Masonic Discipline.—Xviii.

possible for the hearer to learn from the answer , the relative rank of the officers mentioned . In the paragraph quoted from the " Constitutions " it will be observed that the assistant officers are mentioned in the exact order of their relative

rank and precedency in the lodges . The very reverse is the case , for arguing analogically from the order of precedency observed in the naming of the principal officers , it might be fairly supposed that the O . G . was the chief assistant

officer . It is essential that all the questions and answers , all the dialogue , the whole ritual in fact , should be so worded that the misconstruction of any part of it should be rendered as difficult a matter as possible . Were this once accomplished ,

there would be an end to all doubt , all controversy regarding the different interpretations which many parts of it , at present are capable of bearing . To assimilate the reply respecting the assistant officers in a lodge , to that relating to their superiors , it

should be as follows " Four ; namely , the S . and J . D ' s . ; the I . G . and the O . G . or T . ' The wording of the answer in this manner , makes no change , no innovation in the ritual , but renders it easier to remember , since it is in some measure an exact repetition of a former answer , and conduces to the

general simplification and harmony of the dialogue . Having fixed upon the correct reply in which the name and rank of the O . G . is introduced at the opening of lodge , let us now proceed to discuss

that which relates to his position or " situation . We say , " relates to ' as the word "defines , which would be the right term to employ , cannot be used with propriety , Avhen the utter vagueness of the reply is taken into consideration . This is

capable of four renderings , slightly differing from one another , but every one is equally worthless as a definition of the " situation " referred to . " Without the door of the lodge , ' " Without the entrance of the lodge ; " Outside the door of the lodge ,

" Outside the entrance of the lodge . Such are the answers we have heard , and it is obvious that none of them define the " situation of the O . G . or T ., ' any more than they do that of any one in the ante-rooms , or even in the street itself . At the

same time the situation pf every officer belonging to the lodge , ought evidently to be defined in terms which would apply to no other but the one intended . " Outside , or without , the door or entrance of the lodge " simply implies that the O . G . is not situated inside during the proceedings , but his exact

situation , which it is all important to define , is as much undetermined as if he were placed on the top of the monument . The same may be said respecting the reply , alluding to the situation of the I . G . It is equally vague , and merely implies the contrary

of its predecessor , by indicating that the I . G . is placed inside or within the lodge , but he might be in the Master s chair , for all the information afforded on the point . From the duties devolving upon the O . G . he must clearly be sufficiently close to

the door of the lodge , to bar the passage of anyone attempting to enter , whom he might consider it right to keep out . If we imagine an effort being made to effect an entrance into a lodge a V entrance , it would be the duty of the O . G . to place himself

against the lodge door , resist the attempt vi et armis , and call for assistance to the brethren . It is rather difficult sometimes to frame an exact

definition , for in order to define sufficiently , it frequently becomes necessary to . define superfluously . In . this instance however we think that the situation ofthe O . G . is precisely and succinctly defined by the reply " At the door of the lodge , on the

outside . It not only determines his relative position to the lodge room , but also what is the most important point , his necessary proximity to the door . This consideration is entirely disregarded in the ordinary answer , although the gravity of it

needs no comment . But for this indispensable part of the reply , the O . G . has no more connection with the lodge , than anyone else who is not absolutely within it . Prom what has been stated , it will be anticipated that the succeeding answer

requires alteration likewise . In fact the same arguments apply to both cases , and therefore the situation of I . G . is correctly defined by the

analagous reply " At the door of the lodge , on the inside . ' It is impossible to prevent perceiving that there is a manifest propriety , in the wording of the answers we have given , and the actual position of the two officers at the opening and closing of a lodge . It is very easy to test the

comparative efficacy and value of the ordinary replies and those we have suggested , by considering them as commands addressed to ourselves . In the one case supposing the O . G . to be referred to we should leave the lodge and probably walk into the ante-room ; in the other , we should place

ourselves in the exact situation allotted to that officer . What was required of us would not be communicated by the vague language of the one , while the situation would be unmistakably defined by the other . Clearness and perspicacity is of equal importance in the ritual as simplicity and uniformity .