The Builder Magazine

February 1929 - Volume XV - Number 2

 

The Practice of Freemasonry As a Solvent for World Problems

Being the second section of the discussion of the question:

Is Freemasonry Playing Its Part in Promoting the Welfare of the World Today?

The fourth of a series of articles discussing our ancient fraternity and present day problems

 

BY BRO. HERBERT HUNGERFORD Author of Seeing Both Sides of Yourself

 

Is Bro. Hungerford justified in his contention that Masonic principles fearlessly applied would solve the problems facing us today ? Could Freemasonry exercise a real influence in the world? Have Masons forgotten their fundamental ideals, so that while doing reverence to the Landmarks in word they neglect them in deed? Is Freemasonry a Fraternity or merely a social organization? Is it universal or only to some extent international? In short, Whist is it ad about, what are we doing and what are we trying to do? Can anyone tell us?

 

HOW AMUSING and absurd it is to have some "nervous Nellie" in our Fraternity protest that the Landmarks of Freemasonry forbid the discussion of religion in our lodges or other strictly Masonic circles. If this were true, our entire ritual would have to be revised and most of its principal tenets recast in order that our official ceremonials might not transgress our own traditional principles.

 

Surely no member of the Fraternity will deny that our ceremonials are discussions and demonstrations of religious and ethical principles from beginning to end. Every formal Masonic lecture is a discussion of religious ideals and an admonition to religious practices.

 

What our constitutional rules actually prohibit is the discussion of sectarian questions or doctrinal religious issues.

 

There's a world of difference between discussing a disputed doctrinal problem or a sectarian religious question and discussing the application of those broad religious principles which Freemasonry professes to uphold and to practice to the various problems which are disturbing the world today.

 

I am dwelling upon this fact because it seems quite necessary to get this particular point fully cleared up as we attempt to consider the pertinent question as to whether or not the principles and purposes of Freemasonry, if properly practiced, might become a solvent for the distressing questions with which our civilization is faced.

 

 Let me remind you that I stated, in my previous article, my contention that our Fraternity contains in its basic aims and objectives, the principles and program which, if sincerely practiced, generally and regularly, by our members throughout the world, would actually prove a solvent for all the serious social difficulties of our times.

 

Putting it plainly and boldly, I believe with all my heart and soul that, if Freemasons throughout the whole world would begin to practice the principles and precepts which the Fraternity professes and teaches, we would set into motion such forces for human betterment that it would mean, ultimately, the solving of every present day problem.

 

You may regard this as a too bold and, possibly, too idealistic a prediction. But, I hope, you will at least give it due consideration.

 

In the first part of this particular discussion, I quoted from more than a score of persons prominent in world affairs, showing how diverse are the views as to what constitutes the foremost problem which our world is facing today. Yet I think we may be able to devise a fairly simple outline of the three principal world problems which will be sufficiently broad and comprehensive to include every major problem of our times.

 

Peace, Prosperity and Progress; Our World Problem

 

Suppose, for instance, we regard the promotion of peace, prosperity and progress as the three-fold problem of the world. This, of course, must mean universal peace, the prosperity of all mankind and the progress of all humanity everywhere. Surely, you will observe, if we provide a program and a plan that will promote all these, in the broad universal way we have outlined, such a plan or program will include the solution of all the major as well as the minor problems named by our correspondents.

 

Will any Freemason dispute the statement that the central tenet of our creed and the backbone principle of our Craft is the profession and the practice of universal brotherhood? In every degree, our ceremonials impress this central theme. Every emblem and symbol of the Craft relates to this central ideal, either directly or indirectly. Our reverence for the great Architect of the universe, the Father of all mankind, is simply the basic idea or the main root supporting this central trunk of our Masonic tree. The acknowledgment of our common Father of all mankind presumes the practice of universal brotherhood.

 

I am not pretending that Freemasons, as a rule, are practicing the principles of universal brotherhood; but I do contend, without fear of contradiction, that the central ideal upheld in all our ceremonials as the most important endeavor for all candidates for advancement in our Fraternity is to profess and to practice universal brotherhood.

 

Putting my proposition into a nutshell, it is my firm conviction that the practical exemplification of a truly universal brotherly love, exactly as it is plainly advocated as the central theme of Freemasonry, would do more towards promoting world peace, and advancing the welfare and common good of humanity, than any other political plan or social formula that could possibly be devised.

 

It is "old stuff," of course, to complain that we do not practice what we preach. Every man and Mason has it dinned into his ears the fact that we poor, frail mortals are prone to make mistakes and fall short of living up to our pretentions and professions.

 

Are Masonic Lodges Stressing Superficialities?

 

So, please do not infer that I am merely trying to find fault because we, as Freemasons, are subject to the shortcomings which all flesh is heir to. My criticism is more pertinent and more serious. Furthermore, the flaw that I point out could be remedied, whereas only through the long painful educational process of struggle and conquest, trial and error, failure and victory, will the common faults of our humanity be overcome.

 

What I am trying to point out and drive home is my personal conviction that most modern activities in our lodges are placing stress upon secondary matters and failing to emphasize, as effectively and fully as we should, the real Landmarks, the fundamental factors of Freemasonry.

 

We conduct high-pressure fund raising campaigns to build memorials and monuments. We play up the social features of our program to the limit. We rush batches of candidates through our degree mills and try to beat the records of our predecessors in office and outshine our sister lodges. All these activities are in accord with the progressive, competitive, strenuous spirit of our times. But, in making them our foremost and, frequently, our only definite objectives, it seems to me that we are departing much farther from the ancient landmarks of Freemasonry than we would by any possible discussion of religion in our lodge rooms.

 

What is the Central Theme of Freemasonry t

 

If the broad platform of brotherly love upon which the structure of our great Fraternity is established comes to be regarded merely as a pretty figure of speech and not a genuine working principle, a real fundamental factor of Freemasonry, it seems to me that it is high time for us to pause for a while that we may consider what being a good man and a Mason should really mean. If it does not mean, according to every intent and purpose of the founders of Freemasonry, that you thereby acknowledge your allegiance to the belief in universal brotherhood and the practice of brotherly love towards all mankind, then I have sadly misinterpreted what appear to me as plain statements of our professions of faith and practice.

 

If you still harbor the slightest suspicion that universal brotherhood is not the central theme of Freemasonry, let me suggest that you try to recall any portion of our ritual which does not set forth some ideal either directly professing or closely harmonizing with the cardinal virtue of brotherly love.

 

How Would it Work Out in Actual Practice?

 

Possibly, however, you may still wonder what are the grounds for my assertion that brotherly love, really believed and practiced, would act as a common denominator for developing the practical solution of every world problem.

 

Suppose, accordingly, that we attempt to analyze and resolve the ideal of brotherly love into some of its prime factors, or essential elements. As we have been dealing with our other points in groups of three, as for instance, the three-fold world problem, let us consider three elementary factors of universal brotherhood. These are by no means all the factors and, possibly, may not be the most important. Yet they will be sufficient, I trust, to drive home our point that brotherly love is the universal solvent for the ills of mankind.

 

Understanding, confidence and tolerance are the three great attributes of brotherly love to which I would invite your consideration.

 

You will readily observe that all of these elements characterize the true spirit of brotherhood. There always exists a bond of sympathy and understanding between loving brothers. Likewise, love that endures must always be built upon mutual faith and confidence. Finally, there is, between those who bear true affection towards each other, a spirit of tolerance, which overlooks common faults and condones human weaknesses and shortcomings.

 

Now, suppose that throughout the whole world, among all the races and peoples of every country, there existed a world-wide spirit of real understanding, genuine confidence and true tolerance, would we be so fiercely concerned in fighting over petty  partisan policies or battling for the conquest of either property or political power?

 

Can Our Remedy for World Ills Be Applied?

 

I am sure, however, that it is needless for me to argue that the world-wide practice of all the elementary attributes, relations and activities of brotherly love certainly would cure the ills of mankind. Doubtless, you will admit the efficacy of the proposed remedy, but, probably, you will insist that we are today a long, long way from finding a practical plan for the adoption and application of this remedy.

 

 I do not deny that present conditions seem to indicate that this doubtful attitude is fairly justified by the facts. We may be, according to current indications, a considerable distance from world brotherhood.

