Help Me Maintain OUR Website!!!!!!
EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.
Grand Lodges in the United States have adhered to State lines as the limits of their activities, but this has not been so strictly the custom elsewhere. Some particulars of the situations arising from the contact of different practices may be seen in the following statement of the action taken by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania against the Grand Orient of France.
At the Annual Grand Communication of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Pennsylvania, held at Philadelphia, December 27, 1924, Right Worshipful Past Grand Master Brother Abraham M. Beitler, Chairman of Committee on Clandestine Lodges in Pennsylvania, presented the following report, when, on motion, the resolutions attached thereto were unanimously adopted.
The Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana at its fifty-seventh Annual Communication held February, 1869, delivered an address, in the course of which he said:
"It has become my painful duty to bring to your notice the action of the Grand Orient of France, with whom we have for many years been upon the most friendly and brotherly terms of esteem and regard. The Grand Orient of France has aided and assisted this Grand Lodge in times of trouble and anxiety, by her firm adherence to constitutional law and Masonic justice. In the month of December I received from the office of the Grand Orient through the post office an official bulletin containing a decree which certainly surprised me. It has, with a strange perversion, and unaccountable want of consistency, recognized a clandestine body in this city, calling itself the Supreme Council of the Sovereign and Independent State of Louisiana.
"It will become your painful duty to take notice of this action of the Grand Orient of France, and make such decree as in your wisdom may be found expedient and necessary, to sustain the dignity of this Grand Lodge and maintain its authority over Craft Masonry in this Jurisdiction. There can be no divided authority. Upon one principle we are all agreed, and while we have life we will sustain it. The Grand Lodge of Louisiana will never submit to a divided jurisdiction, and in this position she will be sustained by every Grand Lodge in North America, for all are interested alike in sustaining each other. This principle once abandoned, the power of Masonry for good is gone. Discord and confusion will reign supreme, and the sun of Masonry will set in a sea of darkness."
The Committee on Foreign Correspondence submitted a report on the Grand Orient's action, with full translations of the decrees and debates relating to its recognition of the "Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite in and for the Sovereign State of Louisiana" and entering into fraternal relations with that clandestine Body. The report concluded with these words:
"This spirit, which seeks to impair the honor and subvert the dignity of this Grand Lodge, will, we doubt not, be properly appreciated by our sister Grand Lodges, and in submitting the following resolutions, your committee feel confident that the Grand Lodge will receive from her American sisters the same sympathy and support which they so generously extended to the Grand Lodge of New York, when her jurisdiction was invaded by the Grand Lodge of Hamburg." The resolutions offered with the above reportwere:
That all Masoluc correspondence and fraternal relations between the Grand Lodge of Louisiana and the Grand Orient of Franee cease and be diseontinued and no Mason oaring allegiance to that Grand Body be recognized as such in this jurisdiction
That a duly authenticated eopy of the above report and resolution be transmitted to the Grand Orient of Franee and to all regularly constituted American and European Gralld Lodges. The report and the resolutions were adopted.
In his address at the Annual Grand Communication of the same Grand Lodge, December 27, 1869, the retiring Right Worshipful Grand Master Brother Richard Vaux, said:
"Within the past year, the action of the Grand Orient of France in recognizing a spurious Grand Lodge within the Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, has been considered by most of the Grand Lodges of the United States. In each case our sister Grand Lodges have denounced this action as unmasonic. New York and Massachusetts have exhaustively discussed the question and acted accordingly. I am most happy to find that the principle the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania has ever proclaimed, that a Grand Lodge must be supreme and sovereign within its jurisdiction, is thus acknowledged. But in the case before us, another principle which this Grand Lodge has maintained is also accepted as Masonic law. We have asserted that one Grand Lodge will not permit any interference, by any other Grand Lodge, with her sovereignty as a Grand Body; that her power within her jurisdiction tolerates no rival; and when an effort is made to that end, it is the solemn duty of all Grand Lodges to protest, and take such other action as the ease demands. The facts are so clear, in this unjustifiable interference in Louisiana, that I deem it proper to state, that all correspondence between the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania and the Grand Orient of France should cease, till the latter recalls its presumptuous intermeddling with the affairs of our sister Grand Lodge of Louisiana, and yields assent to that paramount principle of American Free nasonry, which lies at the foundation of the suprerne sovereignty of Grand Lodges of Freemasons in the United States."
