The Degrees Of Freemasonry And The Royal Arch.

" In our judgment , until the second decade of the last century , there was but one simple ceremony ; never were brethren required to leave the lodge because a hig her degree was to be worked—for which they were not eligible—but whether Apprentices , Fellow Crafts , or Master Masons , all were equally entitled to be present , irrespective of any notion of degrees whatever . In other words , so far as we can determine in the light of duly authenticated facts , distinct and separate Masonic degrees are never met with , alluded to , or even probable , prior to

1716-1717 . " I believe in the great antiquity of the Fraternity ; In the Free and Accepted Masons of to-day being the lineal descendants of the Craftsmen who built our noble Cathedrals , and in the existing copies of the Old Charges ( extending over a period of five centuries ) , constituting the title deeds to our Masonic inher ' tance . But the antiquity or continuity of Freemasonry is one thing , and that of degrees

quite another ; hence , while I do my utmost to strengthen the links of evidence which connect the original organisation with its operative and partly speculative predecessor—both esoterically and symbolically—I feel quite as free to reject any theory which seeks to date back the origin of degrees , and particularly that of the ' Third , ' to the 17 th century or earlier , beciusc adequate proof is lacking . " This is Bro . Hughan ' s view .

Bro . Speth , the Secretary ot the Quatuor Coronati Lodge , argues that there were two degrees , and in a paper read before the lodge on the 4 th March , 1898 , * thus sums up his contention ; " In the olden days the operative apprentice was ' Entered , ' which was a purely business proceeding , equivalent to our modern indentures or articles . Then , or shortly afterwards , came the degree work , making him « u-Mason , which comprised the administration of an oath , the communications of the Craft-legend , and the imparting of certain secrets , which are now divided between him and the

Fellow Craft . Seven years later he was passed a Master after due examination , again a purely business proceeding . But if he desired to pursue the Craft for a living it became necessary , as in all other guilds , to join the Fellowship , and this entailed a ceremony conferring the secrets necessary for him to prove himself abroad a Fellow of the Craft and not a runaway apprentice . Moreover , this ceremony , which was mystic and a real initiation , imparted , naturally in a much less ornate manner than now , the " Master ' s part" or , in other words , the essentials of our Master Mason ' s Degree .

" In later tiiies these two Degrees were run into one when conferred upon a Speculative candidate , and , as a natural consequence of the decay of the lodges the Second Degree was almost forgotten by the Operatives , and , possibly , much confused by the Speculative Masons . In 1717 these two Degrees were taken over bodily by the Grand Lodge , and restored to sense , as well as the limited knowledge of the members would permit . Finally , shortly after 1723 , they were re-apportioned into three Degrees . "

We thus see , companions , that those most competent to form an opinion on the subject of Degrees , admit that the present arrangement was made subsequent to 1717 , and that as to whether previous to that date there were two Degrees or only one , they are divided . The form of words used at the admission of a candidate—what , in fact , we call the ritual—was doubtless much less elaborate in early times than that which

obtains to-day . No book , manuscript or printed , that I have heard of ( beyond the Ancient Charges ) exists , which gives any clear indication of the nature of the ceremony in the 17 th century or before j but early in the 18 th century we find certain pamphlets published which profess to give particulars of Masonic working within the lodges , which , as Bro . Hughan remarks , " have served to amuse , if not to instruct , the Fraternity for over one hundred and fifty years , "f Of these I may mention two

—1 . '' The Grand Mystery of Free Masons discovered . ''^ 2 . Prichard's " Masonry Dissected . " ]; The first ( "The Grand Mystery" ) was published in 1724 , seven years after the formation of Grand Lodge , and briefly may be said to cover more or Jess what is comprised in the present Three Degrees , The second ( Prichard ' s " Masonry Dissected " ) , published in 1730 , mentions three grades , but gives only one obligation , which naturally occurs at the first admission of the candidate .

A careful consideration of this oath seems to point to the opinion that , according to this writer ' s view there was but one obligation . This was in 1730 . In a book of a similar character , styled " [ achin and Boaz , " but published 32 years afterwards , viz ., in 1762 , and numerous editions since , we find three separate obligations for candidates for the Three Degrees , as well as one for a brother upon assuming the duties of W . M .

