-
Articles/Ads
Article THE ENGLISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY. Page 1 of 2 Article THE ENGLISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The English Rite Of Freemasonry.
THE ENGLISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY .
( Continued from page 226 . ) IN the hurry of closing our last article we made what many will no doubt consider an important slip . We said that "Kloss , according to Findel , included this "the grant of privileges to G . Stewards' Lodge " among the causes of the Schism . " Now , " Kloss , according to
Findel , " see p 173 of the latter ' s " History of Freemasonry , " expresses it aa his opinion that "this" and another innovation he specifies of still earlier date , " although totally opposed to the Masonic spirit of equality , were not by any means a sufficient reason for disunion in the
Fraternity . " We shall not stop to palliate our slip by saggesting—what indeed was in our mind at the timo of writing—that matters which " were not by any means a sufficient reason" may nevertheless very well have been among the contributing reasons . Judging from the con .
text , Kloss probably did not think they were , and to his shade , therefore , as well as to his interpreter , Findel , we offer this apology . But the slip does not seriously affect our theory , the principal objection to -which will not improbably be that the period of time which elapsed between
such grant of privileges and the establishment of the schismatic G . Lodge was too great for the latter to have been directly the outcome of the former . In order to meet this objection , we must repeat a statement we made in our last paper , to the effect that the angry feelings excited by tho
grant of these privileges cannot have come to an end with the close of the angry debate which took place in Grand Lodge on the llth December 1735 and resulted in " so much confusion , " when the question whether the grant should be confirmed or not was put to the vote , " that it
was not possible for the Grand Officers to determine with any certainty what the numbers on either side of the question were . " We must also again point out that the so-called "Ancient" Lodges , Nos . 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , whose Masters were " authorised" at the General Assembly at
the Turk ' s Head , Greek-street , on the 17 th July 1751 , " to grant dispensations and warrants and act as Grand Master , " did not spring into existence all of a sudden in a . state of complete organisation . Thus the angry feeling would be carried onward from December 1735 , while tho
existence of the schismatic Lodges enumerated must bc > carried back to some as yet unknown date of irregular con stitution prior to July 1751 . Then there is nothing extravagant in suggesting that the anger thus aroused , even thongh it might have remained dormant for a year or two ,
would break out afresh , and even fiercer than ever , owing to the greater stringency shown in 1739 and later against " irregular makings . " But the date commonly assigned by trustworthy authorities for that secession from the ranks of the Regular Grand Lodge of 1717 which culminated in
1753 in the establishment of its " Ancient " rival is " about 1738 "—see Preface Gould ' s "Atholl Lodges . " & c . and , though it may not be capable of proof for lack of positive evidence in favour of the proposition , there is nothing
unreasonable in attributing the origin of a secession winch began "abont 1738 " to a circumstance which stirred np so much angry feeling in December 1735 . The dates are proximate enough for the events which belong to them respectivel y to be associated together as cause and effect .
The English Rite Of Freemasonry.
Then , if we take the other end of the interval , namely , 1753 , when the schismatic Grand Lodge was formed , ifc ia possible to work backwards , though not , perhaps , to any great extent . The official Calendar says that " for some few years prior to 1753 , the ' Seceders' were governed by
a Grand Committee . " We have already shown , by a quotation from Bro . Gould's " Atholl Lodges , " that a General Assembly of the schismatics was held at the Turk ' s Head , Greek-street , on the 17 th Jnly 1751 , when the W . M . ' s of Lodges Nos . 2-7 were " authorised to grant dispensations
and warrants and to act as Grand Master . " In the same work it is shown how Laurence Dermott was elected Grand Secretary on 5 th February 1752 in succession to Bro . Morgan , and that on 14 th September 1752 , there occurs , in the " Transactions of the Grand Committee , " the
following passage , namely : — " For Dermott never received any copy or manuscript of the . former ' Transactions ' from Mr . Morgan , late Grand Secretary . Nor does Laurence Dermott , the present Grand Secretary , think that Bro . Morgan did keep any book of Transactions .