 

But this does not diminish the importance of the point I have been attempting to present. Admitting that world brotherhood may be simply a far-off ideal for the many millions of mankind, yet we must also admit that, among the several millions of Masons throughout the world, this ideal is not, or should not be, something in the dim and distant future. In Freemasonry, the ideal of world brotherhood is something ever present and always advocated as a real working principle of the Craft.

 

If world brotherhood ever becomes a universal working principle, it certainly will have to have its beginning somewhere. It is my sincere conviction that the leaven of this great ideal already has begun its work in our great Fraternity. Too slowly, it may seem to us, it is working and spreading the beneficent ferment in its influence among the more thoughtful members of our Fraternity.

 

If this series of discussions, in which I am attempting to act as sort of a chairman, should lead a few more brethren to see still further light on the fundamentals of Freemasonry, and should thereby, through these leaders, instill in a few more lodges more emphasis upon the real and abiding factors of our Fraternity, I shall feel that I have not labored in vain.

 

Again let me remind the reader, that when we call these articles discussions, we mean that our principle objective is to stimulate contributions from those who may be interested. My own endeavor has not been to present an exhaustive treatise upon each topic considered, but rather to raise as many questions as may be possible, without making my article merely a questionnaire.

 

The editors of THE BUILDER will be pleased to consider any comments or contributions that you may submit. Do not hesitate to write if your views are at variance with the writer's. You should not overlook the slogan on the cover of THE BUILDER. Why not do your part to help make this magazine "An Open Forum for All the Craft."

 

----o-----

 

The Degrees of Masonry; Their Origin and History

 

BY BROS. A. L. KRESS and R. J. MEEKREN (Continued from January. All rights reserved)

 

THAT any body of Masons were so much influenced by Prichard's six- penny pamphlet that they straightway gave up their old customs to follow his imaginings seems so inherently improbable that only the most definite evidence could convince us of it. However, Gould, in making this suggestion has left himself a loophole. He may be interpreted, if we read between the lines, as meaning no more than that Prichard's work represents a procedure that was then being followed in some quarters, which the Grand Lodge, or the Grand Lodge officers and their circle, judged to be not in accord with the "ancient and symbolic traditions of the Craft."

 

We think that this point was not really an essential part of the theory of a misunderstanding. It was based in Gould's mind, so it appears to us, upon his dislike for the "Ancients." Previous to the Union in 1813, the "Moderns" changed certain features of their ritual and thus came to differ, not only from the "Ancients," but also from the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland, on the grounds of which the two latter bodies had for many years refused them recognition while maintaining fraternal intercourse with the Ancients a fact that Gould very much minimized and glossed over. (1) He insisted that the original Grand Lodge had never made any changes with the single exception of the one we have been considering the unwilling sanction of the division of the Apprentice's part into Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft. He puts this very strongly in his smaller History in commenting on the negotiations that preceded the Union. (2)

 

. . . the virtual adoption of the method of working among the "Ancients" which has been relied upon as affording decisive proof of the "Moderns" having finally returned to the old ways I regard myself from an entirely different aspect, and consider that it points with certainty to "an alteration" for the first and only time, "in its established forms," by the earliest of Grand Lodges.

 

This is explicit. According to him the yielding of the senior Grand Lodge in matters of ritual was a surrender to innovations introduced by the "Ancients"  at least so far as concerned England from Ireland.

 

We must take this as representing his final and mature opinion, though earlier utterances seem to conflict with it. As for example in the larger and earlier work we find  These alterations [the expansion of the Apprentice's Part into our first and second degrees] if I am right in my supposition were not effected in a day. Indeed it is possible that a taste for "meddling with the ritual," having been acquired, lasted longer than has been commonly supposed- and the variations made in the "established forms," which was one of the articles in the heavy indictment drawn up by the seceding against the Regular Masons, may have been but a further manifestation of the passion for innovation which was evinced by the Grand Lodge of England during the first decade of its existence. (3)

 

And later still, we are inclined to think.

 

In the same volume, referring to the changes made by the Moderns to conform with the usage of the Ancients just before the Union, he says:

 

This was virtually a return to the old practice, and it will be sufficient to remark, that with the exception of the opportunities selected under the two systems for the communication of secrets, there appears to have been no real difference between the procedure (or ceremonial) of the two fraternities. (4)

 

With the last statement we are unable to agree, unless the term "real" be understood in an exceedingly general (not to say vague) sense. But it does seem that here he did still accept the received assertion that the Moderns had made deliberate changes (5) with a view to excluding the members of lodges which were not in their obedience. If so, he later modified his opinion, and we could wish that he had given his readers warning of the fact.

 

It will be necessary now to show as briefly as possible how he justified his later contention, in the face, not only of the fact that it was regarded as a matter of general knowledge in the later part of the eighteenth century, but also in view of the formal admission by the Grand Lodge of the Moderns in a resolution passed at the Quarterly Communication of April 12, 1809.

 

That this Grand Lodge do agree . . . that it is not necessary any longer to continue in Force those measures which were resorted to in or about the year 1736, respecting irregular Masons, and do therefore enjoin the several Lodges to revert to the Ancient Land Marks of the Society. (6)

 

He calls this "a lamentable exhibition of weakness and ignorance of history." He quotes Bro. Sadler on an earlier page in support of his view:

 

To adopt the words of Mr. Henry Sadler, "I am fully convinced that at this period the leaders of the rival Grand Lodges really knew very little of each others origin and antecedents." It would, indeed, be quite possible to show, from their own writings, not merely a sufficiency but an affluence of proof, that neither Dermott nor Preston was even superficially acquainted with the history of English Freemasonry between the years 1717 and 1751. (7)

 

This is undoubtedly true, but it does not follow that a tradition to the effect that a deliberate change had been made for the purpose specified, was without foundation in fact. That still remains an open question.

 

Gould's argument may be summarized thus. Beginning with the position, already sufficiently defined, that in England Masonry emerges into history as a two degree system, but that in Scotland it contained, on the esoteric or speculative side, only the "Mason Word" (which, as we have said, he was apparently inclined to take very literally as implying merely a single password) it followed that in his opinion when the London Grand Lodge acquiesced in the division of the first grade into two, it was fully competent to decide how the division should be made. We must ask our readers here to bear in mind that the most prominent and most definite charge made against the Moderns was that they had transposed certain words. Gould argues that whatever arrangement was followed by the Moderns was the one that was made when the present second degree was separated from the first, and whatever the merits of that fundamental innovation might be it was within the competence of the Grand Lodge to regulate it, and that this being the original arrangement, and if a different one was improper, then it was the other Grand Lodges that were at fault. That of the Ancients, and also those of Scotland and Ireland which agreed with them. (8)

 

The argument is a very plausible one, but its weakness lies in the impossibility of adequately accounting for the change being made in Scotland and Ireland. If Scotland got the degree system from England, as he holds, why did it twist things round in adopting it? He suggests, in the case of Ireland, that it had the same right that the Grand Lodge of England had to divide the original first degree as it chose, and suggests that the Irish brethren were misled by Prichard. The Ancients probably got their ritual from Ireland, at least we may so think if we accept Sadler's thesis that they were in the first place chiefly Irish immigrants to London. Besides this we have Gould's own assertion (whatever it may be worth) that in 1739 there were discontented lodges following Prichard's arrangement. This, however, he ignores in the present connection. It seems therefore that his hypothesis raises a dozen difficulties in order to solve one. On the other hand he did not consider the possibility that there might have been a traditional sequence in the old Apprentice's Part, which was in itself the basis of the original division. If so, then from the standpoint of conservatism it would not be justifiable to alter it. There is evidence overlooked by Gould that this was the case. To this we shall have to come later on.

 

We have scarcely touched upon his discussion of the vestiges of the old ritual practice as his treatment of these seems to be merely auxiliary to his main argument. One point remains which we find still rather obscure, and that is just what he meant by insisting the "essentials" of the ancient symbolic system were the same as those we have today? He intimated indeed that he could not speak more precisely. However in his large History (9) he gives the impression that he believed the legend of the Builder to have been incorporated between 1723 and 1729, while in his paper on the Antiquity of Masonic Symbolisms he says what seems to be the exact reverse of this.

 

Gould bulks very largely in the discussion of this problem, not only because of his extensive acquaintance with the facts concerning it, but also from the sheer bulk of what he has written, and because, owing to the comparative accessibility of his two Histories and the Collected Essays his views are perhaps more widely known than those of any other Masonic writer, with the possible exception of Albert Mackey.

