that the Grand Master (the then Earl of Zetland) stated that he had been under the painful necessity of removing from his position Bro. William Tucker, the Provincial Grand Master for Dorset "in consequence of his having thought proper to appear in his Provincial Grand Lodge in the costume and with jewels appertaining to what were termed 'higher degrees' and not sanctioned or acknowledged by Grand Lodge, and which militated against the universality of Freemasonry." He added that he felt much respect for Bro. Tucker personally, but the act was so completely at variance with the laws of Grand Lodge that it left him no alternative.  The regulation was further emphasized by the Board of General Purposes at its meeting on 19th January, 1869, when a letter from a brother was read saying that he had seen Knights Templar's jewels worn in a lodge, and asking what course to pursue.  The Grand Secretary - at that time Bro. John Hervey - was instructed to reply that such proceeding was at variance with the regulation of the Book of Constitutions. It will be seen, therefore, that, as far as the bodies under notice are concerned, the position of Grand Lodge is one of toleration, provided the other bodies do not attempt to pass over the border lines thus clearly laid down.

 

THE MARK DEGREE IS CONSIDERED

 

In the case of the Mark Degree, the question of its relation to the Craft has been definitely under the consideration of Grand Lodge, and it is important to recall how the question was viewed by some of the most skilled and experienced Masons of seventy years ago, represented on a special committee jointly appointed by the Board of General Purposes and Grand Chapter.  That joint committee entered upon an inquiry and an investigation, as far as could be done by a body, some members of which had not been admitted to the Mark Degree, and it came to a unanimous resolution that, while the degree did not form a portion of the Royal Arch Degree and was not essential to Craft Masonry, there was nothing objectionable in it, or anything which militated against the universality of Freemasonry, and "that it might be considered as forming a graceful addition to the Fellowcraft's Degree." The Earl of Zetland, as Grand Master, approved and directed that the report of the committee should be laid before Grand Lodge, which then unanimously resolved, "That the Degree of Mark Mason or Mark Master is not at variance with the Antient Landmarks of the Order, and that the Degree be an addition to and form part of Craft Masonry; and, consequently, may be conferred by all regular warranted lodges, under such regulations as shall be prepared by the Board of General Purposes, approved and sanctioned by the M.W. Grand Master." This resolution seemed to settle the matter for all time, but, at the ensuing Quarterly Communication - that of June, 1856 - when the minutes of 5th March were read, and were proposed to be confirmed, an amendment was moved: "That such portion as relates to the subject of the Mark Masons be not confirmed," and this, after some discussion, was carried.  The question has not been raised in active form since.

 

The relationship of Grand Lodge to these other degrees, to which many of its members belong is, therefore, somewhat confused and, to that extent, unsatisfactory; but, speaking generally, an entente cordiale has been established in this jurisdiction which prevents friction or overlapping.  When, however, any attempt has been made, directly or indirectly, to associate women with Freemasonry, Grand Lodge, within these past few years, has taken a strong line.  At the Quarterly Communication of 3rd September, 1919, the report of the Board of General Purposes stated: "That the Board's attention is being increasingly drawn to the sedulous endeavors which are being made by certain bodies unrecognized as Masonic by the United Grand Lodge of England to induce Freemasons to join in their assemblies.  As all such bodies which admit women to membership are clandestine and irregular, it is necessary to caution brethren against being inadvertently led to violate their obligations by becoming members of them or attending their meetings.  Grand Lodge in 1910 approved the action of the Board in suspending two brethren who had contumaciously failed to explain the grave Masonic irregularity to which attention is now again called; and it is earnestly hoped that no occasion will arise for having again to institute disciplinary proceedings of a like kind." The problem came more precisely before Grand Lodge at the Quarterly Communication of 2nd March, 1921, when specifically Grand Lodge adopted a report of the Board, which recommended that there should not be granted the prayer of a petition presented on behalf of an "Honourable Fraternity of Antient Masonry" asking for recognition of that body which "modelled its constitutions and ritual upon those of the United Grand Lodge of England, departing therefrom only in one matter of the admission of women." In another form, the question was again presented to Grand Lodge six months later, when Grand Lodge agreed nemine contradicente to the declaration that "no Freemason is entitled to attend any non-Masonic meeting at which Freemasonry by direct implication is introduced, or to participate in any ceremony which is quasi-Masonic or is held under some pseudo-Masonic and unauthorized auspices."

 

IMITATIVE MASONRY IS FEARED

 

In yet a further way the matter came before Grand Lodge in that same year, 1921, and midway between the taking of the two decisions just recorded.  In this case the Board of General Purposes emphasized "the necessity for the greatest caution being exercised by brethren in dealing with bodies which, from a Masonic point of view, are clandestine or irregular.  Brethren who served their country in a special capacity during the war were being invited to attend an 'Order', the objects of which are stated to be 'good fellowship, harmony and benevolence'.  While the body is not called Masonic, it officially states that there is a Grand Council composed of those who have passed the Chair, and that the Council grants charters and dispensations for the founding, opening and consecration of lodges.  'There is a ceremony of initiation, simple and impressive, while in each of such lodges is an altar,' while again, to quote from the authorized statement, 'the lodge is dressed and regalia worn by the officers, and in two lodges already formed are to be found Freemasons who take a great interest in the Society.' The claim made in the last sentence deserves serious consideration, and the greatest caution is enjoined upon brethren when invited to assemblies of the kind indicated."

 

While other facts can be given from our recent history showing the jealous regard which is being taken by the authorities of Grand Lodge to prevent imitative Freemasonry from spreading to England, and strictly emphasizing the necessity for the closest scrutiny of bodies which demand any kind of Masonic test for entrants, it is not in our own jurisdiction alone that these troubles are to be found.  As recently as 1922, the Grand Lodge of Ireland caused an addition to be made to its regulations dealing with any society that requires Freemasonry as qualification for membership, and its decision on this subject is worth quotation in full:

 

No member of any Lodge under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ireland shall be a member of or attend any meeting of any body or society which requires Freemasonry as, a basis of or qualification for membership, except of such bodies as are included in the calendar published annually by the authority

of Grand Lodge.

 

If any lodge, or member of a lodge, shall give any information as to the standing of a member in reply to an inquiry from any such non-recognized body, it shall be deemed to be unMasonic conduct and may be dealt with accordingly.

 

Members of lodges under the Grand Lodge of Ireland are forbidden to join or to belong to clubs or other bodies purporting to be or calling themselves Masonic, unless such clubs or bodies have been sanctioned by the Grand Master or the Deputy Grand Master, or if in a Masonic Province, by the Provincial Grand Master or his Deputy, or if abroad in a country under the jurisdiction of a Grand Lodge recognized by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, by such Grand Lodge.  Such sanction may at any time be withdrawn without notice.

 

OUTER-BODIES INCREASE IN AMERICA

 

But it is when we cross the Atlantic that we find the greatest amount of trouble arises.  I have already given a number of outer-bodies as existing in England to which no formal objection is taken, but the spread of such bodies in America is, in these times, so rapid, and their sporadic growth is so remarkable that it is difficult to keep in touch with even the names of these new organizations.  We, in this country, know nothing, for example, of the Ancient Egyptian Order of Sciots, an organization popular throughout California, and in those American states west of the Rocky Mountains, and it is already possessed of a large number of members and steadily growing larger.  We know as little of the composition of the Shrine, a body which has a large number of members in nearly all parts of the United States, and the Annual Sessions of which, in various of the greater American cities are occasions of much demonstration and rejoicing.  There are the Tall Cedars of Lebanon, intended for men who are Masons and claim to have reached a considerable proficiency in the esoteric work, the strength of this body being mostly in the southeastern states.  The Order of the Eastern Star, which is for women alone, association with which is forbidden by the United Grand Lodge of England to English Masons, has now an American membership of more than 400,000.

