Original Correspondence.

Original Correspondence .

The Editor is not responsible for the opinions expressed ly Correspondents . HEAR THE OTHER SIDE . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —In February last a leader appeared in your journal headed " A Step in the Right Direction . " Ostensibly , it advocated what is called " Christian " or " higher degrees ; " actually , it was designed to justify the introduction of

allusions to Christian saints and Christian doctrines into the work of the lodge . That I did not misunderstand the drift of its intention is evident from Bro . Carpenter's response the week following ( Feb . 19 ) . Bro . Carpenter pats the Jew on the back . " Surely ( says he ) no conscientious Jew could take offence

at the avowal by any brother of his Christian conviction , " which , with the etceteras , means that no Jew ought to feel offended at a Christian brother constantly vaunting the superiority of Christianity ovcr Judaism . You tell us that " Christianity is the pivot upon

which Operative Masonry turns , " because its patrons in the Middle Ages were Christian priests , and further intimate that a Christian brother is debarred from privileges enjoyed by a Parsce , Mahommedan , and Jew . While they arc allowed to be obligated on certain books , the " Christian

brother cannot say a word about the New Testament . " It appears to me that all enjoy the same privileges . It is one thing to be obligated on this or that book . In ' that respect , all enjoy the same privilege ; but it is another thing to be allowed to talk about certain subjects contained in cither of those books about which the brotherhood do not

agree . Nor can I see what the patronage of former Christain priests has to do with our speculative Masonry ; ov what " Operative Masons" had to do with Christianity ; or what the present organisation has to do with the building societies of the

Middle Ages ! The aim and object of the Masonry then and now are entirely dissimilar . Then , the objects of the societies was not the promulgation of Christianity , but bread and butler . The then organisation was as much based on selfishness as those of any of our " trade unions . " True , their

constitutions required members to submit to Roman Catholic Christian discipline , and Catholic Bishops Wire patrons , & c , but what had Christianity 10 do with operative Masonry ! If the then Masons chose to confine the privilege of membership to those only of the Roman Catholic Communion ,

what is that to - us ? Then , as already remarked , the object of the Fraternity was " . bread and butter . " When Catholic Priests employed them to build churches and convents in accordance with the then idea of Christian perfection , no one cculd find employment , or was admitted to fcllowshio

except a Roman Catholic . The object of the present organisation is not selfishness or ' bread and butter , " but " to unite men of every country , sect , and opinion , be they what they may ; and to cultivate and cement a true and sincere friendshi p atnongthose who might otlierwischaveremained at a

porpetti . il distance . " Now , how is that to be accomplished ? Will you confine the privilege to the majority only of eulogising their own religion ; or will you extend the same privilege also to the minority ? Religion , wc know , is necessary to Speculative

Masonry , but the question is what religion ? or whose religion ? Religion consists , first , in belief of a Supreme Being , or the G . A . O . T . U . Second , in practising morality and justice , by doing unto others as wc would others under similar circumstances should do unto us . And thirdiv , something else . About the

first a . nd second , there is no disagreement , but about the third , or the " something else , " mankind cWiicr . It cannot be denied that the Christian , the Jew , the Mahommedan , & c , each regards the other ' s somethings , as erroneous and even superstitious . These " somethings " cannot all be true , because they are

antagonistic ; if cither of them is true , it can only be one , but which one ? Now , if the Darwinian theory of gradual development is true , it is possible , that a time may come , when the digestive and other organs of the lion may become so altered , and his mora ! conscience mav

become so acute , that the lion and lamb may actually lie together in peace and unity . It is also possible that man ' s mental constitution may undergo such a change , that a Christian , a Jew , a " Mahommedan , & c , may each in a Masonic'Jodge , expatiate on the superiority of his own something over the som ' eth ings of all present , without giving the slightest

oflencc to any one . I think , however , that the human mind as at present constituted , can no more suffer such transcendental practice without producing a commotion in the lodge , than to expect that the lion and lamb can now live together in good fellowship . Bro . Carpenter may indeed have had pleasant converse with an

Original Correspondence.

Israeliteaboutthcmerits and demerits of Christianity and Judaism , but did cither convert the other ? and on parting , did not the pious Bro . C . regard the Jew as blind and stiff-necked , & c . ? and did not the Jew think Bro . Carpenter ' s argument very absurd ? All this pleasant converse may , however , do very well

to wile away an hour outside of the lodge , but let Bro . Moses , or Isaacs , or Levy of the Lodge of Joppa , of Israel or of the Tranquillity , make it a practice nightly , while in the lodge of flourishing superiority of the Mosaic religion , no matter how artfully and disguiscdly it may be done , I venture

to assert , that the Christian members of that lodge would feci offended thereat , would regard themselves insulted , would look upon it as impertinent , and though at first they might treat it with silent contempt , eventually , it would cither produce an explosion , or the Christian members would leave such a

