-
Articles/Ads
Article TO THE EDITOR. ← Page 2 of 3 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
To The Editor.
I consider the antient landmarks of our Order . AVhat are termed the Union Lectures , are much curtailed , are not so beautiful , and have , in many respects , a totally different reference to the old lectures , which I have been in the habit of hearing . The old lectures having a more spiritual , the modern , a more mythological reference . Upon diligent enquiry , I am told , that at the Union , when the three ceremonies were revised and agreed uponH . R . H . the present Grand Master was asked
, " Shall we make any alteration in the Lectures ? " he replied , " No , by no means ; do not meddle with the lectures . " This information I had from an old Mason , who took an active part at the time of the Union . Who then , I would ask , has taken upon himself the prerogative of violating the antient landmarks of our Order ?— it is a power which is not constitutionally vested in any man , or body of men , however dignified the office they hold , which is only held in trust for the space of twelve months .
That it is not constitutional , I refer you to the charges delivered to every Master of a Lodge , on his installation , viz . — " You admit , that it it is not in the power of any man , or body of men , to make innovation in the body of Masonry . " That very great innovation has been made within the last thirty years , is too evident ; but the altered system never having been regularly promulgated throughout the provinces , it is now only just beginning to bemade known ; and I can assure it is
. you , spreading alarm and dissatisfaction wherever it is becoming known ; and in several Lodges , some of the Brethren have sent in their resignations in consequence . I have been asked , AVhat is the motive for a change in a system , which boasts of its antiquity as one of its leading features ? I answer , that to me it is a mystery , but not a Masonic mystery : one asks , AVIiy are our Lodges not to be dedicated to St . John ,
as they always have been from time immemorial ? Why are the two g and Parallels , St . John the Baptist , and St . John the Evangelist , to be expunged from our ritual , and Moses and Solomon substituted ? Another asks , AVhy the two grand Parallels , and the ancient historical tradition respecting them , are left out of our Lectures ? I answer , I cannot tell ; but while I am Master of a Lodge , they never will be left out by me . 1 will give you the antient tradition respecting the two St .
Johns , as preserved and delivered by us in the provinces , which I have never heard in London . " From the building of the first Temple at Jerusalem to the Babylonish captivity , Freemasons' Lodges were dedicated to King Solomon ; from thence to the coming of the Messiah , they were dedicated to Zerubbabel , the builder of the second Temple ; and from that time to the final destruction of the Temple of Titus , in the reign of the Emperor
Vespasian , they were dedicated to St . John the Baptist ; but owing to the many massacres and disorders which attended that memorable event Freemasonry sunk very much into decay ; many Lodges were entirel y broken up , and but few could meet in sufficient numbers to constitute their legality ; and at a general meeting of the Craft , held in the city of Benjamin , it was observed , that the principal reason for the decline of Masonry was the want of a Grand Master to patronise it ; they
therefore deputed seven of their most eminent members to wait upon St . John the Evangelist , who was at that time Bishop of E phesus , requesting him to take the office of Grand Master . He returned for answer , that though well stricken in years , ( being upwards of ninety ) , yet having been in the early part of his life initiated into Masonry , he would take upon himself that office ; he thereby completed by his .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
To The Editor.
I consider the antient landmarks of our Order . AVhat are termed the Union Lectures , are much curtailed , are not so beautiful , and have , in many respects , a totally different reference to the old lectures , which I have been in the habit of hearing . The old lectures having a more spiritual , the modern , a more mythological reference . Upon diligent enquiry , I am told , that at the Union , when the three ceremonies were revised and agreed uponH . R . H . the present Grand Master was asked
, " Shall we make any alteration in the Lectures ? " he replied , " No , by no means ; do not meddle with the lectures . " This information I had from an old Mason , who took an active part at the time of the Union . Who then , I would ask , has taken upon himself the prerogative of violating the antient landmarks of our Order ?— it is a power which is not constitutionally vested in any man , or body of men , however dignified the office they hold , which is only held in trust for the space of twelve months .
That it is not constitutional , I refer you to the charges delivered to every Master of a Lodge , on his installation , viz . — " You admit , that it it is not in the power of any man , or body of men , to make innovation in the body of Masonry . " That very great innovation has been made within the last thirty years , is too evident ; but the altered system never having been regularly promulgated throughout the provinces , it is now only just beginning to bemade known ; and I can assure it is
. you , spreading alarm and dissatisfaction wherever it is becoming known ; and in several Lodges , some of the Brethren have sent in their resignations in consequence . I have been asked , AVhat is the motive for a change in a system , which boasts of its antiquity as one of its leading features ? I answer , that to me it is a mystery , but not a Masonic mystery : one asks , AVIiy are our Lodges not to be dedicated to St . John ,
as they always have been from time immemorial ? Why are the two g and Parallels , St . John the Baptist , and St . John the Evangelist , to be expunged from our ritual , and Moses and Solomon substituted ? Another asks , AVhy the two grand Parallels , and the ancient historical tradition respecting them , are left out of our Lectures ? I answer , I cannot tell ; but while I am Master of a Lodge , they never will be left out by me . 1 will give you the antient tradition respecting the two St .
Johns , as preserved and delivered by us in the provinces , which I have never heard in London . " From the building of the first Temple at Jerusalem to the Babylonish captivity , Freemasons' Lodges were dedicated to King Solomon ; from thence to the coming of the Messiah , they were dedicated to Zerubbabel , the builder of the second Temple ; and from that time to the final destruction of the Temple of Titus , in the reign of the Emperor
Vespasian , they were dedicated to St . John the Baptist ; but owing to the many massacres and disorders which attended that memorable event Freemasonry sunk very much into decay ; many Lodges were entirel y broken up , and but few could meet in sufficient numbers to constitute their legality ; and at a general meeting of the Craft , held in the city of Benjamin , it was observed , that the principal reason for the decline of Masonry was the want of a Grand Master to patronise it ; they
therefore deputed seven of their most eminent members to wait upon St . John the Evangelist , who was at that time Bishop of E phesus , requesting him to take the office of Grand Master . He returned for answer , that though well stricken in years , ( being upwards of ninety ) , yet having been in the early part of his life initiated into Masonry , he would take upon himself that office ; he thereby completed by his .