 

But more striking even than these is the rapid growth in America during the past few years of orders intended only for boys and girls.  In the comparatively young Order of De Molay for Boys, which is spreading with great speed in the United States, the candidate has to declare that he is a firm believer in the One Living and True God, and that his father either is or is not a Freemason, and he has to give the names of at least four Masonic relatives, and of four adult persons who have known him for three years; while nomination for membership must be made by either two members of the chapter he wishes to join, or by two Freemasons, and chapters for chapters can be issued only by a recognized Masonic body which promises to carry on the work.  Instituted as recently as the spring of 1919, it seems to be outstripping in rapidity of growth the Order of the Builders for Boys, which is of about the same age, and was instituted by members of a Lodge of Perfection of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite.  The object of this body is declared to organize between the ages of fourteen and twenty-one sons of members of lodges of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons, and their immediate or closest boyhood companions in order to aid in advancing their mental, moral, physical and spiritual up-bringing and development, but there can also become members such Master Masons "as are interested in the promotion and welfare of the Order, and as are necessary to exercise supervision and guidance for its conduct and maintenance."

 

For the other sex has been instituted the Order of the Rainbow for Girls between fourteen and eighteen years of age, which is American in scope, and bears the same relationship to girls as the Order of De Molay does to boys.  Claiming to "inculcate the love of God, home and country, putting special stress upon the American public school system, and political and religious liberty as guaranteed by the American Constitution." This order is for girls who are too young for membership in the Order of the Eastern Star, but for those of their elders who wish to proceed beyond the Eastern Star there is the Order of the White Shrine of Jerusalem, eligibility for membership of which is good standing in the Eastern Star, though the body does not claim to be in any way connected with that Order.  Its whole legend, it may be noted, is essentially Christian.

 

ALARMED AT INCREASE OF SIDE DEGREES

 

It is not an unnatural consequence of the jealousies and growth of these various imitative organizations that Craft Masonry in certain of the states is becoming alarmed at their rapid increase.  One American Grand Master, who incidentally is strongly in favour of the Eastern Star and the De Molay Order for Boys, roundly denounces as "Masonic parasites" various other bodies which seek to make membership in Masonry a prerequisite to their own membership, and he most seriously has asked the attention of his Grand Lodge to the question of whether it would not be well to legislate against such a practice.  Another Grand Master, when recently denouncing the attempts of various "miscellaneous organizations" basing their membership on Craft Masonry, to rush Craft Masons through a maze of higher degrees before, as he picturesquely says, "they are literally dry behind the ears," confesses his weakness when confronted with the present position.  "We have not confidence enough in our own intelligence to attempt to furnish a remedy," he says, "but feel sure that someone will suggest one before long that will do good.  We have scattered until our force is greatly weakened, and the time is right for the return of a consolidation of our activities.  Could we abolish all save lodges and chapters, we would be the gainers, and some sweet day we may find it necessary to do just that."

 

I could produce a whole volume of evidence from the various records of Masonic work in the United States to show how this sponge-like growth is spreading in American Masonry, and is threatening certain of the best interests of the Craft, but I have given sufficient testimony, I think, to satisfy our brethren that the price of Masonry, as of liberty, is eternal vigilance.  While willing to believe that nothing but the highest motives are entertained by those who promote these outer organizations or those who patronize their mysteries and share in their assemblies, I am strongly convinced that the policy of constant and close watchfulness, up to now pursued by the United Grand Lodge of England, when dealing with outside bodies has been fully justified by its results, and is the only one that can truly uphold the dignity and high importance of Freemasonry as we ourselves know it, feel it and hope to transmit it pure and unsullied to our successors as we have received it. It is because of this belief that I have ventured to take this opportunity to lay before so influential a lodge, and so representative a body of its members and associates, certain facts bearing upon a question which I am sure will do something to stimulate research in a direction that, up to now, as far as England is concerned, has been strangely neglected by those who should watch with the closest earnestness the everchanging signs of the times.

 

----o----

 

The Le Plongeon Theory of Freemasonry

 

By Prof. HERBERT J. SPINDEN, Massachusetts

With an Introduction by The Editor

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Our fathers in Masonry will recall the stir occasioned in 1886 by the publication of Sacred Mysteries Among the Mayas and the Quiches, 11,500 Years Ago: Their Relation to the Sacred Mysteries of Egypt, Greece, Chaldea and India: Freemasonry in Times Anterior to the Temple of Solomon; written by Augustus Le Plongeon.  The book was read with avidity at the time, as were all other volumes giving Freemasonry a fabulous origin, and even now the interest is not altogether abated if one may judge by the fact that inquiries concerning it come not infrequently to THE BUILDER.

 

Le Plongeon know as well as anybody that Freemasonry in the form it now wears is not 12,000 years old or anything like it, and was more or less familiar with the theories concerning its origin now more or less current; he made the point, a hard one to sustain but not altogether unreasonable, that while the BODY of the Craft is of comparatively modern origin, its SOUL has been a long time in the world, meaning thereby that its principles and symbols, and the general groundwork of its ceremonies, are late reincarnations of practices of the Ancient Mysteries and similar world-old religious cults.  The audacious theory in Le Plongeon's book was that the Ancient Mysteries, such as were in use in Greece and Egypt, were originally founded in America, among the Mayas, and migrated from thence over an ancient land bridge that was broken when Atlantis was destroyed.  He summed the argument up in a few words, to be found on page 22:

 

"I will endeavour to show you that the ancient sacred mysteries, the origin of Freemasonry consequently, date back from a period far more remote than the most sanguine students of its history ever imagined.  I will try to trace their origin, step by step, to this continent which we inhabit - to America - from where Maya colonists transported their ancient religious rites and ceremonies, not only to the banks of the Nile, but to those of the Euphrates, and the shores of the Indian Ocean, not less than 11,500 years ago."

 

On page 49 is another paragraph of similar import, interesting to read:

 

"Seeking for the origin of the institution of the sacred mysteries, of which Masonry seems to be the great-grandchild, following their vestiges from country to country, we have been brought over the vast expanse of the blue sea, to this western continent, to these mysterious 'Lands of the West' where the souls of all good men, the Egyptians believed, dwelt among the blessed. It is, therefore, in that Country, where Osiris was said to reign supreme, that we may expect to find the true signification of the symbols held sacred by the initiates in all countries, in all times, and which have reached us through the long vista of ages, still surrounded by the veil, 'well-nigh impenetrable, of mystery woven round them by their inventors.  My long researches among the ruins of the ancient temples and palaces of the Mayas have been rewarded by learning at the fountain-head the esoteric meaning of some at least of the symbols, the interpretation of which has puzzled many a wise head - the origin of the mystification and symbolism of the numbers 3, 5 and 7."

 

The theory may be summed up in a few words, to - wit: The origin of Freemasonry is to be found in ancient rites and symbolisms, of which the Mystery cults were the best known examples; these cults originated in America; their rites and symbols have been inherited by Freemasonry; therefore Freemasonry began in America 11,500 years ago.  The whole weight of this ingenious theory rests on the Le Plongeon account of early Maya civilization, and therefore is one to be properly referred to specialists in that field.

 

Professor Herbert Joseph Spinden, of Peabody Museum, Harvard University, is such a specialist.  He is one of the high authorities of the land on American archaeology, has made explorations among the ruined cities of Central America, and has written two books very interesting to read on the Maya subject - Maya Art, and Ancient Civilizations of Mexico and Central America.  When asked by THE BUILDER for a statement concerning Le Plongeon's work from a scientific point of view he sent the paper published herewith.  An excellent and very sympathetic account of Le Plongeon's career as an archaeologist, along with a detailed description of his most important finds, will be found in Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, Oct. 21, 1874, under the caption, "Dr. Le Plongeon in Yucatan." Le Plongeon's book may be purchased through the National Masonic Research Society at  $3.25 net. Prof. Spinden is not a Mason; all the more therefore are we appreciative of his courtesy in writing the critique herewith.