The Grand Master of Louisiana at the fifty-eighth Annual Communication, held February 14, l870, said:
"The Grand Orient of France still maintains the anomalous position which it so unwisely assumed now more than a year ago, and still holds in its embrace a spurious and clandestine body, without any legal title whatever to be called Masonic. From our Brethren in every quarter of the globe come messages of approval of the course taken by our Grand Lodge and in no instance, where the matter of difference has been elearly understood, has Louisiana been condemned for the firm stand she has taken. Even the Supreme Council of England, of the Seottish Rite, has adopted resolutions censuring the Grand Orient of France for having accorded recognition to a spurious body of men, who indeed claim to be Masons, but who have never been elsewhere recognized as such, and who have no legal or proper right to the title, upon so specious and so false a plea as that given by Grand Master Mellinet, and for its improper infringement of the jurisdiction rights of our Grand Lodge."
At that Annual Communication the Committee on Foreign Correspondenee in its report said: "The action of our Grand Lodge, suspending fraternal relations with the Grand Orient of France on account of its recognition of the spurious Supreme Council of Louisiana, which has established Symbolic Lodges in our jurisdiction, has been fully sustained at home and abroad. The principle, that the Grand Lodge of each state has exclusive jurisdiction over the symbolic degrees within its territorial limits, is so well established in the United States, that we confidently relied on our sister Grand Lodges extending to us the same generous s~anpathv and support which New York received when its jurisdictional rights were invaded by the Grand Lodge of Hamburg.
"Nor have we been disappointed; New York led the van in declaring non-intercourse with the foreign invader. Arkansas, California, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin have followed its example; Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Ohio have protested in a firm, Eet courteous manner, against the act of the Grand Orient; Vermont and a number of other states have also spoken in terms not to be misunderstood, but we have not yet received official notice of their action. So far as the proceedings received in season for this report give the action of the Grand Lodges or the views of their committees on the subject, we have submitted them without note or comment the able manner in which the question has been discussed from every point of viesr, precluding any remarks of our own.
"Here, however, we may be permitted to remark that the question is one which appeals to every Grand Lodxe, for if the act of the Grand Orient had been permitted to pass vmrebuked, the sovereignty of each Grand Lodge would have been endangered, as what is our case today may be theirs tomorrow and in defending our rights thev are maintaining their own. yet not the less gratefully do we acknowledge the fraternal spirit which has been displayed in sustaining the action of our Grand Lodge, and, while we regret the occasion ever arose, it is a matter of congratulation that it has shown to the Masonic powers of the world that the Grand Lodges of the United States will submit to no foreign interference with their rights. It has demonstrated that any attempt in that direction will only unite them more closely together in the bonds of Masonic fellowship, and that, while "separate as the billows, they are one as the sea."
The following further comments were made by Brother Beitler:
"Your Committee on Clandestine Lodges in Pennsylvania have within the past month learned that a clandestine body in our State calling itself 'Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite Universal Free Masonry' and claiming the right to tonfer the first three degrees in Freemasonry has been taken under the wind of the Grand Orient of Franee. The two bodies have entered into formal contract, some of the provisions of which sfre interesting.
"It provides that the body in our State shall pay annually to the Grand Orient of France the sum of S10, for each active lodge; that it shall buy all diplomas it may require of the Grand Orient at the price of 15 francs each, the diplomas to be on parch ment, printed in both English and French. "The body working under the Grand Orient is to have the right to institute new Lodges in the United States wherever it may deem convenient. It shall receive for them warrants issued from the Grand Orient of France, but it is not to be permitted to create Lodges in territories of the United States outside of Pennsylvania with which the Grand Orient of France is in fraternal relations. These territories are stated as being Alabama, Iowa, Minnesota, Rhode Island and New Yersey.
"lt is further provided that should there be at any time in the future a cessation of the relations of the Grand Orient of France with one or more of these states, then the body in Pennsylvania shall have 'plenitude of action.'
"The body in Pennsylvania is given the right to practise the Scottish Rite including the Symbolic Degrees.
"In the official records of the Grand Orient of France for December, 1923, the Grand Secretary submits a report which was adopted. In it he said:
"'The Regional Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania was abandoned by the Grand Orient of Spain. They now ask the Grand Orient of France to take it under its wings. You will recall that we entered into relations with the Grand Master of this Grand Lodge through the intermediation of our Brother Beni, Past Master of L'Atlantide.... The correspondence with the Pennsylvania Brethren was through a Brother Gould, Lawyer.'
"We feel that Pennsvlvania should with the utmost emphasis denounce this action of the Grand Orient of France. We cannot acknowledge the right of any other Grand Bodv outside of our Grand Jurisdiction (whether regarded by us as legitimate or not—whether in fraternal relations with us or not) to invade the territory of our Grand Lodge.