lodge in disgust . In vain would Bro . Moses plead , " Surely no conscientious Christian could take offence at the avowal of any brother of his Mosaic convictions , " & c , & c . Nor would the plea stand good , that according to tradition , in ancient times Masonry was patronised by Hebrew Kings and

priests , and " that it follows that we have accepted a Jewish inheritance , " & c . Let us now look upon it from another stand-point . Suppose that our very tolerant brother is a member of St . 'Patrick ' s Lodge , ninctecn-twenticths of whose members are Roman Catholics . Bro . O'Connell , the W . M ., is pleaded

nightly to expatiate on the sublimity of the doctrines of the " real presence , " " the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin , " " the Infallibility of the Pope , " & c . Will not eventually , even Bro . Carpenter himself , either become provoked to challenge discussion on those topics , or protest against the turning of

St . Patrick ' s Lodge into a Roman Catholic Church ? or leave the said lodge in anger ? and how would he feci , when Bro . O'Connell justified his conduct on the plea , that in the middle ages , the patrons of the Fraternity were priests of the Roman Catholic Church ? ecc . But suppose even that Bro . Carpenter

had actually arrived at that imagined state of perfection , so that he could listen with pleasure , or even with indifference to Bro . O'Conncll ' s orations , how many other Protestant brethren can one find so transccndcntaliscd ? My brother , we must take human nature as it is , and as it is , we can only succeed in our mission of

uniting men of divers religions into a harmonious whole , andofcementing a true and sincere friendship between them , by lcavingottt all the issues upon which they differ , and confiningourselvcs while in the lodge , " lo the universal religion , the religion in which all agree . " Respectfully and fraternally yours ,

JACOB NORTON . Boston , U . S ., April Sth , 1870 .

CONSTANTINE THE GREAT . ( To the Editor rf The Freemason . ) DEAR SI : < A \ D BROTHER , —A writer in a late number of THE FREEMASON , signing himself " W . G . Doric , " has been good enough to call in question my historical accuracy , and to stigmatize

my remarks in a late number of your contemporary , as " scurrilous . " As I am not going to criticise the valuable information given us by this gentleman , I will merely ask you to publish the list of some of the works relating to Constantine the Great , which I have appended to this letter , and which I am

certain will be useful to every student of history , as 1 believe this is the first time these references have ever been collectively presented . If , therefore , those of your readers who are interested in the controversy , will kindly take the trouble to consult the undermentioned works , they will be in a position to

judge whose statements are correct . With respect to the charge of " scurrility , " I am of opinion that the writer has rather exceeded the bounds of both common politeness and literary criticism , but will content myself will ; capping his quotation with one from the burlestuie of" Midas : ' '

"When lhe judgment ' s weak , The prejudice is strong . " I am , dear Sir and Brother , Yours fraternally , C . F . MAT 1 ER .

Pyzaiitina ? Historic Scriptores , Bonna ? , 1 S 2 S-1 S 56 , in Svo . P . uscbii Pamphili ; De vita Constanlini , Lipsia . ' , 1 S 30 , in Svo . Ihr . 'iiF . utropii , I ! iv \ i . irinm Re-rum Romanartmi , Lcydc , 1729 , in . it " . Cesiini Xom : IIis : i .. j-ia Uomr . na , Leipsick , 1784 , in Svo .

/ .. S . / . Aain de ' Piliei'ionl , Momoire .. pour scvoir a l'llistciiie IScclcsin . tiquc , el Ilistuirc des Kmpererus , des six premiers sicde-J , & c , Paris , 1 O 93-1738 , in 4 I 0 . Rimmiani Mareellini , qu . e stipc-rsunl , Leipsick , 1 S 03 ,

in Svo . Phi'oslorgii ; Ecclesiastics histori . v , Lib . xii ., Gencvw , 16 . ] 2 , in 4 I 0 . I term . Sozomeiii , Ilistoria Ecclesiastic . ! , Cantab , 1 7 , in fo ,

Original Correspondence.

D 11 Cange , Historia Byzantina , Lutetian , Parisiorum , 1680 , in fo . lac . Usserti , Britaiuiicaruiii Ecclesiarum Antiquitatcs , & c , Dubliiii , 1639 , in 4 to . Card . Caes . Barouii , Annalcs Ecclcsiastici , Antverpio ? , 1670—79 , in fo .

