213 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
213 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
SHORT TALK BULLETIN - Vol.XII January. 1934 No. 1
|
||
|
||
RITUAL DIFFERENCES
|
||
|
||
by: Unknown
|
||
|
||
An experience in freemasonry usually upsetting to the newly-raised
|
||
brother is his first visit to a lodge in another jurisdiction than his
|
||
own. Having carefully been taught a certain ritual, in all probability
|
||
with positive emphasis upon the necessity of being “letter perfect,” he
|
||
learns with a distinct shock that the ritual in other States differs
|
||
from his own, and these differ each from the other.
|
||
If he converses with those “well informed brethren who will always be as
|
||
ready to give as you will be to receive instruction” he is more than apt
|
||
to be met with a puzzled, “I don’t know, I’m sure, just why they are
|
||
different from us, but of course. ours is correct.”
|
||
The riddle becomes much plainer as the neophyte studies Masonic history
|
||
- but, alas, many never open a Masonic book! Yet divergences in ritual
|
||
cannot be understood without some historical background. It is
|
||
necessary to understand, for instance, that Freemasonry came to this
|
||
country, some time prior to 1731, at a time when English ritual was in a
|
||
process of formation. We did not receive our Masonry from one central
|
||
source. but from several; nor did we obtain it as a whole. Several
|
||
different localities, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia) received
|
||
Freemasonry from across the sea and from them our forms and ceremonies
|
||
radiated to other sections. The schism in the first Grand Lodge in
|
||
England (1753) resulted in two Grand Lodges; the “Ancients” (the
|
||
younger, schismatic body) and the “Moderns”” (the older. original Grand
|
||
Lodge). Each had its own ritual; our rituals sometimes lean to one,
|
||
sometimes to the other, and often to both. Literal ritualism is
|
||
comparatively a modern matter; and “mouth to ear” in the early days
|
||
meant nothing more than giving of information, not transmitting it in a
|
||
set form of words. Most of our Grand Lodges have been formed by a union
|
||
of particular Lodges, many of which received each its ritual from a
|
||
different source, with the result that the ritual finally adopted is a
|
||
combination of several. And finally, Grand Lodges have not infrequently
|
||
changed, added to and taken from their own rituals, either as matter of
|
||
legislation or by the easier course (in early days) of adopting with
|
||
little or no question the variations suggested by positive minded
|
||
ritualists, Grand Lecturers, Custodians of the Work, ritual committees
|
||
and so on. Some of these, unfortunately, had little or no Masonic
|
||
background, and changed and altered, added and subtracted with no better
|
||
reason than “this seems much better to us!”
|
||
Certain fundamentalists are to all intents and purposes the same in
|
||
every one of our forty-nine Grand Jurisdictions. All American Lodges
|
||
have a Master and two Wardens, a Secretary and Treasurer, an Alter with
|
||
the V.S.L. and the other Great Lights, three degrees; unanimous ballot
|
||
required; make Masons only of men; have the same Substitute Word given
|
||
in the same way; are tiled; have a ceremony of opening and closing. To
|
||
some extent all dramatize and exemplify the Master’s Degree, although
|
||
the amount of drama and exemplification differs widely.
|
||
But beyond these and a few other simple essentials are wide variations.
|
||
Aprons are worn one way in one degree in one Jurisdiction and another
|
||
way in the same degree in another. Some Jurisdictions have more
|
||
officers in a Lodge than others. In some Jurisdictions Lodges open and
|
||
close on the Master Mason’s degree; others on the First degree; others
|
||
only in the degree which it to be “worked.” Lesser Lights are grouped
|
||
closely about the Altar, in the stations of the Master and Wardens. In
|
||
some Lodges the I.P.M. (immediate Past Master) plays an important part,
|
||
as in England. Other Lodges know him not Some Lodges have Inner Guards
|
||
and two Masters of Ceremonies - others will have none of these.
|
||
Dividing, lettering, syllabling are almost as various in practice as the
|
||
Jurisdictions. Obligations show certain close similarities in some
|
||
requirements; but what is a part of the obligation in one jurisdiction
|
||
may be merely an admonition in another, and “vice versa.”