"The association which the Grand Secretary of the Grand Orient of France styles the 'Regional Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania' and which we have called the 'Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite Universal Freemasonry,' is not lawfully in possession of the rights which the Grand Orient attempted to give.
"We deem it our duty to call the matter to the attention of the Grand Lodge. We ask the adoption of the following:
That the Grand Secretary forward to each of the Grand Lodges in the United Stites a copy of this report, calling their attention to the fact that the body which the Grand Orient of France has "taken under its wings is authorized bv the Grand Orient of France to create Lodges in every State, excepting Alabama, Iowa, Missouri, Rhode Island and New Jersey, and that its power is to extend to those States if and when the fraternal relations nos existing between the several Grand Lodges of those States and the Grand Orient of Franee cease.
That this Grand Lodge, which has always firmly held and still holds the views expressed by our Right Worshipful Grand Plaster Brother Richard Vaux (set out in the foregoing report) respectfully and confidently asks its sister jurisdictions to adopt those views as fundamental in Freemasonry and requests those Grand Lodges which are in fraternal relations with the Grand Orient of Franee to give their adherence to those views and sever further relations with the said Grand Orient.
The above resolutions presented by Brother Beitler, Chairman of the Committee on Clandestine Lodges in Pennsylvania, were unanimously adopted by the Grand Lodge of that State (see Territorial Jurisdiction).
Lodges in the eighteenth century and at the beginning of the nineteenth inflicted fines for nonattendance at Lodge meetings, and of course excuses were then required to avoid the penalty. But this has now grown out of use. Freemasonry being considered a voluntary institution, fines for absence are not inflicted, and excuses are therefore not now required. The infliction of a fine would, it is supposed, detract from the solemnity of the obligation which makes attendance a duty. The old Constitutions, however, required excuses for non-attendance, although no penalty was prescribed for a violation of the rule. Thus, in the Matthew Cooke Manuscript (of the fifteenth century) it is said, "that every master of this art should be warned to come to his congregation that they come duly, but if (unless) they may be excused by some manner of cause" (see lines 7404). And in the Regius Manuscript (lines 107-12) it is written: That every mayster, that is a Mason,
Must ben at the generate congregaeyon
So that he hyt resonebly y-tolde
Where that the semble shall be holde;
And to that semble he must nede gon
But he have a resenabul skwsacyon.
EXECUTIVE POWERS OF A GRAND LODGE.
See Grand Lodge.
EXEGETICAL AND PHILANTHROPICAL SOCIETY.
According to Thory (Acta Latomorumi i 3l2) founded at Stockholm in 1787. It united Magnetism to Swedenborgianism, the religious doctrines of the celebrated Swedish philosopher; it was at first secret, but when it became known it was killed by ridicule.
EXEMPLIFICATION OF THE WORK.
This term is of frequent use in American Freemasonry. When a lecturer or teacher performs the ceremonies of a Degree for instruction, using generally one of the Freemasons present as a substitute for the candidate, he is said "to exemplify the work." It is done for instruction, or to enable the members of the Grand or subordinate Lodge to determine on the character of the ritual that is taught by the exemplifies..
The date of the Exodus has been determined by the excavations recently made at Tel elMaskhtta. This is the name of large mounds near Tel el-Reber, excavated by M. Naville for the Egyptian Exploration Fund, wherein he found inscriptions showing that they represent the ancient City of Pithom or Succoth, the "treasure-cities" (Exodus i, 11), and that Ramses II, was the founder. This was the Pharaoh of the oppression. The walls of the treasurechambers were about six hundred and fifty feet square and twenty-two feet thick. From Pithom, or Succoth, where the Israelites were at work, they started on their exodus toward Etham (Khetam), then to Pihachiroth (Exodus xiv, 2), and so on north and east. The exodus took place under Meneptah II, who ascended the throne 1325 B.C., and reigned but a short period. It was along the isthmus that the Egyptian army perished pursuing the retreating Israelites as they crossed between Lake Serbonis and the waters of the Mediterranean, amidst the "sea of papyrus reeds," the yam suph, that has often proved disastrous to single or congregated travelers (see S. Birch, LL.D., in Ancient History from the Monuments, Brugsch-Bey's lecture, 17th September, 1874; but more particularly the discoveries above referred to, in Fresh Lights, etc., by A. H. Sayce).
From the Greek combining word, ego, meaning outside. Public, not secret, belonging to the uninitiated (see also Esoteric).
In Lodges of the French Rite, there are two officers calledFirst andSecondExperts, whose duty it is to assist the Master of Ceremonies in the initiation of a candidate. In Lodges of Perfection of the Scottish Rite, there are similar officers who are known as the Senior and Junior Expert.