 

We have attempted to show that whatever degree of credence may be given to his opinions, his arguments are not logically conclusive. It is possible, it may even be probable, that no solution of the puzzle can ever be discovered which will compel assent; but it is something to know wherein certainty has not been reached. The facts themselves, as our readers by now must fully realize, are complex and obscure, and it is impossible to adequately discuss them without entering into a complex argument. We hope that in this case we have not made Gould's obscurity still greater in our attempt to elucidate his position.  With Gould what may be called the classical period of the discussion comes to an end. It seemed that, for the time being at least, all the evidence available had been brought forward and debated from every point of view, and that there was no more to do than to give judgment upon the argument. Masonic students have very generally accepted the two degree hypothesis; and though there is, as we have seen, plenty of room for divergence of opinion within those limits, yet probably a majority have taken it in the same sense as Gould and Speth; that the original second grade was equivalent to our third, and that our second has been manufactured or evolved out of part of the original first.

 

Thus the focus of interest shifted to the origin of the third degree and its relationship to the Royal Arch. These intensely interesting problems fall outside the limits that, for purely practical reasons, it has been necessary to lay down although seeing they are closely, one might say organically, connected, it will be impossible to avoid some mention of them, if the subject is to be shown in its true relations.

 

For our present purpose, therefore, we will briefly mention such contributions to the subject of the evolution of the Masonic ritual, the origin of the Royal Arch and cognate topics, so far as they bear upon the particular object of this survey.

 

Bro. Roderick H. Baxter read a paper before the Manchester Association for Masonic Research in 1909, on the "Old Charges," in which he briefly touched upon the question of their ritual use in early Masonic lodges. (11) Eight years later he took up an extension of this subject before the Humber Installed Masters Lodge, under the head of "The Old Charges and the Ritual," and in the following year gave substantially the same paper before Quatuor Coronati Lodge. (12) In this he summarized Speth's arguments on the subject of degrees and indicated his own adhesion to his conclusions. He showed also a number of striking parallels between passages in the MS. Charges and certain present day ritual formulas, chiefly of a hortatory character. As against the doubt expressed by Gould, whether these MSS. were used in the eighteenth century lodges, he advanced the strong, though indirect, argument, that Anderson's Constitutions were to take the place of the old manuscript charges, and that it was directed that they should be read at the making of Masons. Whether this was ever actually done or not we do not know, and it is pretty certain that if it was done it very soon dropped out of use. But it is a fair inference that this direction was not a new thing, that in this too the printed book was intended to take the place of the older and more concise documents. This would also account for the evidences of borrowing collected by Bro. Baxter. The position might be stated thus: There was a definite recollection that the Old Charges and the introductory legend had formed part of the ritual. They became obsolete with the advent of the printed book. The latter, if for no other reason, on account of its impossible length, was never used in this way, or if used was soon disused, and so, in compensation, the old MSS. were used as a quarry by ritualists in search of material for exhortations, eulogiums, moralizings, and so on. Just as, much later, Webb used Preston's Illustrations without regard to the original place and purpose of his material. It is obvious that this kind of ritual expansion and embellishment has no direct bearing on the question of origins.

 

In another paper before the Manchester Association Bro. Baxter discussed the Chetwode Crawley MS. (13) and its bearing upon the "two degree" hypothesis. This MS. seems to shed a good deal of light upon the well known "Haughfoot minute," and Baxter notes Hughan's admission in regard to it, that it did give real support to the theory of an original system of two grades. A rather grudging admission it must be said. (14) Bro. Baxter however expresses the opinion that the argument in favor of two degrees is conclusive, the Chetwode Crawley MS. being an additional and convincing piece of evidence. But it must be remembered that it is possible to hold that there were two original degrees, and yet to suppose the third degree to be a modern invention. As we saw in the discussion of Speth's argument, Bro. J. Ramsden Riley was of this opinion (15), as some other students still appear to be also. Bro. Baxter, however, agrees in this with Gould, and in 1914 in a paper read before the Humber Installed Master's Lodge, he undertook to prove the antiquity of our Third Degree. (16) In the course of his argument he referred, as others have done also, to the various legends of Masonic tragedies; as those of Roslin, Gloucester, Cologne, etc., and also to the folk tragi-comedy embodied in the Mummer's play. In this, however, we must not follow him now.

 

The late Bro. E. L. Hawkins read a paper in Quatuor Coronati Lodge on the Evolution of the Masonic Rituals He however only dealt in this with the period ending with 1716. He covered in this very much the same ground that we have already traversed but in the discussion Bro. Dring made a point that had not definitely been brought out before and that was that certain of the MS. Constitutions, the Watson and Heade versions being specially mentioned,

 

... show a distinction between being made a Mason and a Fellow being received and allowed. According to those versions it was on the latter occasion (when the Fellow was received and allowed ) that the Charges might be read to him. My view is that one can only form personal conclusions or opinions as to what the procedure really was. (18)

 

And he went on to say that the differences and discrepancies were due to the transition from the Operative to the Speculative regime proceeding at different rates in different places. (19)

 

In 1917 Bro. Redfern Kelley (20) discussing the origin of the Royal Arch, intimated his acceptance of the single initiation theory, with second, third and fourth degrees added in succession, but without advancing any new arguments. He however did not take it in exactly the same sense as Hughan and Mackey and the other brethren of their school, as the following passage shows:

 

In Ancient Craft Freemasonry there would appear to have existed from time immemorial, so to speak, a certain essential and well recognized archaic legend; and in connection with that legend a peculiar secret, which may be regarded as being one of the ancient esoteric landmarks of the Order, primitively considered- that this particular esoteric landmark, the M. . . W. . . [presumably these letters stand for "Mason Word"], was recognized under the ancient "Operative" system and subsequently under the combined "Operative and Speculative" systems; and as well under the more recent and improved purely "Speculative" system which obtained since the year 1717; and that, as a "Prime Secret," it was invariably communicated to all candidates indiscriminately, on their admission into the Order under the primitive one degree Ritual of the Craft, as acknowledged and practiced in, and prior to, the latter year [1717] irrespective of any distinction of class either of "Apprentice," "Fellow of the Craft," or "Master" of the Guild or of the Lodge. (21)

 

In other words, that all the essentials of our three degrees were included in the primitive ritual of initiation. It will be remembered that Bro. Sydney Klein had suggested a very similar theory in the discussion of Speth's paper. (22) Bro. Klein, however, begins with the second degree, that is, he supposes the original initiation to have taken place at the end of the Apprentice's term of servitude, when he was made free of the Craft.

 

Bro. R. J. Meekren, in an article published in the Tyler-Keystone, March and April, 1918, had also developed at some length a similar theory, more like Bro. Kelley's than that of Bro. Klein. It was, however, written with insufficient information, and is another example of the difficulty would-be students so often experience in gaining access to the results of the investigations made by others. A further suggestion was made in this article that the first of the Masonic degrees to be put third in the series was not the "Master Mason" but that of "Past" or "Passed Master," and that from this as a germ the Capitular Degrees eventually were developed, i. e., the various Excellent Masterships and the Royal Arch. This, as will be remembered, was not wholly unanticipated. Bro. Upton, for example, suggested something like it. (23)

 

The paper by Bro. Kelley referred to above was rather severely criticized by the other members of Quatuor Coronati Lodge; chiefly on account of his acceptance of the "single initiation" hypothesis, but partly on other grounds which do not concern us here.

 

Bro. J. E. S. Tuckett is the next student who calls for some notice in this connection. His work has dealt more with the origins of the additional degrees, but among his postulates for these researches is this:

 

That before 1717 Freemasonry possessed a Store of Legend, Tradition and Symbolism of wide extent. That from 1717 the Grand Lodge selecting a portion only of the Store, gradually evolved a Rite consisting of E. A., F. C., M. M., and R. A. That the restriction of the terms "pure," "Ancient," and (in a certain sense) "Craft" to the degrees included in this Rite is arbitrary, and due solely to the accident of selection by the Grand Lodge. (24)

 

We believe that there is a good deal to be said for this, though we think too much emphasis is laid on the "selection," which gives the impression that it was a deliberate and conscious process. Our own feeling is that the Grand Lodge followed, rather than led, in the matter; and even that it may have been reluctantly dragged into accepting the evolving expansions of the ritual that took place in the formative period, 1717 - 1738.