 

I WOULD appreciate the opportunity to correct a misconception which has gained strong hold regarding the origin of ancient American civilization and its possible relations with the Old World.  I realize that Le Plongeon's books have been an important factor in the spread of this erroneous idea and at the same time I do not wish to put myself in the position of making an attack upon him in any way unfriendly or unappreciative of his self-sacrificing struggles.

 

I must say to begin with that I am not a Mason and, therefore, have no inside knowledge of the special symbolisms which are used in its ceremonies.  The Masons, as their name implies, and their open history pretty clearly indicates, were builders and as such, they were first of all practical men.  By this I do not mean to imply that they were not interested in ideals as well as results.  Indeed it is always within the pride and practice of good craftsmanship to look beyond work to the things that work stands for in the emotional life of the social group.  But I cannot think that practical builders, if given a chance, would distribute social frills and esoteric ceremonials and not distribute at the same time the machines, processes and constructions that were their solid and real existence.

 

There were stone-workers in ancient America who erected some very interesting temples, embellished them with geometric designs and with the faces of grotesque gods who were believed to have jurisdiction over the sun and the rain.  The evolution of their art is an open book to archaeologists.  They invented a kind of corbelled vault but not a keystone vault.  For the most part they built their walls with a veneer of cut stone and filling of lime mortar poured over broken limestone.  They had the skyscraper instinct and satisfied it by putting their principal temples upon lofty pyramids and then erecting trellis-like walls on the roofs.  Doubtless some of their methods and results might be matched somewhere in the Old World, although they clearly received independent development in the New.

 

But - and here is the important point - they did not have metal tools, only Stone chisels.  This is certainly true in Yucatan.  In Peru and in western Mexico some copper and bronze chisels have been found, but no evidence that these were used in dressing stone is forthcoming. The First Empire of the Mayas, the highest period of civilization in the New World, passed without the use of metal.  And yet here was a tremendous civilization on the artistic and economic side, a civilization that means vastly more to us today in the food that we eat and the clothes that we wear than do the civilizations of Greece or Rome.

 

There were no draft animals in America, except the dog and llama, and there was not the slightest use of the wheel as a mechanical device.  If some Master Mason had reached these shores before Columbus, wouldn't he have left a cart and a windlass? Would he have wasted a precious opportunity to benefit his fellowmen in the practical ways of trade? Would he have taught instead only the details of an esoteric cult, well enough as a ceremonial but shining like the moon with light reflected from a greater purpose? These are questions which I shall let some Mason answer; I would consider myself unfair and antagonistic to the Order - which I am not - if I dared to answer these questions in the way they have been answered by Augustus Le Plongeon and some of his disciples.

 

Essentially the romanticists who argue that similarities in human culture necessarily mean contact degrade man instead of making his story of progress more wonderful.  They picture man as having a retentive memory merely and not a creative mind, but the science of anthropology shows very clearly that men do have creative minds and that all the peoples of the world given certain opportunities and stimuli arrive at pretty much the same results.

 

Nearly all persons who profess to believe that the rites of Freemasonry existed in ancient America seem to have been inspired by the writings of Augustus Le Plongeon, and especially by his Sacred Mysteries Among the Mayas and Quiches, 11,500 Years Ago. Their Relation, to the Sacred Mysteries of Egypt, Greece, Chaldea and India Freemasonry in Times Anterior to the Temple of Solomon. This book was published over thirty-five years ago at a time when real knowledge of the ancient ruined cities of Central America was non-existent.  Almost anything could be claimed without fear of successful contradiction, but even in those halcyon and vociferous days Le Plongeon was not able to gain converts to his strange and fantastic theories among persons familiar with the subject matter of art and history.  Today it is easy enough to controvert his basic doctrine.  He believed that the civilizations of Egypt, Assyria, India, etc., began in Central America, thus taking the opposite side from many other romanticists who have attempted to carry civilizations from the Old World to the New.

 

Le Plongeon was one of the first to explore Chichen Itza, a ruined city in northern Yucatan, and he excavated some interesting altars and ceremonial objects which we now know belong to a period between 1000 and 1300 A.D. He made romantic explanations of these things and also evolved what he called an alphabet, pretending to read passages in inscriptions by means of this alphabet.  Now the world is very eager to recover the real message in Mayan inscriptions, and every suggestion has been subjected to searching tests.  The course of Mayan history has been sharply outlined.  We know that Chichen Itza was founded for the first time about 450 A.D. and abandoned shortly after 600 A.D. for a period of 260 years, after which it was reestablished.  It was finally abandoned about eighty years before the coming of the Spaniards after a period during which Mexican overlords controlled the destinies of the city.  But Le Plongeon says, "From Chichen this great civilization seems to have extended its influence to the remotest parts of the earth, and to have exercised its controlling power among far-distant and heterogeneous nations." But comparative chronology will not let us derive the origin of Egyptian culture from a city which was founded long after Egypt had passed into ruin.

 

But lest there should be an attempt among some persons to reform the arguments of Le Plongeon on another base, let us look at some of the controlling facts as regards historical relations in ancient times between the New and Old Worlds.  Man came into the New World as a savage with simple implements of the new-stone type, perhaps as much as 15,000 years ago and before any kind of civilization was developed anywhere in the Old World.  The American Indian, as a whole, is physically closely allied to the rather primitive tribes of northeastern Asia.  Nevertheless, he has natural characters which mark him off from other peoples.

 

The languages of the ancient Americans are distinct from those of the Old World and are highly diversified.  No legitimate proofs of linguistic characters between the eastern and western hemispheres have ever been accepted, if we omit the case of a small body of Eskimos who are recent invaders into Siberia from the American side.  The cultures or habits of life of the American Indians are different from those of Europe or Africa.  They had simple arts, such as basketry, flint chipping, etc., when they spilled into their new land across the Straits of Bering many thousand years ago.  They did not bring in food supplies, for agriculture had not been invented anywhere at this time.  Now the higher civilizations of America are all built directly upon food supply, in exactly the same way as the civilizations of the Old World are built upon food supply; but the plants domesticated in America were entirely unknown in Europe and Asia before the discovery of America by Columbus and similarly the domesticated plants of the Old World were unknown in the New.  The only apparent exceptions to this statement are cotton, where independent species were domesticated in the two hemispheres and the common gourd which probably drifted by water around the world.

 

There have been plenty of parallel developments in processes and constructions.  Pottery was independently invented as was the loom.  Many decorative designs were discovered over and over again, examples being such geometric forms as the swastika and the Greek fret, but all in all the most notable achievements of the East and West have been distinct.  The Mayas were much ahead of the Old World nations in mathematics and astronomy.  The Peruvians were the world's weavers and the sedentary American Indians in general were more successful as breeders of plants  than were the peoples of the Old World.  On the other hand, most domestic animals are of Old-World origin and most basic machines, such as the wheel and the screw were invented in the Old World and were entirely unknown in the New.

 

The follower of the fantastic proofs of contact between America and the Old World before the momentous voyage of Columbus which were presented to explain comparative minor matters, has got to swim a very wide channel against a very strong tide.  Speaking as a scientist who has gone deeply into the matter of art and ceremony and kept, I hope, an open mind to real proofs, I must say that nothing has come to light that indicates that Freemasonry was known in ancient America.  The only possibility of its introduction would be through the Norsemen who had a slight trading contact with primitive tribes in Greenland and Labrador.  There was no lost Atlantis to give a dryland connection and no proofs of lost Phoenician galleys or any of the other romantic devices have survived the white light of scientific research.