Conferred in three grades, and cited in Fustier's collection (see Thory, Acta Latomorum i, 312).
EXPERT, SUBLIME ENGLISH.
Mentioned in Fustier's collection (see Thory, Acta Latomorum i, 312).
Very early after the revival of Freemasonry, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, pretended expositions of the ritual of Freemasonry began to be published.
There have been several American expositions but the compilers have only been servile copyists of Morgan, Bernard, and Allyn. The undertaking has been, and continues to be, simply the pouring out of one vial into another.
The expositions which abound in the French, German, and other continental languages, are not attacks upon Freemasonry, but are written often under authority, for the use of the Fraternity.
The usages of continental Freemasonry permit a freedom of publication that would scarcely be tolerated by the English or American Craft.
Expulsion is, of all Masonic penalties, the most severe that can be inflicted on a member of the Order, and hence it has been often called a Masonic death. It deprives the expelled of all the rights and privileges that he ever enjoyed, not only as a member of the particular Lodge from which he has been ejected, but also of those which were inherent in him as a member of the Fraternity at large. He is at once as completely divested of his Masonic character as though he had never been admitted, so far as regards his rights, while his duties and obligations remain as firm as ever, it being impossible for any human power to cancel them. He can no longer demand the aid of his Brethren nor require from them the performance of any of the duties to which he was formerly entitled, nor visit any Lodge, nor unite in any of the public or private ceremonies of the Order. He is considered as being without the pale, and it would be criminal in any Brother, aware of his expulsion, to hold communication with him on Masonic subjects.
The only proper tribunal to impose this heavy punishment is a Grand Lodge. A subordinate Lodge tries its delinquent member, and if guilty declares him erpelled. But the sentence is of no force until the Grand Lodge, under whose jurisdiction it is working, has confirmed it. And it is optional with the Grand Lodge to do so. or, as is frequently done, to reverse the decision and reinstate theBrother. Some of the Lodges in this country claim the right to expel independently of the action of the Grand Lodge, but the claim in Brother Mackey's opinion is not valid. He held that the very fact that an expulsion is a penalty, affecting the general relations of the punished Brother with the whole Fraternity, proves that its exercise never could with propriety be entrusted to a Body so circumscribed in its authority as a subordinate Lodge. Besides, the general practise of the Fraternity is against it. The English Constitutions vest the powers to expel exclusively in the Grand Lodge. A Private Lodge has only the power to exclude an offending member from its own meetings.
All Freemasons, whether members of Lodges or not, are subject to the infliction of this punishment when found to merit it. Resignation or withdrawal from the Order does not cancel a Freemason's obligations, nor exempt him from that wholesome control which the Order exercises over the moral conduct of its members. The fact that a Freemason, not a member of any particular Lodge, who has been guilty of immoral or unmasonic conduct, can be tried and punished by any Lodge within whose jurisdiction he may be residing, is a point on which there is no doubt.
Immoral conduct, such as would subject a candidate for admission to rejection, should be the only offense visited with expulsion. As the punishment is general, affecting the relation of the one expelled with the whole Fraternity, it should not be lightly imposed for the violation of any Masonic act not general in its character. The commission of a grossly immoral act is a violation of the contract entered into between each Freemason and his Order. If sanctioned by silence or impunity, it would bring discredit on the Institution, and tend to impair its usefulness. A Freemason who is a bad man is to the Fraternity what a mortified limb is to the body, and should be treated with the same mode of cure he should be cut off, lest his example spread, and disease be propagated through the constitution.
Expulsion from one of what is called the higher Degrees of Freemasonry, such as a Chapter or an Encampment, does not affect the relations of the expelled party to Blue Masonry. A Chapter of Royal Arch Masons is not and cannot be recognized as a Masonic Body by a Lodge of Master Masons by any of the modes of recognition known to Freemasonry. The acts, therefore, of a Chapter cannot be recognized by a Master Mason's Lodge any more than the acts of a literary or charitable society wholly unconnected with the Order.
Besides, by the present organization of Freemasonry, Grand Lodges are the supreme Masonic tribunals. If, therefore, expulsion from a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons involved expulsion from a Blue Lodge, the right of the Grand Lodge to hear and determine causes, and to regulate the internal concerns of the Institution, would be interfered with by another Body beyond its control. But the converse of this proposition does not hold good. Expulsion from a Blue Lodge involves expulsion from all the other Degrees; because, as they are composes of what Brother Mackey here terms Blue Masons, the members could not of right sit and hold communications on Masonic subjects with one who was an expelled Freemason.
EXTENDED WINGS OF THE CHERUBIM.