 

Bro. Tuckett accepts two original degrees under the names of "Enter'd Mason or Apprentice" and "Enter'd Fellow or Master," and suggested that they were recast (25), the present third degree being "a dramatic representation of the older 'Master's Part."' Which seems to imply that the latter consisted chiefly of the communication of an item of legendary history. But some years later (26) he summed up his views as follows:

 

The old two degrees were substantially the same as our present day First and Second.

 

"The Master's Part" was not a degree but a ceremony-with secrets, conferred upon but few. This was elevated to the status of a recognized degree our present Third Degree for which all Brethren in possession of the other two were eligible.

 

This would seem to be closely allied to the theory that the third degree was originally for Masters of Lodges (or earlier still, of employers) although this is not definitely brought out. Otherwise the theory is like that of Bro. J. Ramsden Riley. (27) But what a ceremony-with-secrets if not a degree? We are inclined to think that such a conception as this would only be possible in England, where the brethren are "teethed" on the eminently practical but absurdly illogical compromise of 1813. (28)

 

By this, for the purpose of English Masonic Constitutional Law the term "Degree" is defined as applicable only to the three specifically mentioned, and to nothing else. Whatever propriety this usage may have in its limited legal sphere, it must be said that from the etymological point of view it is artificially restricted, and for the historian's purposes highly inconvenient; and more than that, it tends to misunderstanding and confusion of thought. It is however useless to quarrel over words. To those who use the term in this restricted sense we submit the following schema:

 

Class:  Ritual-unit

 

Sub-class:  (a) Degree. (b) Ceremony-with-secrets.

 

We desire, though, to make it quite clear that we have used, and intend to continue to use (on the mere ground of convenience) the word "degree" for the class, amending the classification thus:

 

Class:  Degree Sub-class:  (a) Degree in English legal sense. (b) Ceremony-with-secrets.

 

In short, following the classic example of Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass, we will pay the word extra and make it mean what we like.

 

It is obvious, as we think, that the Royal Arch and the Installed (or Past) Master have every characteristic of a degree, there are in them secrets, communicated to duly qualified persons under a vow of secrecy, in a ritual that is also secret and which is accompanied by a legendary history. The special qualifications demanded are not, for the student's purpose, a relevant mark of distinction. Historically the R. A. and P. M. are intimately connected with the first three degrees of our system, and no attempt to investigate the origin of the last mentioned can be complete that entirely ignores the additional ceremonies-with- secrets that in England are denied the name of degrees, though acknowledged to be part of the "pure Ancient" system.

 

Bro. Tuckett has collected much evidence to substantiate in some sense the vague statements of older Masonic authors regarding the Jacobite influence in early Speculative Masonry. Interesting as this is, it is yet itself too speculative, in the ordinary, non- technical sense of the word, to be dealt with here; though if, as has been frequently suggested, the degree of Master Mason is a cryptic allegory of the history of the cause of the Stuarts and the hopes of their supporters, it could hardly be left out of account. Bro. Tuckett, however, sees the effects of this influence rather in the formation of those early "additional" grades that were termed "Scottish," or more properly Ecossois.

 

The Rev. H. G. Rosedale does ascribe the third degree to this cause, unfortunately without seriously attempting to support it with evidence. He says for example:

 

It is clear that the two first Degrees were in existence and fully recognized though possibly not in separate form before the year 1717. The full "Third" Degree did not appear as an accepted Rite till 1724, when, according to Bro. Yarker and others, the old Jacobite Lodges in London owing to the repeated failures of Jacobite plots were beginning to regain strength and when the newly-formed Hanoverian Grand Lodge had proved a success. (29)

 

Earlier in the same paper in which this occurs, Bro. Rosedale had argued that the division of opinion in the country at large during the religious and political struggles of the seventeenth century had been reflected in the Masonic Fraternity, even to the extent of producing groups or lodges on each side of the dispute. No reason is given for this but probability. To us it seems highly improbable. That Masons, as individuals, were divided is certain; that their political and religious differences were carried into the lodges to the extent of creating two opposed Masonries there is no evidence at all. We cannot forget that the lodge at Warrington initiated on the same occasion the royalist Ashmole and the parliamentarian, Col. Mainwaring, at the very time the Civil War was tearing the country in two. That groups of royalist Masons may have formed lodges and made Masons of other royalists is very possible, just as a group of good Presbyterian Masons at the siege of Newcastle initiated Robert Moray, but this is not at all the same thing that we understand Bro. Rosedale to assert. Still less can we accept his contention that the schism between the Moderns and the Ancients had their roots in these political and religious differences, especially as no evidence is advanced in support of the hypothesis. In justice to Bro. Rosedale, however, it must be said that he touched on this matter only as preliminary to an examination of later ritual development (which of course is outside our present purpose altogether) and so did not really attempt to prove his statements.

 

Bro. Rosedale followed the late John Yarker in this idea of two opposed Masonries divided on politico-religious grounds, though he may of course have reached the conclusion quite independently. Bro. Yarker seemed to be willing to admit the antiquity of the essentials of our present system, but his theory is complicated by his acceptance of the modern Operative or Guild Masons. These claims are so far apart from the main lines of this investigation that we must ignore them here. (30)

 

A number of other brethren have addressed themselves to the problem of the origin of the sublime degree of Master Mason. Two of these essays call for brief mention. Bro. Moir Dow in discussing "The Basis of the Third Degree," appears to accept a system of two grades as inherited by the Grand Lodge of 1717 from the old lodges which composed it; but seems to suppose that this was a comparatively recent evolution from a Single initiation. At least he thinks it

 

. . . highly probable that by this simple mode Elias Ashmole was "made a Mason" in 1646 . . .

 

and he goes on to say that

 

There is evidence, however, that side by side with the one Degree mode, the reception ceremony comprised two steps or stages. We know definitely that a certain point the Entered Apprentice withdrew from the Lodge Room- when the initiate received further instruction. This early evidence (based on Scottish records), is of high importance as manifesting evolution in a ritualistic direction . . . and it is therefore probable that by the close of the 17th century influenced by the increasing speculative element that the two-Degree system developed, became crystallized, and displaced in England generally the original sole Degree. (31)

 

The evidence, "based on Scottish records" must be, we presume (unfortunately no references are given) the "Haughfoot minute," interpreted in the light of the Chetwode Crawley MS. The hypothesis offered by Bro. Dow is a new combination of the elements. Contrary to the earlier investigators he seems to incline to the belief that the more complex two degree system arose in Scotland. We could wish that he had developed his arguments in favor of this view. We can only guess that it is based on the fact that the lodge at Haughfoot seems to offer the earliest existing record of two separate grades which comprised ceremonies with special secrets pertaining thereto. Not, we think, sufficient to produce conviction. And we might ask why a single initiation should have been divided or expanded in the 17th century, when Freemasonry was still mainly operative, if there were no earlier tradition of such division ?

 

Two years later Bro. G. W. Bullamore defended the "Antiquity of the Third Degree." In this paper he made some interesting suggestions. He supposes that the three classes mentioned in the Old Charge,

 

. . . the "Masons, fellows or freemasons" of the Apprentice Charge are the accepted Masons, Mark fellows and Master builders. These three classes would meet in separate lodges. . . . There would be no regular advance from accepted Mason or layer to mark mason or hewer and then from hewer to master. The Master's Lodge could no doubt confer the secrets of all three degrees, and in this sense might be considered to work the three degrees, but the evidence of the Old Charges favors the view that the apprentice when he had finished his time either became a fellow or else a master on account of his exceptional abilities. (32)

 

Or we might add, because he had capital enough behind him, or was the son or relative of a master. Bro. Bullamore further said that our present ceremonies originated from these three types of lodges, and that there

 

. . . are facts which suggest that distinct types of Lodges have amalgamated to form our present ceremonies. The struggle between Ancients and Moderns was far too great to have been produced by a few minor alterations in the ritual. (33)

 

This last may be true, and we are inclined to think it is, but as Bro. Bullamore does not tell us what these facts are on which he bases this rather startling theory of the amalgamation of quite separate units we can hardly criticize it profitably. As for the third degree itself, which presumably was that of the "master builders" in his classification of ranks or kinds of operative Masons, he apparently would explain its genesis in the light of foundation sacrifices. Not at all an original idea, of course; and though he adduces many interesting facts, yet he does not develop the argument based on them very definitely, probably because of difficulties that will be apparent to all Freemasons. (34)

 

Gould's argument on this point depends on the lack of precision in ascribing any date to the supposed change, either by the Grand Lodge itself in 1809, when it spoke vaguely of 1736, or by Preston or Dermott. The unrecorded motion of 1730, earlier than the publication of Prichard's work, and so unaffected by it, seems to him the only possible place to be found for it in the record. From that it would follow, on his premises, that as the things transposed were still equally component parts of the original first grade, their order was a matter of no consequence. To that we would repeat that there may have been a traditional order within the old "Apprentice Part," and that changing this was one of the "measures adopted." If a recollection of this was handed down, and it is precisely the kind of thing that might be thus remembered, it would be more probable that both its date and the exact circumstances might be forgotten, while the main fact was remembered that there had been a transposition for the purpose of excluding unrecognized Masons or imposters. Our own opinion is that there was such an original, traditional sequence, and that it had been changed; and further that this "slogan" of the "Ancients," as it might be termed in present day parlance, merely represented the differences between them and the "Moderns"-which were many and important- and which they supposed (not unnaturally) were all deliberate innovations on the part of the latter. Though in all probability most of them were actually inherited from variations antedating 1717, many years perhaps, possibly centuries.