 

----o----

 

An Unique Masonic Meeting on the Battlefield in France

 

The following account of a most unique event in the annals of the Craft has been collected from several sources and deserves to be put on perpetual record.  The incident is not yet complete, but the main facts are as here stated.  Through the courtesy of Brother Alexander Anderson, U.S.S. Maryland, the main incidents first came to our attention.  The others came through correspondence with other craftsmen.  So far as known this is the only occasion of its kind during the World War.  It emphasizes the virility of the Institution and its adaptability to every circumstance.

-C. F. Irwin.  Associate Editor.

 

 

DURING the World War the craftsmen on board the U.S.S. New Hampshire organized the "Granite Club", of which Brother Alexander Anderson was president.  This club maintained the custom of entertaining all Masons of the army who traveled across the ocean east and west.  During the winter of 1918-1919, while transporting troops westward, they had occasion to hold a Masonic meeting in one of their wardrooms.  In the company was Worshipful Brother Colonel Morris B. Payne, who related the following story:

 

"On December 31, 1917, I was installed Master of Union Lodge, No. 31, A.F. & A.M., of New London, Conn.  On that date I conferred the first three degrees on Colonel L.R. Burgess, commanding officer of the 56th Coast Artillery Corps.  Shortly after my installation it became evident that my regiment would soon be ordered to France, so a number of Masons in the regiment petitioned the Grand Master of Connecticut to grant us a charter to take with us.  This he did not care to do, and as it afterwards developed he used very good judgment, as the keeping of records and electing candidates in the field would have been practically impossible.  He did, however, grant to me a special dispensation to confer the first three degrees of Masonry on ten members of the regiment who were elected but who had not been worked.  Our work in the training area in France was so laid out that an opportunity to gather a lodge together did not occur until the regiment had moved into the zone of the armies.  It then became apparent to me that I would have to do the work at once or possibly never do it.

 

"The regiment detrained at a place called La Ferte on the Marne River, and from there went into temporary billets at Charly-sur-Marne, about six miles south of Chateau-Thierry.  On the evening of August 8, 1918, I opened a lodge of Entered Apprentices in the Hotel-de-Ville (City Hall).  The building was in a fair state of repair, notwithstanding the destruction in the immediate vicinity.  By a liberal use of blankets over the openings we were able to operate with a fair amount of privacy.  On this evening I conferred the First Degree on six candidates.  The three lesser lights used were three very handsome silver candlesticks borrowed from the Catholic church in the village.

 

"On August 9, 1918, I conferred the Second Degree on the same six candidates.  For the lack of other equipment a good brother very artistically chalked the 3-5-7 steps and emblems on the floor.

 

"On the evening of August 11, I raised the six candidates and one other who had received his first two degrees in the States.  The 26th (Yankee Division) was well represented, that outfit being located close by. The work was done perhaps not so smoothly as one would expect under more pleasant conditions, but I assure you that the candidates were not neglected.

 

"The first candidate for the Third Degree will perhaps recall his experience as long as he lives.  After he had met his third obstruction and had been moved to the west, the bugler outside sounded taps.  This feature was a coincidence which made it just the more impressive.

 

"A few days later I was ordered to put my guns into action.  While moving into position we lost one of our most enthusiastic brothers, Brother Robert C. Fletcher, of Norwich, Conn.  While our column was passing a crossroad the German artillery opened fire and Brother Fletcher received wounds that caused his death within a few moments.  His loss was keenly felt by all who knew him, and it had the effect of raising the morale of my battalion to the point that nothing they could do would be enough to avenge the death of their comrade.

 

"The officers in the lodge were Brother Major Harry Skinner, of Massachusetts, S.W.; Brother Major J. Eugene Nestor, Connecticut, J.W. (both P.M's); Brother Capt. Camille Mazeau, Connecticut, S.D.; Brother Lieut. J.A. Harvey, Connecticut, J.D.; the other officers changed from night to night as available.

 

"During the Argonne battle I received dispensation to confer the degrees on several other candidates, but the opportunity never arrived."

 

For an interesting continuation of this story, see the following letter received through the courtesy of Capt. E.Q. Jackson, New York City.  This letter is one of a large number on his files from the Masonic Club of the American Camp at Blois, France.

 

During May, 1918, this club advertised in the Paris edition of the New York Herald, inviting any Masons in the army to open communication with their club.  The following letter was one of the replies:

 

May 12, 1918.

Battery E, 119 Reg.,

F.A., A.E.F.

A.P.O. 711.

 

 

Dear Mr. Oettinger:

 

In looking through the Herald last night I saw your article concerning the Masons, and decided that you were the man that could perhaps help me.

 

I consider myself a Mason; consider may sound rather odd, but here's how it is.  My application was sent through by Major Morris B. Payne, and I received a receipt O.K. Then we left for "over here" just the day designated to go to New London (Union Lodge, No. 31) to take my degrees, so I was disappointed.  However, the Major told me that I would probably be able to take them here, and I was figuring on that being quite a novelty.

 

But he was temporarily transferred from our battery (56th C.A.C.) and then before he returned I was transferred to this battery.  And I would like very much to be able to finish them.  Today I received a copy of Craftsman and was surprised to see my name in the honour roll of the lodge, Major Payne being Worshipful Master,.  His whereabouts are unknown to me an I decided on asking information from you.

 

If you can suggest something, somehow or somewhere that I could do, or go, I would appreciate it very much.  Thanking you very much, I remain, with best regards,

Sincerely,

Corp. Leslie V. Manchester.

 

P.S. My home is in Norwich, Conn., and I was stationed at Fort H. G. Wright, just outside in the sound.

 

Thus we have on record the opening of a Master Masons lodge in the very front of the battle line during the fierce month of August in 1918, and the conferring of the three degrees upon six of our American soldiers.

 

----o----

 

Freemasonry and Toleration in the Colonies

By Bro. BENJAMIN WELLINGTON BRYANT, California

 

This paper may with profit be read in conjunction with Bro.  Bryant's contribution to THE BUILDER, February, 1923, page 50.  THE BUILDER is not much in sympathy with those who seek to stir up religious strife and rancour, least of all with those who would introduce it into Freemasonry, nevertheless it believes that an impartial treatment of some subjects is valuable to the student, and therefore arranged with Bro.  Bryant for these two able articles, along with others to follow.  Those who may be interested to read an account of Roman Catholicism in Revolutionary America from the Romanist's point of view are advised to consult The Life and Times of John Carroll, published by The Encyclopedia Press, 119 East 57th street, New York City, 1922.  John Carroll was Archbishop of Baltimore.  Chapters v, vi and vii deal with some points covered by Bro. Bryant, and are entitled thus: "The Catholic Church in the United States on the Eve of the Revolution," "Catholics in the American Revolution," "Carroll's Mission to Canada." Bishop Carroll was largely responsible for publishing a ban against Freemasonry in America.  On page 780 of his biography occurs this peculiar statement: "To those who are aware that, two years previous to this ban on the Freemasons, the Ursuline Nuns of Nantes wrought a beautiful Masonic apron of satin, with gold and silver mountings, for George Washington, this regulation will appear curious." On page 781 is a long letter written by Carroll concerning Freemasonry and the Roman Catholic Church.

 

"A Mason is obliged by his tenure to obey the moral law; and if he rightly understands the art, he will never be a stupid atheist nor an irreligious libertine.  But though in ancient times Masons were charged in every country to be of the religion of that country or nation, whatever it was, yet it is now thought more expedient only to obligate them to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves; that is, to be good men and true, or men of honour and honesty, by whatever denominations or persuasions they may be distinguished; whereby Masonry becomes the center of union, and the means of conciliating true friendship among persons that must else have remained at a perpetual distance."

 

Charge "Concerning God and Religion" in the first (Anderson's) Book of Constitutions.

 

IN the year 1717, and during the reign of the first George of England, occurred the great event of modern Masonic history - the Revival of the Fraternity.  This was far from being the least of the causes that contributed, during the subsequent half century, to the propagation of the ideals of human liberty and religious toleration, and to the undermining of despotism, both in the political and ecclesiastical sense.