Now , to what extent these accurately represent those Masonic ceremonies of the two periods it is not for me to determine , but there is no doubt that they indicate progression or advancement in Masonic ritual . In the oldest minutes of a Masonic lodge extant—the si of Mary Chapel , No . I —we find that gentlemen were admitted " Fellows of the Craft . " These same minutes , which bear date from 1599 , also mention Deacons , Wardens , and Masters of Masons .

Ellas Ashmole , in his diary for 1646 , says that he and Colonel Mainwaring were made Freemasons at Warrington , in Lancashire , on the 26 th October of that year , but these is no mention of Degrees . On attending a lodge in London in 1682 , however , he describes himself as the " Senior Fellow " present . Many other cases might be quoted . The conclusion to be reached from all this is , that our present arrangement

of Masonic ceremony into Three Degrees was the work of the early part of last century . The terms " Entered Apprentice , " " Fellow Craft , " and " Master Mason" were probably taken from the nomenclature of the Operative Masons ' Guild , and suitably described a brother at the various stages of his Masonic career . Once admit the need of dividing the ceremonies into Degrees , and names for them would be found readily enough . Let us glance at this very interesting period in Masonic history for one moment .

In 1717 four or more lodges in London met and constituted themselves into what they were pleased to call a " Grand Lodge . " Who the moving spirits in this movement were is not now known , as there are no minutes preserved , and no Secretary was appointed . The first Grand Master was Anthony Sayer , and it was not until 1723 that Wm . Cowper was appointed Secretary . Of the first six years' proceedings of this new and specially constituted body we have no cflicial account , but from the date named an unbroken record is extant . The

progress of this Grand Lodge was rapid , for besides constituting new lodges , it took into its association other bodies then existing in London and Westminster . Some , however , were not willing to submit to this self-constituted authority , and held aloof , and yet notwithstanding this , in 1723 the engraved list gives the signs of 51 houses at which lodges under this Grand Lodge authority were supposed to be meeting . To minds like those of George Payne , who was Grand Master in 1718 , % 1 * Desagulicrs , Grand Master in 1719 , it became at once evident that if the new body was lo succeed , organisation and system would be needed . An

The Degrees Of Freemasonry And The Royal Arch.

enquiry for Masonic documents was made , a system of Masonic research instituted , and the result of these labours was the appearance of what is called Anderson ' s Book of Constitutions . This was in 1723 . I regret that I cannot stop to go into detail , but must pass rapidly over these most interesting events . It would seem that it was about this time also that the ceremonial of Freemasonry was taken in hand , elaborated , and divided into its present recognised three Degrees . For various reasons which I cannot now enter into , it appears

probable that these changes and alterations were accompanied by omissions or additions , which were looked upon by the lodges existing independent of Grand Lodge jurisdiction , as a distinct departure from the ancient landmarks . This , they therefore scornfully called " Modern " Freemasonry , in distinction to their own , which they claimed as " Ancient "; hence , when some 30 years after , a rival

Grand Lodge sprang up , comprising lodges which had not joined the organisation of 1717 , they proudly claimed the title of " Ancients . " This new Grand Lodge has been usually described as a secession , but Bro . Henry Sadler has satisfactorily demonstrated that such was not the case , * and that the societies forming the Grand Lodge of the Ancients owed no allegiance to the Grand Lodge of 1717 at all , and therefore cannot be described as seceders or schismatics .

And now the question arises as to the Royal Arch Degree . There is no evidence to show that previous to 1740 such a Degree , as a Degree , existed . Di . Mackey says " that until the year 1740 the essential element of the Royal Arch constituted a component pjirt of the Master ' s Degree , and was , of course , its concluding part . " Bro . Hughan * fixes the probable date of arrangement at 1 740 , but admits that he can say nothing definite as to the actual year , nor is it at all clear when and by whom it was originated .