 

NOTES (1) Gould History, Vol. iii, p. 248, cf. Essays, p. 229. 

(2) Gould Concise History, p. 441. Also A. Q. C., Vol. x, p. 138.

(3) Hist., Vol iii, p. 114. 

(4) Ibid., Vol iii, p. 252. 

(5) At least it is plausible that Dr. Desaguliers advocated something of the kind in 1730. Gould, op. cit., Vol. iii, p. 138.

(6) Hist., Vol. iii, p. 250- Concise Hist., p. 441. 

(7) Ibid., p. 433. 

(8) Ib., pp. 403 and 408. Also Essays, pp. 228 and 232. 

(9) Hist., Vol. iii, pp. 117-119.

(10) A. Q. C., Vol iii, p. 23; Reprinted in the Essays, p. 141.

(11) Trans. Man. Ass'n, 1909-10, p. 22.

(12) A. Q. C., Vol. xxxi p. 33.

(13) Trans. Man. Ass'n 1910-11.

(14) The point has been touched on in a previous note. BUILDER, Aug., 1928, p. 248. The reference is to Hughan's Origin of the English Rite, p. 23.

(15) BUILDER, Oct., 1928, p. 299.

(16) Trans. Humber Installed Masters Lodge, 1912-1916, p. 635. 

(17) A. Q. C., Vol. xxvi, p. 6.

(18) Ibid.; p. 19.

(19) The William Watson MS., Q. C. A., Vol. iii, has the following passage which succeeds the account of the great Assembly at York under Edwin. "In England right worshipful masters & fellowes yt been of divers Semblies and congregations wth ye Lords of this Realme hath ordained & made charges by their best advise yt all manner of men yt shall be made & allowed Masons, must be sworne upon a booke to keep the same in all yt they may to ye uttermost of their power, & alsoe they have been ordained yt when any ffellow shall be reeeiued & allowed yt these charges might be read unto him, & he to take his charges, and these charges haue been seen & perused by our late Soveraigne Lord King Henry ye sixth & ye Lords of ye Honourable Couneell, and they have allowed them well & said they were right good & reasonable to be holden...."

(20) A.Q.C., Vol. xxx. D. 7. "The Advent of Royal Arch Masonry.

(21) Ibid., p. 13.

(22) BUILDER, Oct., 1928, p. 299; A. Q. C., Vol. xi, p. 61.

(23) BUILDER Oct., 1928 p. 301 and others have reverted to it since. We hope to explore it more fully later on.

(24) A. Q. C., Vol. xxxii, p. 5.

(25) Trans. Man. Ass'n, 1921 1922, p. 78.

(26) Trans. Dorset Masters Lodge, 1926-1927, p. 42.

(27) BUILDER, Oct., 1928, p. 299.

(28) Already quoted, BUILDER May, 1928, p. 132.

(29) Trans. Man. Ass'n, 1919-1920, p. 21.

(30) Bro. Yarker's views are set forth, not very coherently, in his work The Arcane Schools, in which a mass of interesting material has been collected. We must confess though that we do not think the author an entirely safe guide in its interpretation. For the claims of the modern operatives, see also Carr, The Ritual of the Operative Freemasons, and Merz, Guild Masonry in the Making. The articles in the BUILDER for 1926 may also be consulted.

(31) Trans. Man. Ass'n, 1922-1925, p. 28.

(32) A. Q. C., Vol. xxxviii, p. 68.

(33) Ibid., p. 76.

(34) Readers who desire to follow this up may be referred to Bro. J.S. M. Ward's recent work Who Was Hiram Abiff ? There is much material of this kind in Frazer's Golden Bough and Tyler's Primitive Culture.

 

----o-----

 

American Army Lodges in the World War

By BRO. CHARLES F. IRWIN, Associate Editor

 

WE have been presenting a series of American Field Lodges that flourished during the World War, both at home and overseas. Six of these lodges have thus far been presented, as follows:

 

August - Montana Military Lodge, No. 1, U.D.

September - Army Lodge A, U.D., North Carolina

October - North Dakota Military Lodge Lodge, No. 2, U. D.

November - Emergency Lodge U.D., of Indiana

December - Lahneck Lodge, No. 1186, Coblentz, of Texas

January – Overseas Lodge, No. 1, at Coblentz, Germany (Rhode Island Grand Lodge)

 

This month we are presenting the first of a series of five Military Lodges all under the dispensations of the Grand Lodge of New York. Four of these were stationed overseas. The first of the series was at first stationed in the City of New York. After seeking for an authoritative account of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, I secured the following from M. W. Bro. William C. Prime, Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of New York, and the Secretary of this lodge. Bro. Prime was also one of the active members of the Overseas Masonic Mission that went to France in the spring of 1919 and ministered to the Craft throughout France and other Allied Countries in a most efficient manner. The history of this mission will be given in the articles on Masonic Clubs which will follow the present series. To those of us who met the warm friendliness of the Overseas Mission, and benefited by it was one of the outstanding experiences of our sojourn in France during the latter part of the War, and all Masons in the A.E.F. owe them enduring gratitude. To M.W. Bros. Prime and Townsend Scudder, and the many other fine New York Masons (not overlooking my excellent friend and brother Merwin W. Lay of Syracuse, and our dear old comrade Charles H. Huntley of Schenectady) this chapter is especially dedicated.

 

The warranting of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, provided the substructure upon which each of the other four Overseas and Field Lodges of the Grand Lodge were warranted and worked. It is my personal testimony, after having had the privilege of attending the closing Communication of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 2, at Paris in July of 1919, and having participated in the conferring of the Third Degree, in the East, that same evening, that the Ritual of New York, as used in its Military Lodges in the World War, omitted not a single fundamental of the Masonic Principles in the three degrees. That the procedure was not only dignified, but produced a deep emotion seldom aroused by the peace time rituals. That the vow each Candidate took upon himself as stated above, was under the most profound feelings of exalted loyalty to his God, his Country, his Neighbor and Himself as phrase by phrase this obligation was given him by the Master of the Lodge.

 

Upon my own return to my own Grand Jurisdiction of Ohio late in the summer of 1919, I discovered that through misrepresentations, current in a number of Grand Lodges, relative to New York's Military Lodges, a Resolution had been passed by my Grand Lodge holding in abeyance all Ohio material made in a New York Military Lodge. I am happy to say that through my own personal efforts after a full explanation of the work as I had seen it, the Past Grand Masters almost to a man, led by our splendid P.G.M. Charles Pretzman of Columbus, Ohio, with ardent support of P. G. Masters Kissel of Springfield, and Flotron of Dayton, that Resolution was recalled the next Annual Communication and all Ohio material made through a Sea and Field Lodge of New York State were permitted to visit Ohio Lodges and to present their dimits for membership in the same.

 

One of the priceless rewards that come to a Searcher after Light in the Masonic quarries, is the friendship formed with excellent brothers in all quarters of the country. I have been forming such friendships during the past ten years and count myself among the wealthy of our land, although but an humble shepherd in the fields of our Lord. This account by Bro. Prime is so full and complete that there is nothing more to add to it, and I therefore give it just as it stands.