 

 

The charge "Concerning God and Religion," which was first published in Anderson's Constitutions of 1723, is one of the landmarks of human as well as Masonic progress; it is doubtful if the language contains a half dozen passages of equal length that have exerted more influence upon human thought.  Sectarianism and bigotry cannot live in the midst of a group of men united in the bonds of "that religion in which all men agree," for such is the very foundation of universal brotherhood.  A group of men in any community united on that basis must inevitably carry the ideal with them when they leave the tiled precincts of the lodge, and must exert a powerful influence upon the thought and action of all with whom they come in contact.  Such a group must be an influential factor, through their own efforts and through the force of example, in the building of a fairer, nobler and more fraternal social and political structure.

 

The only forces which have desired or dared to attempt the extinguishing of the light of Masonry have always been, and still are, those that work in behalf of political and religious despotism.  Of these, the contest waged by the latter has been the more bitter even as its effects have been more baneful in cramping and distorting the minds of men.  It is with the latter, far more than with the former, that our contest here in America has been waged from the beginning.  Only too frequently history exaggerates the lesser struggles, waged on the battlefield and within legislative halls, and ignores or belittles the far more bitter and relentless, though less spectacular, struggle for the control of the minds and consciences of men.

 

It is more than significant that the Masonic Fraternity stepped out of the shadows into the full glare of historical light just at the time when those forces of darkness had received a most important, if not a final cheek in England.  Of Freemasonry prior to 1717 we can catch only occasional unsatisfactory glimpses. How much of it existed and what was its influence must be left to conjecture.  It is difficult to believe, however, that the religious clause in the Charges approved in 1722 represented a novel innovation or a sudden reversal of established customs.

 

Much has been written of those men who stood in the front rank of English Masonry at this period.  Doubtless much more could be said of their high character and broad vision.  However, the present purpose is to endeavour to show the intimate connection of the Craft with the dissemination of the ideas of human liberty, religious toleration and popular education which have since become the foundation stones of our American institutions.

 

The first Freemason on this continent of whom we have reliable historical record is a character fully in keeping with the high standards of worth which the Craft has ever sought to maintain, for it was no less a personage than Jonathan Belcher, Governor of Massachusetts Colony from 1730 to 1741.  Bro.  Belcher was made a Mason in England, whither he had gone to complete his education, in 1704.  He returned to Massachusetts the following year.

 

Mr. Samuel Oppenheim devotes several pages of history of his essay on The Jews and Masonry in the United States before 1810 to consideration of a tradition of a Masonic lodge held at Newport, Rhode Island, as early as 1656 or 1658.  The evidence is meager, however, and there are some points in which it does not square with well substantiated Masonic history.  On the other hand, reliable evidence has been found that a lodge met for a time in King's Chapel, Boston, in the year 1720.  Melvin M. Johnson, Past Grand Master of Massachusetts, in an article published in THE BUILDER for May, 1915, states on the authority of Bro. Sachse, Librarian of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, that confirmation of this fact may be found in the Library of the American Philosophical Society.

 

The recorded history of the Fraternity of this continent began about the year 1730, both Massachusetts and Pennsylvania claiming the honour of priority.  It is sufficient for us here that the Craft was established in both these colonies about that year.  Thence it spread throughout the thirteen English-speaking colonies and attracted to its altars the best of many communities, men who were or soon came to be recognized as leaders in every field of public endeavour.  It is an indisputable fact that prior to the Revolution a surprisingly large number of lodges had been chartered in the colonies.

 

That our brethren of that early day were actively promoting the cause of public education is indicated by a fragment of correspondence quoted by Hayden in Washington and his Masonic Compeers.  It is a portion of a letter from a German printer, Christopher Sowrs, of Germantown, to Conrad Weiser.  In it bitter complaint is made of the activities of Benjamin Franklin and the Freemasons generally on behalf of the movement for free schools.  Sowrs exclaimed: "The people who are the promoters of the free schools are Grand Masters and Wardens among the Freemasons, their very pillars."

 

MASONS AS PIONEERS IN EDUCATION

 

Another interesting sidelight on the subject of early Masonic interest in education is a resolution adopted by St. John's Lodge of Philadelphia under date of June 5, 1732, and believed by good authorities to be in the handwriting of Benjamin Franklin.  It provides:

 

"1. That since the excellent Science of Geometry and Architecture is so much recommended in our ancient Constitutions, Masonry being first instituted with this Design, among others, to distinguish the true and skillful Architect from unskillful Pretenders; total ignorance of this art is very unbecoming a Man who bears the worthy Name and Character of a Mason.

 

"We therefore conclude, that it is the Duty of every Member to make himself, in some measure, acquainted therewith, as he would honour the Society he belongs to, and conform to the Constitutions.

 

"2. That every member may have an Opportunity of so doing, the present Cash to be laid out in the best Books of Architecture, suitable Mathematical instruments, etc."

 

The foregoing resolution with an account of its discovery may be found in the American edition of Gould's History of Freemasonry. (Vol. IV, p. 235.)

 

Here we have indisputable evidence that the Masons of Philadelphia, both as individuals and as a Fraternity, were actively interested in free education.  It was scarcely two score years later that the Massachusetts brethren at least gave equal proof of their devotion to the cause of human liberty by active participation in the stirring events which led to the outbreak of the Revolution.  We cannot but be certain that much of the inspiration of the innumerable other workers in the field of human progress throughout the colonies was gained from Freemasonry.  The Masonic names that appear among the Colonial and Revolutionary leaders leave no doubt on this score.  Washington, Randolph, Pinckney, Patrick Henry, from Virginia; Adams, Hancock, Warren, Otis, Revere, from Massachusetts; Thornton, Bartlett, Sullivan, from New Hampshire; Livingston, Jay, Gouverneur Morris, from New York; Greene, from Rhode Island; Ethan Allen, from Vermont; Franklin, Rush, Robert Morris, "Mad Anthony" Wayne, from Pennsylvania - the list is too long for more extended notice.  The reader's attention is directed to Hayden's Washington and his Masonic Compeers and to Madison Peters' Masons as Makers of America.

 

Attention should also be drawn to the fact that the earliest Masonic centers, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia, were the colonies where the most vigorous organized resistance to royal tyranny appeared; and these colonies furnished the most able and active of the Revolutionary leaders.  Some significance may be attached to this circumstance.  The value of a Masonic lodge to a community, not only as a disseminator of high ideals of citizenship, but also as a training school of popular government, cannot be questioned.  Too little attention has been given to this phase of Revolutionary and early Constitutional history.  The part played by the Fraternity in the establishment of American independence and in the building of a stable government in these United States is as yet scarcely realized.

 

THE SOUL OF ULSTER

 

Another factor that has received little attention, and which is closely allied to Masonry, is the great Scotch-Irish immigration during the half century preceding the Revolution.  These people were of the only faction in that unhappy island who could possibly have lent their cordial support to Irish Masonry, and they came from the districts where it had made its first recorded appearance in Ireland.  They must have brought with them much of the Masonic ideal, together with a stern realization of the age-long, bitter and relentless struggle of ecclesiasticism against all that makes for liberty, toleration, education and fraternity.  I have seen no work that gives a more clear and concise account of the conditions under which they had lived than Mr. Ernest Hamilton's The Soul of Ulster. While not a Masonic book, it is worth the time of every Mason to read it.

 

Only too well those sturdy Scotch-Irish pioneers knew the lengths to which religious intolerance could be carried, and their influence counted for much in shaping a government here in America under which every sect and every citizen should be equal before the law, and in creating a Constitution that is a standing rebuke to any organization or individual seeking special privileges.  It is estimated that upwards of half a million of these immigrants arrived prior to the Revolution.