Mich . Alfordi , Fides Rcgia Britanica ; sive annales & c , Leodii , 1663 , in fo . Bp . Slilliugflcd ' s , Origines Britanica ? , Oxford , 1 S 42 , 111 Svo . Saudi Aldhclmi , de laud virginitatis , London , 1844 , in Svo .

fo . Albert ! Fabricii , Bibliothecre Graecre , Hamburg ]' , 1714 . Buchcrius , in Cyclis , p . 276 and 286 ; Pagi , in Baron ; Cupcri , prref in I-o . it de mort perscc . ; Incerti paiieg . Max . ct Const . No . 4 ; Eitinen : pancg . Const . No . 9 ; Firmicus , lib . I , cap . 4 ; Chron . Alex . p . 27 S ; Ilicron

in Chronico : Ambros . orat . in fun ., Iheod . ; Anon . Vales . Inscript ; Buck , celg ., 1 . 8 , c . 2 ; Nnmism Mezzab ; Poll . Claud , c . 13 and 3 ; Liban . in Basilico ; Vorliitrg . 1 . 2 , p . 112 ; Ruffin : lib . S , cap . iS ; Platina , in Marcel ; Sigan : de Imp . occ . p . 43 , et seq . ; Politia S . S . Men . et Alex , apud Phor . art . 256 ; Cod : Theod .

lib . 6 , 1-23 , de pvrep . lah . et ibi Godcfr . ; Niccpli . Call . lib . 7 , c . 29 ; Acta Artemii apud Mccaphr . ; Galenius , in colon , magnid ., 1 . r , synt . 4 ; Jlforiu , de la delivr . de l'Eglise part 2 , c . 12 ; Chifflel , de conv . Const , c . 6 ; Gelasii Cyzic . 1 . 1 , c . 4 ; Oisel . Thcs . munis , antiq ., p . 463 ; Tollius apud Baudri in Lait : p , 735 ; Colombiis in Lait . p . 3 SS ; All / an . de syn . Arym . ct Seleuc ; Epiph .

lirer . 69 ; Le Qnien , Oriens Christ : t . 3 , p . 559 ; Floury hist : eccl . I . lo , c . 36 ; Crevicr hist , des Empcreurs , t . 6 , I . 29 , ; Du Voisiu Dissert , critique stir la vision de Consumtin , Paris , 1774 ; Ch . Le Bean ; hisloire de Bay . Empire ; Brunei de Prese / e , Grece Moderne ; Anquetil , Hisloire de Prance ; Gibbon ' s decline and fall of the Roman Empire ; Cyrill . Alex . 1 . 7 , contra Julian . ; Lib . Basilic . Ath . Apol . 2 , et ad solicit ; Acta Mart . p . 667 ; & c , & c .

HURAM ABIFF . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —After a good deal of controversy wc had of late in your valuable paper on the subject , we must admit that we have as yet failed to explain the true meaning of the

passage in 2 Chron . iv . 16 , " did Huram his father , make to King Solomon , " or as Luther translates it , " Machtc Huram Abiff dem Kuninge Salomo , " Bro . Carpenter says himself , in page 141 of your paper , that it is a passage of great difficulty . I , therefore , beg the attention of your readers

to the two passages 2 Chron . 11-13 of Huram my father , " and iv . 16 " Huram his father , " as it has been explained by some of those ancient and learned Jewish commentators , quoted by me on page 1 S 8 of your valuable paper . The passage " of Huram my father" they give us two explanations : —1 st

M , rvn' " ON TO oarr piN , YN cnr 6 Kin *> TO " of Hiram my father ( has this meaning ) a wise workman of my father ancl to me . " Second explanation .

, " . BH pNn Vjn , n « D-pr-aa MYI n ^ Sn i « rrc & a Y . N iKnpi , tmn rrr . vsty c ^ Y

-w py a « "O , irvaan an hv , ni 2 TOn awn " or the ( letter ) * 7 ( which is rendered ) of is placed for the word j"lj ^ , and , referring to the builder , as his name was also Hiram , and he ( the King ) calls him i ^ W avi , father , as a title of honour for his

great wisdom , as ^>^ av father a lo great men . " According to this explanation the passage before us will read thus , as in Luthcrs Bible . "So sende ich num eincn weiscn mann der ferstand

Hat Huram Abiff , " the word Abiff referring to Hiram the builder as a title , see Bro . Carpenter ' s letter , page 141 of your paper , and Genesis iv . 20 and 21 , the word avi , father , is spoken of as a founder of anything . Now in fourth chapter 16 ,

,-vinY rraTO ibr ^ b TON QTin ntzw

EPE *) oaia aTin nvy m ' -r ^ n DYan yTO TT 7 W , YUN D-lYTD "VDVW , Vat « rbwb IBN ^ vaa . im ^ sY DD-IY ^ I . p YON » -orr , * paaai ana yp ^ . Wtttyn , nrK a * ts"" me > a !? YY . crcn

rn-tta YU ? inwai " Did Huram his father make to King Solomon , " has this meaning , this Tabs did Hiram so well and good , like Huram liis father ; that is to

say , like his father , that was known ( by fame ) to be an able workman , as it says skilful to work in gold and silver ; and though it has not the 3 , so as to make render like his father , wc find many places , like it , as in Prov . xvii . 22 , "A merry heart