 

----o----

 

Sea and Field Lodge No. 1 of New York

Stationed in New York City

BY BRO. WILLIAM C. PRIME, Secretary

 

WITHIN approximately a month after the United States entered the Great War, the Grand Lodge of New York convened in Annual Communication, enthusiastically voted unlimited support to the Government, of men and money, and adjourned without substantial action looking to the opportunities and meeting them, which the War inevitably would offer.

 

Early in the summer of 1917, M. W. G. M. Thomas Penney appointed a committee on "Plan and Scope of Masonic Service During the War", who pondered over the problem which the Grand Lodge had neither attacked nor solved. The Committee's advice caused the Grand Master to reconvene the Grand Lodge (the 136th Annual Communication), on the 10th day of September, 1917. After a sincere and most telling address, the report of the Committee was presented, whereupon the Grand Lodge among other actions taken, adopted the following Resolution:

 

RESOLUTION

 

Whereas, Numerous members of the Masonic Fraternity have entered, or are about to enter, the service of the Country in its armed forces at sea and on land, in the Great War- and

 

Whereas, in cantonments, training camps, at sea or at the front, the influence of Freemasonry is inestimably valuable to its votaries- and

 

Whereas, both to members of the Fraternity and to their dependents and relatives, the opportunity and the duty to administer will presently be at hand; and,

 

Whereas, it may be found that the Fraternity can best administer to the souls and the bodies of its members through the time-honored institution of Masonic Lodges; now, therefore,

 

Be it Resolved, that Sea and Field Lodges be organized in cantonments, training camps, on vessels, and in regiments or other military units at the front, if in the judgment of the Grand Master it be wise to exercise his prerogative in that regard; and the Grand Master is requested to take such steps as in his judgment shall seem best, to establish by his warrant, wherever he may see fit Sea and Field Lodges, at home and abroad, with such authority to make Masons, and under such regulations as to dual membership or multiple membership, inspection and control, as to him shall seem proper; and also to take all Such steps as to him shall seem best and appropriate to extend the influence of Freemasonry through deputies, representatives or otherwise to and among the members of the Fraternity engaged in the Country's Service; and to render to stall sick and distressed, such aid, comfort and relief as to him shall seem fit.

 

Resolved, That this Grand Lodge do and it hereby does extend to sister Grand Lodges in the United States an invitation to cooperate and participate with it in the work above described and to do, if in their judgment it be wise, whatsoever the Grand Master of New York may do in the matter of warranting Sea and Field Lodges for the Period of the War.

 

At the same Session the Grand Lodge authorized the Grand Master to grant a dispensation to a Lodge to shorten the time between degrees, in case of war material.

 

The problem of Masonic Service during the War was not simple. How to render it, in what form to present it to the Masons in the service of the Country was the question.

 

In the Civil War some twelve Field Lodges had been warranted by New York; but the experience which our Grand Lodge had with their work and officers was not satisfactory. Little record was kept, and almost none was turned over to the Grand Secretary after the War was over, and it was almost impossible to learn what those Lodges had done and what material had been handled. This left a bad taste and tended seriously to prejudice the leaders of the Fraternity against the proposal to authorize Sea and Field Lodges in the Great War.

 

Nevertheless, with this previous experience plainly in mind, the Grand Master after full consideration, on Oct. 6, 1917, by his warrant created Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, with an unusual personnel; the warrant designating the seven Officers from Master to Junior Deacon necessary to constitute an Entered Apprentice Lodge, and authorizing it to sit in the City of New York and elsewhere as might be convenient; to initiate, pass and raise its own war material without the usual formalities required for chartered Lodges; to initiate, pass and raise war material from foreign jurisdictions on request of the Grand Master; and to pass or raise, for other Lodges in the State of New York, war material that had already been initiated. Having in mind the total omission of records or the careless keeping and more careless failure to file them, by the Civil War Lodges above referred to, Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, had three separate complete records of all of its transactions as regards candidates, consisting, first, of complete applications

 

 fully signed, authenticated and approved; second, its minute books containing the full record of all its proceedings; and third, a complete card index of all of its personnel as well also as the personnel of the Overseas Lodges consolidated with it, on which cards are substantially all the data contained in the application blanks and the record transcribed from the minutes of the actions of the Lodge thereon.

 

With this triplicate record it is not likely that, large as the number of those served may be, any loss of important material or information can occur.

 

At least three cantonments were in rather close proximity to New York City and several others had been established in various parts of the State of New York and several in the adjoining States nearby the New York Harbor. Troops were pouring into those stations from all over the country. Some of them had been accepted candidates for Masonry but had not yet been initiated; others had received one or more of their degrees, but had not yet been raised.

 

Our New York Law did not permit, nor does it now permit, a Lodge to initiate any but its own material; and the prayer from all over the country was pressing us that we find some way to help them in the situation, by initiating, passing, and raising, or of passing and raising, foreign material thus situated, as well also as some of our own Lodges in other portions of the State, whose material was due to embark for foreign service.

 

There was also an appeal for the sons of Master Masons, which was very potent and induced the Grand Master to include in his delegated authority to Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, the power to accept and to confer the three degrees upon candidates who were under the age of twenty-one, sons of Masters (Lewises in fact), provided, however, that each of such candidates should be the subject of a special and separate dispensation granted by the Grand Master after thorough inquiry into the candidate's history and the reasons advanced for the conferring of this exceptional favor.

 

M.W. Townsend Scudder, P.G.M., was appointed the Worshipful Master; R. W. George J. Jackson, Deputy Grand Master, was appointed the Senior Warden; M. W. Robert Judson Kenworthy, P.G.M., was appointed the Junior Warden; Bro. Harold E. Lippincott, Judge Advocate, was appointed Senior Deacon; R. W. John A. Dutton (then Commissioner of Appeals, now Grand Master) was appointed Junior Deacon. The remaining personnel was of similar caliber.

 

The original Committee and these Lodge Officers, with the Grand Master, foresaw the peculiar character of the service which this Lodge would be called upon to perform, and they realized early the inadaptability of the regulations and ritual to such an undertaking. Practically none of the Candidates would live in New York, nor would have leave, time or opportunity to visit New York City for instruction, and the personnel of the Lodge were busy men, who could not, if they would, go to the stations of the Candidates to instruct them. Instruction and catechism would require time.

 

The men were all, practically, on the point of embarking. New York and its neighborhood was but a brief resting place before boarding transports for foreign service. To initiate a candidate, then to postpone his passing or raising until after instruction and examination, might involve a delay in his Masonic progression that could easily cover years, if in fact he ever went further in the institution. He might be on the seas, in the trenches, or in a "better country" before the Lodge machinery could arrange for his Masonic accommodation. It was obvious that the unusual must be done, and it was done bravely and prayerfully.

 

By the authority of the Grand Master, expressly granted in the warrant, the Officers of the Lodge undertook to formulate a simplified ritual for the extraordinary purpose for which the Lodge was created and adapted. This ritual, after some evolution recommended by later experience, soon reached a high degree of perfection and rendered possible a very signal service.

 

Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, sat, in all, 36 times to confer degrees, always at New York City. Sometimes in the afternoon, usually in the evening, at substantially weekly intervals, save that in the first ten days of December, 1917, it sat twice in the space of five days.

 

These Sessions opened with the usual ceremonies, including the carrying-of the Colors. The Lodge sang the first verse of "America" with a special second verse composed during the War and which was very appropriate to the occasion. A talented quartette assisted and each degree was prefaced with a hymn especially appropriate to it. For the first degree we used "Guide Me, O Thou Great Jehovah", to the tune of "Autumn". The third degree was preceded by "I would not live alway". While the Lodge was closed with the hymn "O God Our Help in Ages Past".

 

The several degrees were exemplified usually by selected persons, members of the Lodge, in successive stages; the entire personnel of the Lodge however being on the qui vase to render any service which might be required. Each of these were fully equipped to take any position at a moment's notice.

 

In all cases the Candidates were vouched for by a Past Master of a regular chartered Lodge in the State of New York. A peculiar form of application with additional data relating to the military station of the applicant, yet covering all the requirements of the usual application, was adopted. Upon the Secretary fell the burden of verifying the data thus furnished, and the preparing of the detail of each communication; and at each Session, which opened at seven o'clock P. M., a roll call was made which revealed the class which had been summoned for the evening and who had been elected by the approval of the Master and Wardens who had passed upon their credentials. This service was rendered for the minimum fee prescribed by the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of New York; and no dues were imposed. A Lodge Card and a Diploma together with a Bible appropriately inscribed, was presented to each Candidate. In the Bible was attached a neat title plate on which the name of the owner was inscribed, together with the Lodge War Pledge, which read as follows:

 

We undertake to maintain our part of the War free from hatred, brutality or graft, true to the American purpose and ideals.

