Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

The Editor & not rcf-ponvillcjor fhe opinions caressed by Corrzc-ponucrds . THE HIGH GRADES . TO THE EDITOIt OS THE niEEJIASO ^ s' mAGA / . I ^ F . AXD niASOXIC AIIIiEOK . DEAR S IR AXD BROTHER ,- —Two letters from Bro . the Rev . A . F . A . Woodford , written personally against

Bro . Shuttleworth ' s views , but with a tendency opposing the high grades , havo appeared at pp . 269 , and 312 , of the present volume of the MAGAZINE , and as the Reverend Brother felt called upon to answer Bro . Shuttleworth , so I take it to ho a duty to examine some portions of Bro . Woodford ' s letters in return . In doing this , however , I must not bo understood as taking up the matter for Bro . Shuttleworth , because he is an equal match for his antagonist , but for the sole reason that certain assertions made in these letters ought not to go

unquestioned . In casting wholesale inuendos against the high grades , Bro . Woodford ought to give us authorities for what he advances , ancl not siveepiiigly condemn right and wrong in one promiscuous category such as his account of Bro . Finders " indignant" ( he calls it—I call it rude and unbrotherly ) " protest against many of those

professed degrees , which , the offspring of charlatanism and imposture , arc confessedly so ridiculous in themselves , as to be actually excluded from what is called Christian Masonry , as practised at present in England . " If I remember rightly Bro . Findel attacked our venerable and learned chief , Dr . Leeson , by a coarse expletive not usual amongst gentleman , and ho

condemned the high grades as practised here under that Brother . If this was so , what then is the meaning of the latter portion of the above sentence ? "Why did not Bro . Woodford name the degrees to which he alludes , for either lie and Bro . Findel mean a different series or the " christian Masonry , as practised at present in England " is , according to Bro . Woodford ' s assertion , " thc offsprki" - of charlatanism and inroosture . "

Bro . Woodford entirely disagrees with Bro . Shuttleworth and asserts that " the only true historical theory of Masonry is to bo found in the unbroken connection betweeu our present speculative and adoptive Masonry , and the operative guilds ol tha early and middle ages . " And on this assertion I , too , entirely disagree with Bro . Woodford . What adoptive , or female Masonry has to

do with speculative Masonry , and the mcdiceval guilds , Xiasses my comprehension . After such a loose statement wc must take Bro . Woodford ' s assertions with duo care . The High Grade Mason is not dependant on any continental degrees of imposture , or otherwise , ior the practice of his rite . He derives them through thc ancient York Masons who sedulously cultivated the rite

of perfection of Harodim , of ivhich the IS' and 30 ' wero a . portion . Before 1716 , I vciy much question if Craft Masonry had a ritual of any kind , and this is borne out by the fact that throughout the first edition of Anderson ' s Booh of Constitutions no mention is made of the three degrees as such , it alludes only to Masters and Wardens of lodges , ancl it is not until wo get the second edition that wc find tho fellow-craft ' s song introduced . The

Entered Apprentice song having been written hy Bro . Birkhcad even after that . But why did scrupulous brethren make a bonfire of their MSS . as wo aro told in our Calendar ? Because they wero the York degrees and the holders were determined not to surrender them to those who wore forming a Southern Grand Lodge . And of what degree :- ! did they consist ? Hone others

than those of tho York rite of perfection . This then was how Masonry came into its present shape . Hundreds of years before that time iho high grades had been in . existence . The proofs aro everywhere . Bro . Woodford lavs considerable stress on tho cvi-

Correspondence.

donees radidly accumulating from fabi'ic rolls etc ., but what do they prove ? That a guild , or Craft , woro builders and hud certain secret lairs and immunities . What then ?—so had every other handicraft . The philology in our ritual is but a very broken rood to rest upon . It includes one Saxon word and that , forsoothis to prove its antiquity .

, Then wo are told the " earliest constitutions of our present fraternity , still happily preserved in the British Museum , are of themselves an answer to those who would impugn the identity between operative and . adoptive [ sic !] Masonry . " ( Beally Bro . Woodford will bo of immense service in Scotland , just now , where they are beginning to resuscitate " adoptive Masonry . " )

Will Bro Woodford kindly point out to me those " earliest constitutions" in tho British Museum ? I think I know every Masonic document in that _ collection , but I may have overlooked thoso to which ho alludes .

Passing over a great deal of matter ... that i-equires no notice we come to a fact viz ., that Masons marks are identical all over the world , Well , so bo it , what are they ? Does any one profess to read thoir meaning ? If not how can Bro . Woodford assert so complacently that they are not tho monograms of masters of lodges ? He states " they are governed by one law , and resolvable

into one and the same geometrical and Masonic first principle . "—What is that ? Turning to another letter from thc samo hand , and on tlio same subject , page 312 , there is a sneer at the York rite as practised in the crypt of York Minster , perhaps Bro . Woodford will look at page 131 of thc MACAJ -INE ( Augnst 20 th , 1859 ) , and he may slightly alter his views .

i . c . if carefully stated authorities havo any weight with him . I clo not intend to offer one word as to tho origin of thc construction of arches in architecture but I cannot

refrain from stating , much as 1 admire the degree , the Boyal Arch is truly " a strange anachronism . " It is chronologically wrong in more than one portion . It is fearfully incorrect in its derivations of words , and yet , in 1113 * opinion , vastly superior to either of tho Graft degrees . This , however , is a subject that cannot be handled in print ancl its mention has been made here to

shoiv Bro . Woodford how necessary it is to pluck tho mote from our own eyes before ive would attempt to displace the beam iu those of others . Following Bro . "Woodford ' s example in adding a valedictory address , I would strongly urge on him the prudence of not destroying one portion of Freemasonry to e . calt- another , or in so doing he may place the whole

fabric hi peril ! Of being careful to verify his references ; of being charitable enough not to encourage a rcviler of the brotherhood and , before he commits himself again on a subject witb which he is unacquainted to get some friend at hand to sec that he does not confound male and female Freemasonry as existing together , and proved by documents , which I engage to say are not to be found in tho British Museum or elsewhere . I am , Dear Sir ancl Brother , yours truly and fraternally , ? £ . MATTHEW COOKE , 30 ' .

Faiths Of The World.

FAITHS OF THE WORLD .

TO TUtt XBITOU OT ? THE ITi' . ST- ^ IASOXS' : KAGAZI 2 * K AICD 3 IASO :- * 'C ItlP . KOIt . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER . —No ono likes being what is vulgarly called " taken in , " and more especially ivhen enthusiasm on any particular subject is tho vehicle through which one is deceived , I have , I believe , been so "taken in , " and to satisfy myself on this point , and guard others against similar deception is tlio object of

my writing this letter ; but noiv to my tale . A few days since , whilst particularly engaged hi pursuing my ordinary avocation , I ivas informed that a gentleman from London wished to sec me " on Masonic business .