Of the following details there can be no doubt : From the year 1743 down * wards references to or mention of the Royal Arch occur . Dr . Chetwode Crawley , in Vol . I . of his Cojmentaria Hibernica , quotes a paragraph from a Dublin news > paper of 1743 , which in describing a Masonic procession , mentions the Royal Arch as being carried by two excellent Masons . Dr . Dassigny , in his " Enquiry " ( 1744 ) , speaks of an assembly of Masons in York , under the title of Royal Arch Masons . J These are printed statements . The oldest minute or written evidence

relating to Royal Arch Masonry at present known to exist , is in the transactions of a lodge at Bristol , 1758 , and is in these words : " Bro . Gordon proposed to be raised to the Degree of a Royal Arch and accepted . " There is an important difference which should be noted between the introduction of the three Degrees' arrangement and the advent of the Royal Arch as a separate ceremony . The former was , there is little doubt , done under the

sanction of the Grand Lodge , and the Degrees so arranged were adapted and approved by that body . This is shown by tho fact that the first Book of ConstU tutions ( 1723 ) lays it down that the Degrees of " Fellow Craft" and " Master Mason " couid only be conferred in Grand Lodge . This rule , however , was abolished it the meeting of Grand Lodge held on the 27 th November , 1725 . $ In the case of the Royal Arch this does not appear to have been so . One of the first known references to it asso : iates it with York , and the Grand Lodge of

England ( Moderns ) , whatever their attitude towards it at a later period , certainly for a time looked upon it with something approaching disdain , though it was started or promoted by some of their own members a dozen years or so before the " Ancients" were organised . The Ancients took it up warmly . Dermotfc , their Grand Secretary , in his Ahimati Reaon of 1756 , says he firmly

believes " the Royal Arch to be the root , heart , and marrow of Freemasonry , " Contrast this with the official reply of Grand Secretary Samuel Spencer of the " Moderns . " Writing to a petitioner , who , amongst other qualifications , described himself as a Royal Arch Mason , Bro . Spencer says , " Our Society ( that is , the Moderns ) is neither Arch , Royal Arch , or Ancient , so that you have no right to partake of our Charity . " ||

This being the state of affairs , it cannot be surprising that this Degree for some time made little progress . In 1765 the minutes of a Royal Arch chapter in Halifax begin , the oldest in this province , and in the same year , not to mention many other cases , a Royal Arch chapter was working in London , which afterwards developed into Grand Chapter , and was patronised by the Moderns .

Besides there being two Grand Lodges flourishing at the same time in London , there was also this Grand Chapter , which , though independent if both , was really supported by the members of the premier Grand Lodge , as Bro . Hughan styles the Modern Masons . At the Union , in 1813 , the Royal Arch Degree was amalgamated with Craft Masonry , and was declared to be included in it . So much for its history so far as we know it .

Leaving this aspect of the subject and looking at our system from a philosophical point of view , one is naturally struck with the antiquity and peculiarity of our ancient Institution . Tojdeclare Freemasonry to be a relic or an adaptation of the mysteries of Egvpt , Greece , or Rome , would be to make a bold assertion , yet those ancient mysteries were , amongst other things , intended to teach

precisely those truths and lessons which are so strongly insisted upon in our cere monial . They may be briefly summed up thus—1 . Acknowledgment of a Supreme Being . 2 . Belief in the resurrection and the immortality of the soul . 3 . The practice of Morality and Charity .

Now , if the conjecture is true that those who framed our present ritual wenc on the lines of these ancient mysteries , and worked in , as far as they could , the ceremonies used in conferring the grades among the old operative Masons , we can arrive at some idea as to the present arrangement of our Degrees , and hence it became necessary that in the Third Degree both death , resurrection , and immortality should be typified ; and one is not surprised to find that the Third Degree

should be enlarged and elaborated by the arrangement of the ceremony of the Royal Arch . In Prichard ' s " Masonry Dissected " ( already referred to ) we find these questions and answers" Where are you going ? To the West from the East . " " What are you going to do there f To seek for that which was lost and is now found . "

This , I think , puts a different complexion on the Third Degree to what we ara accustomed . Acting on these thoughts , what may we say of Freemasonry ? The First Degree points out to us the birth of man ; the world is all before him , unknown , untried , with its cares , struggles , and perplexities . The Second Degree represents man in the strength of his years , and he is bidden to extend his

researches into the more hidden mysteries of nature and science . His attention is directed to mental improvement and enlightenment , which only can render him a fit member of society . He is taught to improve himself , to know the advantage ol refining studies , to render himself uselul in bis generation , and to endeavour to leave the world better than he found it . In the Third Degree his attention is forcibly directed to the lessons which nature teaches ; he is led to