 

Aware of the temptations incidental to camp life and the moral and social wreckage involved, we covenant together to live the clean life and to seek to establish the American uniform as a symbol and guarantee of real manhood.

 

We pledge our example and our influence to make these ideals dominant in the American Army and Navy.

 

This Pledge was also administered and assented to in the course of the proceedings.

 

The degrees were conferred consecutively on one evening occupying in all approximately three and one-half hours. Upon one occasion Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, took over the entire Trestle Board of another Lodge, which for some reason was prevented from working, and upon another occasion, a special Session was held in order to confer the degrees upon a class of twenty-four soldiers and sailors from another New York lodge, treating this Session, to all intents and purposes, as its own.

 

In some cases the rendering of the service consecutively was impossible due to the requirements of one or another jurisdiction. In all such cases Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, did what it could and if the Candidate did not receive his entire Masonic work, in the matter of the degrees, it was not through any negligence of the Lodge or its officers.

 

The total number of Candidates who entered the Outer Door was 743. Of that number 439 were enrolled as members of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1; 57 were candidates under the age of twenty-one years, that is, they were in each case a "Lewis"; 131 were Candidates of New York City Lodges; 54 were Candidates from other New York Lodges outside the metropolis; while 119 were Candidates of foreign Jurisdictions.

 

The largest class of candidates present at any one Session was 54. These men were arranged in six files of nine each; a man's length between each file; at a certain stage in the work, and at a signal from the East, with one accord and in perfect unison, these Candidates experienced the full exemplification of the second section of the third degree. It is to be observed that each candidate had a Conductor who attended to the ritual throughout this section.

 

Visitors were not welcome; while each who was present, by invitation, was so employed in a valuable service, and so occupied in his own task, that at no time was any carelessness, levity or lack of dignity observed in any of the labors of the Lodge. It was a serious and holy and intense procedure. Upon the conclusion of the work for the evening the officers with scarcely an exception, however cold or inclement the weather, were wet to the skin through sheer nervous tension and the exaltation aroused by the occasion.

 

One Saturday in December, 1917, a flotilla of transports convoyed by a destroyer was due to leave the New York Harbor. Twenty-two of the personnel of the destroyer were brought in the morning to the attention of the Secretary of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1; they were properly and singularly vouched for. Their applications made out in proper form, were passed upon, after their credentials had been closely scrutinized. At seven o'clock the Session opened, most of the Candidates being accompanied by their fathers, who of course were Master Masons. At approximately eleven o'clock on a wild winter night, they left our shores, after having been taken into Masonic Fellowship, and followed by our united prayers went out upon the troubled seas, equipped each of them, so far as we could aid them, with a new inspiration and a new Light, out to the hazardous service of the Supreme Architect of the Universe and of their country.

 

At each of the Communications of the Lodge a box was passed and voluntary contributions were collected, totaling in all $3,563.21. This sum, after a modest deduction of expenses for stationery and the musical services, was placed in the War Relief Fund. It is almost interesting to record that many Lodges for whom courtesy work was rendered, voluntarily contributed to this same fund.

 

Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, was warranted, as distinguished from the usual authority of a chartered New York Lodge. This warrant gives life to its Lodge during the pleasure of the Grand Master. Since the Armistice and demobilization of our military forces a diligent effort has been made continuously to bring about the demission of the membership of our lodge to regular chartered Lodges.

 

In 1920, the Grand Master recalled the Warrants of the other four Overseas Sea and Field Lodges, and consolidated their undimited material into Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, for the purpose of record and control. At the present date only 291 out of a total of 1,192 are still undimited. Some of these no doubt are in the other world.

 

Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, still lives. Its personnel is unchanged save that in April, 1918, its Senior Warden met an untimely death and the Junior Warden was advanced to that station. Otherwise the personnel all stepped up.

 

On several occasions thereafter the Lodge was employed by the Grand Master as a convenient agency to sponsor patriotic occasions, and it will probably continue so long as it lives to be available for any emergent service upon the call of the Grand Master.

 

The particular motif of this undertaking was originally to inspire in the Candidates the virtues of decency and personal purity and respect for others. We endeavored so to exalt the spirit of the Candidates whom we served that they would not only have no fear of death should it come to them, but that they would be keen so long as they should live and the military service still embrace them, to keep themselves fit to fight if need be. It is a matter of great satisfaction that in not a few distances from time to time during the War and the years following it, letters and personal communications have been received from many indicative of their lively memory of their experiences and of the indelible lessons which were taught and which were safely received.

 

And a closing word with regard to our ritual. The standard ritual of the Grand Lodge of New York was used throughout with some abbreviations in the lectures, excepting that in the second section of the Third Degree a modification of the Emulation Ritual of the United Grand Lodge of England was used, adapted to the purposes of our undertaking. To those familiar with that Ritual, its appropriateness will be obvious. To handle any such company as 54 Candidates in one class in one and the same evening in the space of something less than an hour in the Second Section of the Third Degree would have been impossible by any other method. Altogether aside from the facility which it offered, the fine dignity and the absence of all levity was an outstanding characteristic of our War Ritual.

 

Although our method of inquiry into the qualifications may have seemed to be rather informal; however moderate or even cheap our fees may have appeared (which might have inspired some Candidates to seek membership at a material saving) yet there was but one instance in our entire experience, known to us, of any Candidate accomplishing this purpose. With that exception if it is such, we have not known of a single instance of unworthy material having been accepted by our Military Lodge.

 

The following comments from other Jurisdictions will be interesting and informing. The Fraternal Correspondent, in the Proceedings of Pennsylvania, for 1918, says that at the Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge of New York, held on May 7, 1918, the Grand Master, mentioning Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, said that it conferred the degrees on 431 applicants, of whom 39 were under the age of twenty- one years. He also attended the first meeting of this Lodge, at which time his son was made a Mason. The ages of the initiates under twenty-one ranged from eighteen years and four months to twenty years and ten months. The majority of them were over nineteen years.

 

In the Pennsylvania Proceedings for the following year, 1919, it is noted that:

 

 In addition it [S. & F. L., No. 1] raised about 300 Candidates for other Lodges. The total membership at the date of report was 361. It conferred no degrees after the Armistice, Nov. 11, 1918. Its future existence depended at the will of the Grand Master.

 

The Fraternal Correspondent of South Dakota remarks in the Proceedings of that Grand Lodge for 1920 that:

 

The work of the Sea and Field Lodges was closed, except No. 1, which remains in existence for the purpose of placing the Masons made in all of them in regular Lodges.

 

He recommended that their names so far as appropriate be given chartered Lodges of the State from time to time.

 

As was to be expected there was not unanimous approval of New York's action on the part of other Grand Lodges. In the Proceedings of Texas for 1921 the criticism of the South Carolina correspondent is quoted with approval, and it is intimated that the Grand Lodge of New York was acting improperly in issuing warrants for Sea and Field Lodges in France, the Texas brother adding that:

 

If the Grand Lodge of New York can issue a warrant for a Lodge in France, under the jurisdiction of New York, it might with the same authority set a Lodge to work in Texas or South Carolina.

 

The report of M.W. Bro. Townsend Scudder to Grand Lodge on the work of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, which was received and ordered printed in the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of New York for 1920, is as follows:

 

New York City, May 4, 1920. Hon. W. S. Farmer, Grand Master. Dear Sir and M. W. Brother:

 

I beg to submit the following report of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1

 

Since Nov. 9, 1918, no sessions save formal business sessions have been held. The last session was held on April 5, 1920, in conjunction with a regular session of Jonkheer Lodge, No. 865, at Yonkers, N. Y., on which occasion, by your permission, the officers of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, undertook to confer the Second Section of the Master Mason degree for that Lodge.

 

In March last you issued instructions to the Wor. Master to assimilate the undemitted material of Sea and Field Lodges Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5, overseas, and that thereafter that material should be recorded and transferred in the same manner as the material of Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1. Your instructions have been carried out.