|
||
Discovering all this (and much more) the thoughtful initiate is apt to
|
||
wonder why it is deemed so important that he memorize his own particular
|
||
“work” so closely; when he travels he finds that what he knows as
|
||
familiar words and forms and phrases are strange to the Lodges he
|
||
visits. Not is this the place to ague for purity of the ritual as
|
||
taught. There are good and sufficient reasons why we should hand on to
|
||
our sons and their sons the ritual as we received it - if only to
|
||
preserve without further alteration and change that which was formed by
|
||
the fathers. Suffice it that while uniformity in work within a
|
||
Jurisdiction is fairly well established as good American Masonic
|
||
practice, it is not universal. there are several “workings” for
|
||
instance, permitted in English Lodges, and even in some American
|
||
Jurisdictions (“vide” Connecticut) not all Lodges use the same ritual.
|
||
The reasons for all this are so involved, complex, and cover such a long
|
||
period; that a complete understanding is difficult even for the student
|
||
willing to read the enormous amount of history and authority which may
|
||
make it plain. Briefly, and in general, the matter becomes clearer if
|
||
we visualize our sources of ritual.
|
||
We received our Masonry from:
|
||
|
||
The Mother Grand Lodge of England 1717-1753
|
||
|
||
The Grand Lodge of the “Ancients” 1753-1813
|
||
|
||
The Grand Lodge of the “Moderns” 1753-1813
|
||
|
||
The United Grand Lodge 1813 and on -
|
||
|
||
The Grand Lodge of Ireland 1724- and on -
|
||
|
||
The Grand Lodge of Scotland 1736 and on -
|
||
|
||
and From the Pre-Grand Lodge era of Lodges of England, Ireland and (or)
|
||
Scotland.
|
||
|
||
Unfortunately for the historian, this list does not signify six or seven
|
||
different but “pure” forms. The ritual of the original Grand Lodge
|
||
changed as it flowed, through many years after 1717. The Grand Lodges
|
||
of “Ancients” and “Moderns both made alterations in ritual so that rival
|
||
members of each body found it impossible to make themselves known
|
||
Masonically in the other. Ireland and Scotland were, and are, as
|
||
different as Pennsylvania and California. From pre-Grand Lodges members
|
||
came to this country to form themselves into Lodges without Warrant or
|
||
Charter (as was the custom in early days). A dozen men, bringing “what
|
||
they remembered of the” ritual they heard when “made,” to form a Lodge,
|
||
would naturally include in their ritual a little of one original source,
|
||
some phrases from another beginning, a paragraph from a third
|
||
wellspring, and so on.
|
||
The Mother Grand Lodge ritual (1717 to 1753) was not the ritual of the
|
||
United Grand Lodge which came into existence in 1813, when the two parts
|
||
of the original Mother Grand Lodge (“Ancients” and “Moderns”) again came
|
||
together. The United Grand Lodge, or Grand Lodge of Reconciliation,
|
||
formed its ritual from the best of the divergent rituals of the
|
||
“Ancients” and the “Moderns.”
|
||
Thus, Lodges in this country which received ritual, in any and all
|
||
states of purity or impurity, from either of these several sources,
|
||
would differ decidedly each from the other.
|
||
Come we now to the spread of Masonry in the thirteen colonies, and
|
||
later, through the forty-eight states, territories, and the District of
|
||
Columbia. To write even one paragraph of Masonic history of ritual in
|
||
so many subdivisions would make this Bulletin unreadably long. But a
|
||
few high lights may be noted.
|
||
From our primary American sources of ritual, in one way or another all
|
||
other American Grand Jurisdictions, in part at least, received their
|
||
“work;” Massachusetts, which at first sent forth what must have been at
|
||
least an approximation of the work of the original Mother Grand Lodge,
|
||
though her ritual today is derived from both “Moderns” and “Ancients;”
|
||
Pennsylvania and Virginia, both giving forth individual variants of a
|
||
combination of “Modern” and “Ancient,” and North Carolina, almost purely
|
||
“Modern.”