 

In 1775 there were approximately three million people in the thirteen colonies.  Of these, not to exceed 25,000 were of the Roman faith. By far the greater majority of the Roman Catholic population resided in Maryland, the original "Catholic colony," and in Pennsylvania, where the Quakers extended to them a sort of negative toleration.  There were some score or so of Roman Catholic priests.

 

There seems to have been a strong disposition on the part of our fathers of '76 to extend to this small and apparently harmless minority, a greater measure of toleration than they had enjoyed at any time previously under the colonial governments.  It is significant, however, that one of the complaints raised against the Mother Country just prior to the outbreak of hostilities was occasioned by the passage by Parliament of the Quebec Act.  The Declaration of Rights of 1774 mentioned this act as one of the "infringements and violations of the rights of the colonists," and declared its repeal as "essentially necessary in order to restore harmony between Great Britain and the American colonies."

 

"Also the act passed at the same session for establishing the Roman Catholic religion in the province of Quebec, abolishing the equitable system of English laws, and erecting a tyranny there, to the great danger (from so total a dissimilarity of religion, law and government) of the neighbouring British Colonies, by the assistance of whose blood and treasure the said country was conquered from France."

 

The government of Canada was thus placed practically in the hands of the priesthood.  It was most bitterly resented by the English speaking colonists, and was again referred to in the Declaration of Independence two years later.

 

"For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies."

 

Article XV1, of the Virginia "Declaration of Rights," adopted May 6, 1776, expresses a sentiment that is reminiscent of the clause "Concerning God and Religion" of Anderson's Constitutions:

 

"That religion, or the duty we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the duty of all to practice Christian forebearance, love and charity towards each other."

 

These passages are important in illustrating the trend of thought in the colonies.  The adoption of the Quebec Act by the English Parliament would seem to indicate that the party in power in Protestant Britain, realizing that the spirit of revolt was spreading through the English-speaking colonies, was seeking to placate the Catholic priesthood of Canada in order to enlist their aid in preventing the infection of rebellion from reaching the newly acquired French provinces.  The Act served its purpose in Canada, but it only added fuel to the conflagration in the thirteen Protestant Colonies.

 

The purpose of the act and its certain effect upon the Roman Catholics of Quebec must certainly have been understood in the colonies, as the resentment of the colonies must have been known at least to the priesthood of that province, yet, curiously enough, the Continental Congress, only a few months prior to the adoption of the clause quoted from the Declaration of Independence, sent a commission to Quebec in an effort to enlist the aid of that province in the struggle against the mother country.  The members of the commission were Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Chase and Charles Carroll; the latter's cousin, John Carroll, a Jesuit priest and later the first Catholic Archbishop in the United States, went along as a priestly appendage to the party.  Needless to say, their efforts came to naught.

 

THE CONWAY CABAL

 

During the progress of the Revolution the loyalty of a large percentage of the Romanist population to the American cause was far from being above question.  The infamous "Conway Cabal" against Washington took its name from Major General Thomas Conway, a member of that church and one of the few non-Masons holding high commissions in Washington's army.  Again, when the British, finding themselves hard pressed for soldiers to carry on the war, sought enlistments among the colonists, their principal, if not practically their only success, was among the Roman Catholic population.  These were still under the domination of the Jesuits who not only distrusted the Masonic influences that were playing so large a part in the leadership of the patriot cause, but also hated our French allies for the stand taken by France in the suppression of the Society of Jesus.  Hence they were only too ready to make common cause with England against their Protestant and Masonic neighbours.

 

According to Bancroft's History of the United States Howe was able to form a regiment of Catholics in Philadelphia.  Clinton also, by playing on their racial weaknesses and by flattery, allured many in New York to the support of the British cause.  He raised a regiment for Lord Rawdon in which both officers and men were exclusively Irish Roman Catholics.  Among them were nearly five hundred deserters from the Continental Army.  Two regiments certainly represented no small percentage of the able bodied males among the 25,000 adherents of that faith in the colonies at the time.  So much for the "Irish of the Revolution."

 

By way of contrast the almost interminable list of Masons who were active supporters of the cause of independence speaks for itself.  Much could be written of the work of the military lodges in the Continental Army, as well as of the numerous civil and military leaders who were members of the Fraternity.  When Warren fell at Bunker Hill the Massachusetts brethren lost their Provincial Grand Master.  The Sons of Liberty were largely officered by Masons, and their Boston headquarters, the Green Dragon Tavern, was also the home of St. Andrew's Lodge.  It is a matter of record that on the night of the famous "Tea Party" the lodge was unable to work owing to lack of attendance.  Paul Revere, who had been credited with the leadership of the band that boarded the tea ships, was at the time Junior Warden of St. Andrew's Lodge.  Many of the other Revolutionary leaders who were Masons have already been mentioned.

 

The number of Masons among the signers of the Declaration of Independence and among the members of the Constitutional Convention is too much in dispute for discussion in the limited space of this article, but enough is known with certainty to prove that the leading spirits of both conventions were members of the Craft.  The immortal documents framed at those two conventions were made possible by, as they represented the spirit of Freemasonry in America.

 

----o----

 

The Comacine Masters: A Reply

 

By Bro. W. RAVENSCROFT, England

 

Historians know a great deal about the builder gilds of the Roman Empire and much about the gilds of the Middle Ages; but what about the extended period between the two? For a long time it appeared to be impossible to bridge this gap.  It remained for a woman, Mrs. Lucy Baxter, writing over the pen name of "Leader Scott" in a volume entitled "The Cathedral Builders," to offer a theory with sufficient merit in it to attract general attention.  Mrs. Baxter was followed by Bro. W.R. Ravenscroft, whose little book, "The Comacines, Their Predecessors and Their Successors," was published serially in THE BUILDER.  An elementary sketch of the Comacine Theory was published in the Study Club department of THE BUILDER, October, 1923, page 305.  The contribution printed below was written by way of reply to the Study Club article, and should be read in conjunction therewith.  Bro. Ravenscroft is one of the most delightful friends in the world who understands how to disagree without being disagreeable.

 

 IN the October 1923 number of THE BUILDER under the section set apart for the Study Club the editor has dealt with the question of Freemasonry and the Comacine Masters, and if one may be permitted to say so he has done this with frankness, fairness and friendly spirit and by not attempting to settle differences but by restricting himself to a statement of known facts and a brief sketch of theories regarding the Comacines and their relation to Freemasonry.  He has opened the door for some further consideration of the subject.  He concludes his article, however, by an expression of his opinion for which I am sure we are grateful because of the value we set upon anything he gives us in that, as in other directions.  This permits one to venture on a similar expression.  May I therefore, in a short effort, be allowed to carry on the study and divide what I have to say into four parts:

 

1st.  As to the facts about the Comacines. 2nd.  As to opinions about them. 3rd.  As to the connection between them and Speculative Masonry. 4th.  As to Bro.  Haywood's closing remarks.

 

First then as to facts:

 

It is amazing to read that Wyatt Papworth should say "I believe they never existed," or that George Edmund Street should consider the "theory" of the Comacines altogether erroneous when we have such a mass of actual historic evidence before us, and when we can give documentary evidence and the names and dates of individual Comacine Masters and point to the scores of buildings they erected, still standing.  Moreover, we have statements (not opinions) of Italian writers who have studied the subject; and last of all the numerous traditions which, although not direct evidence, are of some value.  Neither Wyatt Papworth nor Street, however, are men to whom we should look for any reliable help in this direction, simply because the one was concerned chiefly in architectural history in general and could not have given the time or thought required to qualify for a statement on the Comacines and Freemasonry on which any reliance could be placed, while the other (Street) was distinctly a student of Gothic development and not an authority for the work of those days which preceded the birth of Gothic in Europe.  I very much doubt if either seriously studied and investigated the subject on the spot or indeed sufficiently to make their evidence of any value.  One might write a great deal more on this first point, for it seems to me it would be just as reasonable to doubt whether William the First ever conquered England as to question the existence or work of the Comacines.  But I will only add that  it is known as fact (the editor says "believed") that Comacine Masters and Craftsmen did work in the district of Como and that the reason for their continuing in that neighbourhood was, as the editor says, the twofold one of available quarries, and the rapid development of the Lombards from a semi-savage to a civilized people.