 

During the year 1919, 145 demits were issued, and from the institution of the Lodge to date 225 have been transferred to other Lodges. The number remaining upon the roll, untransferred, exclusive of the personnel, is 204.

 

Fraternally, William C. Prime,

 

Secretary.

 

The Grand Master's Address for the same year had the following reference to Sea and Field Lodges:

 

In my address to the Grand Lodge at its 138th Annual Communication, I stated that the warrant establishing Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, was still outstanding, and that I had also issued warrants establishing Sea and Field Lodges, Nos. 2, 3 and 4, for work and instruction overseas.

 

I did, in fact, issue warrants for Sea and Field Lodge, No. 2, with M. W. Townsend Scudder as Master, at Paris, France; Sea and Field Lodge, No. 3, with R. W. Harry B. Mook, Past Master of Excelsior Lodge No. 195, as Master, at Le Mans, France; Sea and Field Lodge, No. 4, with W. Charles T. Arrighi, Past Master of Howard Lodge, No. 35, as Master, at Marseilles, France- and Sea and Field Lodge, No. 5, with Bro. Mark E. Penney, Junior Warden of Konosioni Lodge, No. 950, as Master, at the A. E. F. University, Beaune, France.... Inasmuch as the establishment of Sea and Field Lodges was commenced in the administration of my predecessor, I should hope if my suggestion is approved that one of said Lodges may be located in Buffalo; and that I should be glad if one of them No. 2 might be located in or near my home city, Syraeuse. I should like to see them established in different parts of the State.

 

In the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Florida for 1919 is the following sympathetic account of the social activities of the lodge:

 

The first Army Lodge chartered by the State of New York known as "Sea and Field Lodge", has arranged to open and has now opened the club rooms in the basement of the Masonic Hall on Twenty-Third Street. It is probably the most magnificent club of its kind in the city. Large rooms opening from the main entrance have been remodeled and are furnished with costly rugs, tables, desks, chairs, full writing equipment, magazines, and every other convenience for a lounging room for the men in service. Attendants are on hand at all times, to render assistance to the visitors.

 

These facilities are offered only to soldiers and sailors in uniform, and all is free without a cent of charge. They also have all the privileges of the club on the top floor of the building.

 

The old banquet room has been turned into bath and amusement rooms. There are showers, tubs and lockers fitted with the very best plumbing, and there are billiard and pool rooms and there are rooms for checkers, dominoes, and shuffleboard The War Demonstration Committee of the Grand Lodge are keeping up these rooms in perfect shape and they are being visited by several hundred enlisted men almost daily.

 

In 1919 many thousands of cards were distributed throughout the embarkation centers and ports informing returning Masons of these Club Rooms in New York and extending to them every courtesy while stopping in the vicinity of New York prior to their demobilization. A photograph of one of these cards is here reproduced. It bears the seals of the Grand Lodge and of the lodge, and is signed by the Secretary. This was made out as a specimen for record.

 

The following circular letter was issued by the Grand Lodge of New York to all the Grand Lodges of the U. S. A., informing them of the formation of the Sea and Field Lodge and offering its services to them:

 

GRAND LODGE OF THE FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK MASONIC HALL. Office of the Grand Secretary.

 

New York, June 14, 1919. Most Worshipful Sir and Dear Brother:

 

The Constitution of the Grand Lodge of New York gives it jurisdiction over all men serving in the United States Army and Navy. The Grand Lodge of New York has warranted Sea and Field Lodges in France, and may warrant some in the occupied territory to serve the Craft if the circumstances justify this course. Notwithstanding the fact that under its Constitution the Grand Lodge can accept material resident of other jurisdictions when serving in the United States Army or Navy, it has hesitated so to do and has uniformly sought the acquiescence of the Grand Lodge in the jurisdiction in which the Candidate resided, when in civil life.

 

We appreciate fully that most Grand Lodge Constitutions have no provisions to meet conditions prevailing in war times and that few Grand Lodges have provided for waivers excepting through the medium of the local lodge within the jurisdiction of which the candidate resides.

 

An important part of our service to the Craft overseas is to correct the unfavorable impressions which our younger members had gained through the failure of our Fraternity to serve them independently over there as a war relief organization. It happens that much can be done to retrieve our failure and further our cause by accepting certain candidates whose influence and good will we can use for the betterment of the condition of our members.

 

We would like to have it understood that your Grand Lodge will not take offense if in our effort to serve American Masons overseas in some eases we initiate, pass and raise material which in civil life would belong to you exclusively.

 

These men will become members of our Sea and Field Military Lodges. We will carry them until they have had a reasonable time to affiliate elsewhere. We confer the degree for the minimum of $20. Of course the money is not a factor. Our sole purpose is to help our boys overseas. When the new members return they will affiliate where they belong and an affiliation fee in their ease can be made to equal the home initiation fee, if that will better suit local sentiment.

 

The purpose of this letter is to receive from you, if it seem to you proper, some assurances that in this Service overseas to the Fraternity as a whole the American Masonic Mission will not give offense to your Grand Lodge when it accepts candidates in the service hailing in civil life from your jurisdiction

 

Very truly,

 

Grand Secretary.

 

This letter aroused mixed feelings in the various Grand Lodges. Some granted this permission while others summarily refused to do so and declared summary action against any material received by the New York overseas lodges that came from their Grand Jurisdictions. The letter, as a historical document, indicates a genuine effort on the part of New York to meet and solve a wartime emergency situation.

 

APPENDIX

 

It will be useful, as will as interesting, to put on record The Warrants by which Sea and Field Lodge, No. 1, was constituted.

 

Sit Lax Et Lax Fait.

 

I, Thomas Penney, Grand Master of Masons in the State of New York, do by these presents, appoint, authorize and empower our worthy Brother Townsend Scudder to be the Master- our worthy Brother George J. Jackson to be the Senior Warden; our worthy Brother Robert Judson Kenworthy to be the Junior Warden; our worthy Brother Arthur K. Kuhn to be the Treasurer- our worthy Brother William C. Prime to be the Secretary, our worthy Brother Harold E. Lippineott to be the Senior Deacon; our worthy Brother John A. Dutton to be the Junior Deacon of a Sea and Field Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons, to be by virtue hereof, constituted, formed and held at the City of New York, and elsewhere as may be convenient and necessary, which lodge shall be distinguished and known by the name or style of Sea and Field Lodge No. 1 and the said Master is hereby authorized to appoint subordinate officers of said lodge; and said lodge is authorized to adopt all such by-laws and regulations for the governance of its proceedings and labour, Subject to any approval, as it may see fit.

 

And further the said lodge is hereby invested with full power and authority to assemble on proper and lawful occasions and to confer upon candidates who have been elected and initiated members of a regular lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the State of New York, and who have actually enlisted or been drafted or commissioned officers in the United States Forces in the present great war; the Second and Third Degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry, without the usual interval, and without the usual proof of suitable proficiency in the preceding degrees- and, to elect, initiate, pass and raise, without the usual formalities and requirements of chartered lodges, candidates, residents of the State of New York, who have actually enlisted, or been drafted or commissioned officers in the United States Forces in the present great war, who apply therefor in writing, and who satisfy the Master and Wardens of said lodge that they are qualified, and who are about to be sent out of this jurisdiction on duty, and on payment of twenty dollars- and to initiate, pass and raise candidates who have actually enlisted or been drafted, or commissioned officers in the United States Forces on the present great war, residents of other states, who have been initiated or passed, or who having been elected members of regular lodges in their respective states, have not been initiated, upon the request of the Grand Master, and Satisfactory proof that they have paid all fees required by the laws of the jurisdiction in which they were respectively elected, as also to do and perform all and every such acts and things appertaining to the Craft as have been and ought to be done for the Honor and Advantage thereof.

 

Membership or Officership in said lodge shall in nowise impair or affect existing membership or officership in a regular chartered lodge.

 

Said lodge shall have a seal and shall have and keep all books required to Abe kept by regular lodges in the State of New York, and the same and all records to be surrendered to the Grand Lodge on the termination of this warrant.

 

This warrant shall terminate at the pleasure of the Grand Master.

 

Given under my hand and Private Seal at the City of New York, in the United States of America, this sixth day of October in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred and seventeen, and in the year of Masonry, five thousand and nine hundred and seventeen.

 

(Signed) Thomas Penney,

 

(Seal) Grand Master.

 

Sit Lung Et Lux Flit.

 

Thomas Penney, Grand Master.