|
||
In 1915 Dean Roscoe Pound showed how various were the next groups of
|
||
States which received their rituals from the first four American
|
||
sources. He developed that Maine derived from Massachusetts since the
|
||
fusion; Vermont derived from the Grand Lodge of “Ancients” in
|
||
Massachusetts before the fusion; Ohio derived from Massachusetts, from
|
||
Connecticut, a strictly “Modern” Jurisdiction, and from Pennsylvania;
|
||
Indiana derived from Ohio and Kentucky, which later represents Virginia
|
||
after the fusion, Michigan derived from the “Ancient” Grand Lodge of
|
||
Canada and from New York, which since the Revolution was a Strictly
|
||
“Ancient” Jurisdiction; Kentucky derived from Virginia; Tennessee
|
||
derived from North Carolina, a purely “Modern” Jurisdiction; Alabama
|
||
derived from North Carolina, from South Carolina and from Tennessee,
|
||
thus representing Virginia and North Carolina; Louisiana derived from
|
||
South Carolina, from Pennsylvania and from France; Florida derived from
|
||
Georgia and from South Carolina; Missouri derived from Pennsylvania and
|
||
from Tennessee, representing therefore, the fusion in Pennsylvania and
|
||
the “Modern Masonry” of North Carolina; Illinois derived from Kentucky
|
||
and so represents Virginia; and the District of Columbia derived
|
||
Maryland (a fusion of “Modern Masonry from Massachusetts and from
|
||
England direct, with the “Ancient Masonry” from Pennsylvania), and from
|
||
Virginia.
|
||
The further west we go, the more we find a mixture of sources,
|
||
complicated rather than simplified by such matters as the splitting of
|
||
the Grand Lodge of Dakota into the Grand Lodge the of South Dakota and
|
||
North Dakota, when these two States were formed, and the formation of
|
||
the Grand Lodge of California, which drew its work from many different
|
||
sources. California Lodge No.13, of the District of Columbia, was
|
||
formed for the purpose of carrying Masonry to the Golden Gate at the
|
||
time of the gold rush. That Lodge is now No.1 on the California Grand
|
||
Lodge Register. But California’s ritual is not more similar to the
|
||
District of Columbia working than that of any other State, since the
|
||
District Lodge was but one of several which formed the Grand Lodge of
|
||
California.
|
||
There have been certain unifying influences; the Baltimore Convention of
|
||
1843, the conclusions of which were adopted in whole or in part by
|
||
several American Grand Jurisdictions, and the work of Bob Morris and his
|
||
conservators, which, despite its chilly reception by many Grand
|
||
Jurisdictions, undoubtedly left its impression on American ritual. A
|
||
third unifying influence has been the tremendous impress made on almost
|
||
all American Jurisdictions by Thomas Smith Webb, and Jeremy Cross,
|
||
plainly evident in the exoteric paragraphs printed in many State
|
||
Monitors or Manuals. A fourth has been the honest desire and strenuous
|
||
efforts of many Grand Lodges through District Deputies, Grand Lecturers,
|
||
Schools of Instruction and similar machinery, to preserve what
|
||
they have in its supposedly ancient perfection. But by the time these
|
||
latter were in operation, ritual was more or less fixed. Because of the
|
||
reverence of the average Mason for what he is taught, and his fierce
|
||
resentment of any material change in that which he learns, rituals and
|
||
degree forms, ceremonies and practices, usages and customs continue to
|
||
be what he believes them to have been “from time immemorial” even when
|
||
sober fact shows that they have an antiquity of (in all probability)
|
||
less than two hundred years.
|
||
For the benefit of those Masons to whom divergence of ritual is not the
|
||
less distressing thing, but that it is understandable, it may be said
|
||
that most authorities agree that it is really not a matter of great
|
||
moment. All over the world Freemasonry teaches the same truths, offers
|
||
the same spiritual comfort, creates and continues the same fraternal
|
||
bond. In “non essentials, variety; in essentials, unity” might have
|
||
been written of Masonry. It matters little how we wear the apron in a
|
||
given degree - so be it that it is worn with honor. The method of
|
||
giving a sign or a pass matters much less than that what we do is done
|
||
with understanding.
|
||
While Freemasonry continues to observe and revere those few Landmarks
|
||
which are undisputed everywhere - those which Joseph Fort Newton says
|
||
are “The Fatherhood of God, the Brotherhood of Man, and the hope of Life
|
||
Everlasting,” it becomes of less moment that different men, in different
|
||
times, in different localities, have found more than one way to phrase
|
||
and to teach the ancient verities of the old, old Craft.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|