 

Next as to opinions about the Comacines.  Here I need only refer to those hostile, the chief of such being held, I suppose, R.F. Gould.  This writer has, according to some, demonstrated conclusively a good many things, and amongst them the mythical character of the Comacines.  Bro. E. Ellison of San Francisco last year contributed an article to THE BUILDER entitled "Traveling Craftsmen" (April 1922, page 102) in which he relies on the opinion of Gould; but in the November number of THE BUILDER of the same year Bro. Cyrus Field Willard, of California, effectually disposes of the position taken by Gould, and one cannot do better than refer to that article in order to show the weakness of Gould's opinion.  Unfortunately I do not know what Dr. Milman has to say, but I am well aware that in England there are critics who, in their desire to trace everything that one would denominate "Comacine" to Byzantine origin, simply ignore the existence of the former or at least call it by another name.  Not so Rivoira who places between these two influences that of Ravenna, and in a most consistent way shows their relation to each other.

 

I pass on to the connection between the Comacines and Speculative Freemasonry, and here it seems necessary to make it clear that no claim based on proof has, so far as one knows, been made that in an unbroken line Speculative Masonry is clearly the direct outcome of the Comacine Gilds.

 

What are the facts?

 

That Comacine lodges did exist. There are records of them; buildings are still standing which are pointed out as their headquarters, e.g. one at Assisi referred to in my little book.  They had a system of symbolism in many respects similar to that of Speculative Masonry.  They were called to England over and over again and engaged in the erection of churches there.

 

The architecture of those churches corresponded with that of their work in Lombardy in many striking details.  And the symbolism expressed in stone in those churches also corresponded in many ways with that they had at home.  So far as I know these are undisputed facts, and then, although of course of less weight, there are their traditions of King Solomon's Temple.  Leaving that out, however, as nebulous, if some brethren would have us so regard it, I submit we have facts enough to show that in England there did exist "Masonic lodges" by whatever name they may be called.  If it be challenged that this is all true except that the men who formed these lodges in England were not Comacines, one asks the question, Who then were they? Not men from Byzantium, not from Rome, not from Germany, but either from France or Italy; so the records read, so the architecture conforms, and I think I am right in saying history gives no other gilds who would be at all likely to fill the place claimed for these men.

 

Metzario professes to trace their existence through the later medieval times and claims for them the glory of Gothic architecture.  Here I venture to think he is wrong and that the real fact was that the Comacine gilds merged into those of the Gothic Masters which were more wide spread in Europe than ever the Comacines had been. In a word these latter were lost in the larger movement which characterized the great Gothic building period.  That their ritual and symbolism, probably with many modifications, passed on to the later gilds one claims as a fair inference and equally that our Speculative Masonry is largely based upon the practices of the later medieval gilds, thus forming a chain of several links, connecting the Comacine Masters with our Masonry of to-day, but beyond that one would not venture to dogmatize.

 

Now as to Bro. Haywood's closing remarks. Here may I say that the delightful and courteous way in which he disagrees, is so attractive that one is fain to be thankful even for the disagreement.  In the same spirit I would reply as follows:

 

Bro. Haywood says my opinion that the Comacines held traditions of King Solomon's temple is open to two facts which tell heavily against me. One that most of these traditions are in the Scriptures and therefore available to anyone.  To this I reply that the Scriptures were not available to anyone, only to the learned and chiefly to ecclesiastics.  Hence the value of a body outside the church holding such traditions.  Moreover, supposing they had been available to anyone that does not militate against their adoption or symbolic usage by any guild.  They are open to anyone today yet we Masons appropriate them in a peculiar sense.

 

The other argument against me, Bro. Haywood says, is that there is no known connection between the Comacine and Gothic gilds which latter developed in Europe, but found little development in Italy.  I think the answer to this is given under my last heading in which I considered the decline of the Comacine gilds thus showing that there were not two schools running on contemporaneously and to this I might add that in England at least the growth of Gothic work out of Norman architecture through the transitional period and the previous growth of Norman work in England out of the so-called Saxon, evidences a connection and sequence which cannot be ignored.  This being the case it is not to be expected that there should be any connection between these gilds except that of sequence.

 

I have only now to thank the editor for the kind words in which he has referred to my researches and writings, and for the courteous spirit and unbiased manner in which he has set forth his conclusions.  May I hope that, for further elucidation of whatever may remain obscure regarding the Comacines, any brother who can contribute information will do so seeing it is better (whether my theories hold good or are shaken) that the truth shall prevail.

 

I hold no brief against stronger evidence.

 

----o----

 

"A TOAST TO OUR NATWE: LAND"

 

Huge and alert, irascible yet strong,

We make our fitful way 'mid right and wrong.

One time we pour out millions to be free,

Then rashly sweep an Empire from the sea!

One time we strike the shackles from the slaves.

And then, quiescent, we are ruled by knaves.

Often we rudely break restraining bars,

And confidently reach out toward the stars.

 

Yet under all there flows a hidden stream

Sprung from the Rock of Freedom, the great dream

Of Washington and Franklin, men of old

Who knew that freedom is not bought with gold.

This is the land we love, our heritage,

Strange mixture of the gross and fine, yet sage

And full of promise,  -  destined to be great.

Drink to Our Native Land! God Bless the State.

 

- Robert Bridges, in Atlantic Monthly, January, 1902.

 

----o----

 

Entered Apprentice Degree With Its Groups of Three

By Bro. CHARLES E. BOYDEN, Grand Lecturer, A.F. & A.M., North Dakota

 

THE BUILDER, JANUARY 1924

 

Now let our minds be clear and free

To dwell a while on Masonry,

Its basic principles forsooth,

That we may grasp the Precious Truth

Concealed in "Mystic Groups of Three"

As visioned in the First Degree.

 

 

THE left was said by ancient Masonic writers to be the weaker part of man and by analogy the Entered Apprentice Degree was pronounced the "weakest" part of Masonry; but the consensus of opinion among modern Masonic investigators lays more stress on the Entered Apprentice Degree as being basic and fundamental; the cornerstone of a moral and Masonic edifice. Upon this cubical stone of "Faith in God' the candidate for Masonic Light, at his entrance, places his trust and commences to build the temple of character.

 

Let us consider in detail these "Groups of Three" which in this degree are quite marked.  Masonry is defined by many Masonic writers as being a system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols, and the symbolism of the Entered Apprentice Degree is mainly calculated to impress upon the mind a high regard for the moral lessons to be derived from a study of the "groups of three" as presented in the lectures.

 

The "Three Knocks," alluding to a certain text in scripture, "Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you," was applied as follows: the candidate asked the recommendation of a friend to be made a Mason, through his recommendation sought initiation, knocked at the door of the lodge and it was opened unto him.  How true this allusion is to life.  What we ask for and seek for in truth and set our affections upon, we naturally obtain.  It is the law of the natural and spiritual world.

 

The Three Great Lights are the Holy Bible, Square, and Compasses.  The Holy Bible is to rule and guide our faith, the Square to square our actions, and the Compasses to circumscribe and keep us in due bounds with all mankind.  The Holy Bible is dedicated to God, it being the inestimable gift of God to man; the Square to the Master, for it is the proper Masonic emblem of his office; and the Compasses to the Craft, for by a due attention to its uses they are taught to circumscribe their desires and keep their passions in due bounds.