Thongh there is no certainty that he did not . " Thus it is on record that on 17 th July 1751 there were six schismatic Lodges fully organised , though for how long a time they had been in such a condition it is impossible to say ; as Bro . Gould expresses it in somewhat grandiose
fashion"the Constitutions" of these Lodges " range beyond historical investigation . " In Bro . Northouck's note , quoted by Bro . Hughan , relative to the year 1739 , we read that the decision adopted in that year to stringently enforce the laws against " irregular makings , " so far apparently
from having the desired effect of stamping out the irregularity , "irritated the brethren who had incurred the censure of the Grand Lodge ; who , instead of returning to their duty , and renouncing their error , persisted in their contumacy , and openly refused to pay
allegiance to the Grand Master , or obedience to the mandates of the Grand Lodge . In contempt of the ancient and established laws of the Order , they set up a power independent , " and from what we read a little further on , they seem to have presumed so far as "to claim the right
of constituting lodges . '' Preston , speaking of the same year , writes—we are quoting from the passage as given in Findel— " Lord Raymond was succeeded by the Marquis of Carmarthen in May 1739 ; and under his lordship ' s auspices the lodges were numerous and respectable .
Notwithstanding the flourishing state of the Society , however , irregularities continued to prevail , and several worthy brethren , still adverse to the encroachments on the established system of the institution , seemed to be highly disgusted at the proceedings of the regular Lodges .
Complaints were preferred at every succeeding Committee , and their conferences were fully employed in adjusting differences and reconciling animosities . More secessions taking place , it became necessary to pass votes of censure on the most refractory , and enact laws to discourage
irregular associations of the Fraternity . This brought the power of the Grand Lodge in question ; and in opposition , to the laws which had been established in that assembly , Lodges were formed without any legal warrant , and persons initiated into Masonry for small and unworthy
considerations . " There is nothing to show how soon after the measures taken in 1739 by the regular Grand Lodge this claim of the seceders to establish Lodges was acted upon . What we know is , that six Lodges which did not derive their existence from the Grand Lodge were in full constitu-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The English Rite Of Freemasonry.
THE ENGLISH RITE OF FREEMASONRY .
( Continued from page 226 . ) IN the hurry of closing our last article we made what many will no doubt consider an important slip . We said that "Kloss , according to Findel , included this "the grant of privileges to G . Stewards' Lodge " among the causes of the Schism . " Now , " Kloss , according to
Findel , " see p 173 of the latter ' s " History of Freemasonry , " expresses it aa his opinion that "this" and another innovation he specifies of still earlier date , " although totally opposed to the Masonic spirit of equality , were not by any means a sufficient reason for disunion in the
Fraternity . " We shall not stop to palliate our slip by saggesting—what indeed was in our mind at the timo of writing—that matters which " were not by any means a sufficient reason" may nevertheless very well have been among the contributing reasons . Judging from the con .
text , Kloss probably did not think they were , and to his shade , therefore , as well as to his interpreter , Findel , we offer this apology . But the slip does not seriously affect our theory , the principal objection to -which will not improbably be that the period of time which elapsed between
such grant of privileges and the establishment of the schismatic G . Lodge was too great for the latter to have been directly the outcome of the former . In order to meet this objection , we must repeat a statement we made in our last paper , to the effect that the angry feelings excited by tho
grant of these privileges cannot have come to an end with the close of the angry debate which took place in Grand Lodge on the llth December 1735 and resulted in " so much confusion , " when the question whether the grant should be confirmed or not was put to the vote , " that it
was not possible for the Grand Officers to determine with any certainty what the numbers on either side of the question were . " We must also again point out that the so-called "Ancient" Lodges , Nos . 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , whose Masters were " authorised" at the General Assembly at
the Turk ' s Head , Greek-street , on the 17 th July 1751 , " to grant dispensations and warrants and act as Grand Master , " did not spring into existence all of a sudden in a . state of complete organisation . Thus the angry feeling would be carried onward from December 1735 , while tho
existence of the schismatic Lodges enumerated must bc > carried back to some as yet unknown date of irregular con stitution prior to July 1751 . Then there is nothing extravagant in suggesting that the anger thus aroused , even thongh it might have remained dormant for a year or two ,
would break out afresh , and even fiercer than ever , owing to the greater stringency shown in 1739 and later against " irregular makings . " But the date commonly assigned by trustworthy authorities for that secession from the ranks of the Regular Grand Lodge of 1717 which culminated in
1753 in the establishment of its " Ancient " rival is " about 1738 "—see Preface Gould ' s "Atholl Lodges . " & c . and , though it may not be capable of proof for lack of positive evidence in favour of the proposition , there is nothing
unreasonable in attributing the origin of a secession winch began "abont 1738 " to a circumstance which stirred np so much angry feeling in December 1735 . The dates are proximate enough for the events which belong to them respectivel y to be associated together as cause and effect .