An expression used in the ceremonies of Royal Master, a Degree Gf the American Rite, and intended to teach symbolically that he who comes to ask and to seek Divine Truth symbolized by the True Word, should begin by placing himself under the protection of that Divine Power who alone is Truth, and from whom alone Truth can be obtained. Of Him the cherubim with extended wings in the Holy of Holies were a type.
EXTENT OF THE LODGE.
The extent of a Freemason's Lodge is said to be in height from the earth to the highest heavens; in depth, from the sur,'ace to the center; in length, from east to west; and in breadth, from north to south. The expression is a symbolic one, and is intended to teach the extensive boundaries of Freemasonry and the coterminal extension of Masonic charity (see Form of the Lodge).
The name of the First Degree of the Rite d'Orient, or East, according to the nomenclature of M. Fustier (see Thory, Acta Latomarum i, 31°).
The eternal qualifications of candidates for initiation are those which refer to their outward fitness, based upon the exhibited moral and religious character, the established reputation, the frame of body, the constitution of the mind, and social position. Hence they are divided into Moral, Religious, Physical, Mental, and Political for which see Qualifications of Candidates.
The expression in the instruction, that "it is the internal and not the external qualifications that recommend a man to be made a Freemason," it is evident, from the context, refers entirely to "worldly wealth and honors," which, of course, are not to be taken into consideration in inquiring into the qualifications of a candidate.
A Lodge is said to be extinct which has ceased to exist and work, which is no longer on the registry of the Grand Lodge, and whose Charter had been revoked for misuse or forfeited for non-use.
The same as Special Communication (see Communication).
From the Latin and applied to that which is outside, and thus said among the Craft to be not regularly made; clandestine. The word is now obsolete in this signification, but was so used by the Grand Lodge of England in a motion adopted March 31, 1735, and reported by Anderson in his 1738 edition of the Constitulions (page 182). "No extraneus brothers, that is, not regularly made, but clandestinely, . . . shall be ever qualified to partake of the Mason's general charity."
Used in the Constitution of the Royal Order of Scotland for expulsion. "If a brother shall be convicted of crime by any Court of Justice, such brother shall be permanently extruded" (see Section 29). Not in use elsewhere as a Masonic term.
EZEKIEL, TEMPLE OF.
See Temple of Ezekiel.
In Hebrew, iRK-U t:R eben hahezel, meaning the stone of departure, namely, a mile-stone. .~n old testimonial stone in the neighborhood of Saul's residence, the scene ot the parting of David and Jonathan, and the mark beyond which the falling of Jonathan's arrow indicated danger (see First Samuel xx, 19). Hence, a word adopted in the honorary Degree that iS called the Mason's XVife and Daughter.
There are two persons named Etra who are recorded in Scripture.
1. Etra, a leading priest among the first colonists who came up to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel, and who is mentioned by Nehemiah (xii, i); and,
2. Ezra, the celebrated Jewish scribe and restorer of the law, who visited Jerusalem forty-two years after the second temple had been completed. Calmet, however, says that this second Ezra had visited Jerusalem previously in company with Zerubbabel. Some explanation of this kind is necessary to reconcile an otherwise apparent inconsistency in the English system of the Royal Arch, which makes two of its officers represent Ezra and Nehemiah under the title of scribes, while at the same time it makes the time of the ceremony refer to the laying of the foundation of the second Temple, and yet places in the scene, as a prominent actor, the later Ezra, who did not go up to Jerusalem until more than forty years after the completion of the building. It is more probable that the Ezra who is said in the work to have wrought with Joshua, Haggai, and Zerubbabel, was intended by the original framer of the ceremony to refer to the first Ezra, who is recorded by Nehemiah as having been present; and that the change was made in the reference without due consideration, by some succeeding author whose mistake has been carelessly perpetuated by those who followed him. Dr. George Oliver (see Histoncal Landmarks ii, 428) attempts to reconcile the difficulty, and to remove the anachronism, by saying that Esdras was the scribe under Joshua, Haggai, and Zerubbabel, and that he was succeeded in this important office by Ezra and Nehemiah. But the English ceremonies make no allusion to this change of succession; and if it did, it would not enable us to understand how Ezra and Nehemiah could be present as scribes when the foundations of the second Temple were laid, and the important secrets of the Royal Arch Degree were brought to light, unless the Ezra meant is the one who came to Jerusalem with Nehemiah. Brother Mackey suggested that there is e confusion in all this which should be rectified.
[What is Freemasonry] [Leadership
Development] [Education] [Masonic
This site is not an official site of any recognized Masonic body in the United
States or elsewhere.
Last modified: March 22, 2014