 

The Three Lesser Lights are the Sun, Moon and Master of the Lodge symbolical of the Divine Mastery over Nature, and the Mastery of Man over himself and the Animal Kingdom.

 

In the Three Divisions of the twenty-four inch gauge we find eight hours for the service of God and the relief of a distressed worthy brother, eight for our usual avocation and eight for refreshment and sleep.  In this material age we are apt to emphasize the latter two divisions of our time and neglect the former, "service to God and our fellow men." If Masons could only be impressed with this fair division of time, what happiness would follow!

 

The Three Symbolic Supports of a lodge are Wisdom, Strength, and Beauty.  The universe is the Temple of the Deity whom we serve; wisdom, strength and beauty are about His throne as pillars of His work, for His wisdom is infinite, His strength omnipotent, and his beauty shines forth through all His creations in symmetry and order.  These pillars represent the three principal officers of the lodge.  The Worshipful Master is supposed to have wisdom to open and govern his lodge; the Senior Warden to assist him in his arduous duties, and the Junior Warden, who in ancient times observed the sun at meridian height, which is the beauty and glory of the day, presides at the refreshment hour and sees that none convert the means of refreshment into intemperance or excess.

 

Faith, Hope and Charity are the principal rounds of the mysterious ladder which Jacob in his vision saw extending from earth to heaven; the greatest of these is Charity, for our Faith may be lost in sight, Hope ends in fruition, but Charity or Love extends beyond the grave throughout the boundless realms of eternity.

 

The Three ornaments of the lodge are the Mosaic Pavement, the Indented Tessel, and the Blazing Star.  The Mosaic Pavement is a representation of the ground floor of King Solomon's Temple; the Indented Tessel, of that beautiful tessellated border or skirting which surrounded it.  The Mosaic Pavement is emblematic of human life, checkered with good and evil; the Beautiful Border which surrounds it of those blessings and comforts which surround us, and which we hope to obtain by a faithful reliance upon Divine Providence, which is hieroglyphically represented by the Blazing Star.

 

The Three Symbolic lights are to be found in the East, West, and South, while Darkness (the absence of light) is to be found in the North.  Let us always be seekers after more light and avoid the abysmal Darkness, which is the state of a Soul on its journey through life without light to guide.

 

The Three Immovable Jewels are the Square, Level and Plumb.  The Square teaches morality, the Level equality, and the Plumb rectitude of life.

 

The Three Movable Jewels are the Rough Ashlar, the Perfect Ashlar, and the Trestle Board.  These jewels mark the line of culture and progress.  The Rough Ashlar is a stone taken from the quarry in its rude and natural state.  The Perfect Ashlar is a stone made ready by the hands of the workman to be adjusted by the working tools of the Fellowcraft.  The Trestle Board is for the master workman to draw his designs upon.  The rude stones have by work and discipline been transformed into beautiful and polished ones; so it is with our lives in Masonry; from rudeness to culture, from darkness to light, from slavery of bodily appetites to the mastery of our own minds and spirits, the very discipline necessary for progress.

 

The Three Tenets of our profession are Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth.  By the exercise of brotherly love we are taught to regard the whole human species as one family - the high and low, the rich and poor.  On this principle Masonry unites men of every country, sect and opinion.  To relieve the distressed is a duty incumbent on all men but more particularly on Masons who are linked together by an indissoluble chain of sincere affection.  Truth is a Divine attribute and the foundation of every virtue.  To be good and true is the first lesson we are taught in Masonry. On this theme we contemplate, and by its dictates endeavour to regulate our conduct.

 

Freedom, Fervency and Zeal were the characteristics of the Entered Apprentices in ancient times represented in the lodge by Chalk, Charcoal and Clay.  There is nothing freer than Chalk, the slightest touch of which leaves a trace behind; there is nothing more fervent than Charcoal, to which, when well ignited, the most obdurate metals will yield; nothing more zealous than Clay, or our Mother Earth, which is Continually imparting for man's necessities, and constantly reminding us that as, from it we came so to it we must all sooner or later return.

 

The Groups of Three set forth in the beautiful lectures and ceremonies of the Entered Apprentice Degree must become a part of the spiritual temple we are endeavouring to erect in our lives if we are to build characters that shall resist the temptations of our animal nature and permit us to continue our Masonic career unto the end of our material existence, that end which we hope will usher in the perfect day.

 

In this article we have not attempted to consider the beautiful lessons to be derived in the presentation of the "Lambskin," or the request for a "Memento," nor have we alluded to the "Situation and Dedication" of Masonic Lodges, or even the "Four Cardinal Virtues." Each of these would demand separate articles, but we confined ourselves to the Groups of Three as set forth in this degree.  The reader will find some Iteration of Phrases found in the Monitor, but we cannot too often be reminded of the valuable character of the lessons sought to be inculcated in these Groupings of Three.

 

----o----

 

How differently in Masonry! The hand that grasps a brother is the hand of charity, relief and truth. The arms that are stretched forth to minister consolation and comfort, are the strong arms of sympathy and brotherly love. The eye that sees the Masonic brother's signal of distress, and the ear that catches the words that accompany it when daylight has departed, are the willing eyes and ears that will hasten to a brother's relief and whisper words of cheer and hope and comfort, and like the good Samaritan, bind up his wounds and minister to his wants.

 

- The Beeches Lodge, Toronto, Canada.

 

----o----

 

SIGNOR MUSSOLINI RECEIVES MASONS

(By Courtesy of The Christian Science Monitor)

 

THERE is a brief announcement in the papers that the President of the Council, Benito Mussolini, received at Palazzo Chigi a delegation representing the Order of the Scottish Rite. The Masons forming this delegation were: Grand Master Raoul V. Palermi, Comm. Cesare Mombello, Prof. Ernesto Villa, Comm. Dott. Tito Gualdi, Grand Uffieiale Dott. Pietro Villetti, Comm. Giovanni Nicolini, Comm. Vittorio Falorsi, Cav. Giovanni Giaealone, Capt. Marehese Navarra Viagiani.

 

In the receipt of the journals it is said that Grand Master Palermi, speaking for the Scottish Rite Masons in Italy, expressed to Signor Mussolini the admiration of his Masonic brethren for the work which the Fascist Government had accomplished, pledging anew their unfaltering support of those ideals which inspire the Duce in his service to the patria and the people. Grand Master Palermi also registered his commendation of the new school reform, especially because of its emphasis on moral and religious values. Signor Mussolini in reply thanked the members of the delegation heartily for their words, expressing likewise his sympathy for their national order. The notice of this meeting is brief, but its significance should not be overlooked.

 

EITHER MASONRY OR FASCISMO

 

First of all, this is a complete right - about - face by Signor Mussolini in his attitude toward Masonry. Only a few months back he was saying clearly to all Italian Masons that they must choose between Masonry and Fascismo. If they were Masons, they could not be Fascisti; if they were Fascisti, they could not be Masons. Last July, speaking in Parliament in favor of his new electoral law, he referred to the Masons of Palazzo Giustiniani in most uncomplimentary terms. Four mouths later he receives officially this delegation of the Italian Scottish Rite and expresses his kindly feeling for the Order.

 

One cannot read the inside of Signor Mussolini's mind, but one may infer what is transpiring in the thought of the Fascist Dictator. There are those who hold that this is simply another pass to gather in his support parties outside of Fascismo. He is experiencing considerable difficulty in his efforts to hold his own special Fascist forces united. While on the surface his ranks are intact, it is well known that very serious divisions exist. Because of bitter internal dissensions, not long since he was forced to decapitate his entire Fascist executive council. Subsequently he declared that Fascismo had been created to aid him in saving the patria. If by small polities it showed itself unworthy of this high calling, he would look elsewhere for the support necessary to rehabilitate the country.

 

Some maintain that in receiving this delegation from the Scottish Rite he is giving tardy recognition to that branch of Italian Masonry which assisted him to