The English Rite Of Freemasonry.
Then , if we take the other end of the interval , namely , 1753 , when the schismatic Grand Lodge was formed , ifc ia possible to work backwards , though not , perhaps , to any great extent . The official Calendar says that " for some few years prior to 1753 , the ' Seceders' were governed by
a Grand Committee . " We have already shown , by a quotation from Bro . Gould's " Atholl Lodges , " that a General Assembly of the schismatics was held at the Turk ' s Head , Greek-street , on the 17 th Jnly 1751 , when the W . M . ' s of Lodges Nos . 2-7 were " authorised to grant dispensations
and warrants and to act as Grand Master . " In the same work it is shown how Laurence Dermott was elected Grand Secretary on 5 th February 1752 in succession to Bro . Morgan , and that on 14 th September 1752 , there occurs , in the " Transactions of the Grand Committee , " the
following passage , namely : — " For Dermott never received any copy or manuscript of the . former ' Transactions ' from Mr . Morgan , late Grand Secretary . Nor does Laurence Dermott , the present Grand Secretary , think that Bro . Morgan did keep any book of Transactions .
Thongh there is no certainty that he did not . " Thus it is on record that on 17 th July 1751 there were six schismatic Lodges fully organised , though for how long a time they had been in such a condition it is impossible to say ; as Bro . Gould expresses it in somewhat grandiose
fashion"the Constitutions" of these Lodges " range beyond historical investigation . " In Bro . Northouck's note , quoted by Bro . Hughan , relative to the year 1739 , we read that the decision adopted in that year to stringently enforce the laws against " irregular makings , " so far apparently
from having the desired effect of stamping out the irregularity , "irritated the brethren who had incurred the censure of the Grand Lodge ; who , instead of returning to their duty , and renouncing their error , persisted in their contumacy , and openly refused to pay
allegiance to the Grand Master , or obedience to the mandates of the Grand Lodge . In contempt of the ancient and established laws of the Order , they set up a power independent , " and from what we read a little further on , they seem to have presumed so far as "to claim the right
of constituting lodges . '' Preston , speaking of the same year , writes—we are quoting from the passage as given in Findel— " Lord Raymond was succeeded by the Marquis of Carmarthen in May 1739 ; and under his lordship ' s auspices the lodges were numerous and respectable .
Notwithstanding the flourishing state of the Society , however , irregularities continued to prevail , and several worthy brethren , still adverse to the encroachments on the established system of the institution , seemed to be highly disgusted at the proceedings of the regular Lodges .
Complaints were preferred at every succeeding Committee , and their conferences were fully employed in adjusting differences and reconciling animosities . More secessions taking place , it became necessary to pass votes of censure on the most refractory , and enact laws to discourage
irregular associations of the Fraternity . This brought the power of the Grand Lodge in question ; and in opposition , to the laws which had been established in that assembly , Lodges were formed without any legal warrant , and persons initiated into Masonry for small and unworthy
considerations . " There is nothing to show how soon after the measures taken in 1739 by the regular Grand Lodge this claim of the seceders to establish Lodges was acted upon . What we know is , that six Lodges which did not derive their existence from the Grand Lodge were in full constitu-