The Masonic Trowel

... to spread the cement of brotherly love and affection, that cement which unites us into one sacred band or society of brothers, among whom no contention should ever exist, but that noble emulation of who can best work or best agree ...

[What is Freemasonry] [Leadership Development] [Education] [Masonic Talks] [Masonic Magazines Online]
Articles] [Masonic Books Online] [E-Books] [Library Of All Articles] [Masonic Blogs] [Links]
What is New] [Feedback]

 Masonic quotes by Brothers

Search Website For

Add To Favorites

Help Me Maintain OUR Website!!!!!!

List of Contributors

PDF This File

Print This Page

Email This Site To ...

The Hebrew letter is the fourteenth letter in the English and Hebrew alphabets; its numerical value is 50, and its definition, fish. As a final, Nun is written 1, and then is of the value of 700. The Hebrew Divine appellation is Formidabilis.
The daughter of Lamech and sister of Tubal-cain (see Genesis iv, 18-24, and 99, which have been read as meaning two different persons but now usually understood as of the same list). To her the Legend of the Craft attributes the invention of the art of weaving, and she is united with her three brothers, by the same legend, in the task of inscribing the several sciences on two pillars, that the knowledge of them might be preserved after the Flood.
See Schools of the Prophets.
After the destruction of the Solomonial Temple, the captives formed an association while slaves at Naharda, on the Euphrates, and are there said to have preserved the secret mysteries.
In Scriptural symbology, nakedness denoted sin, and dothing, protection. But the symbolism of Freemasonry on this subject is different. There, to be "neither naked nor clothed" is to make no claim through worldly wealth or honors to preferment in Freemasonry, where nothing but internal merit, which is unaffected by the outward appearance of the body, is a recommendation for admission.
A reverential allusion to the name of God, in some especial and peculiar form, is to be found in the doctrines and ceremonies of almost all nations. This ineffable or unutterable name was respected by the Jews under the sacred form of the word Jehovah. Among the Druids, the three letters I. 0. W. constituted the name of Deity. They were never pronounced, says Giraldus Cambrensis, but another and less sacred name was substituted for them. Each letter was a name in itself. The first is the Word, at the utterance of which in the beginning the world burst into existence; the second is the Word, whose sound still continues, and by which all things remain in existence; the third is the Word, by the utterance of which all things will be consummated in happiness, forever approaching to the immediate presence of the Deity. The analogy between this and the past, press ent and future significations contained in the Jewish Tetragrammaton will be evident

Among the Mohammedans there is a science called Ism Allah, or the science of the name of God. "They pretend," says Niebuhr, "that God is the loclc of this science, and Mohammed the key; that, consequently, none but Mohammedans can attain it; that it discovers what passes in different countries; that it familiarizes the possessors with the genii, who are at the command of the initiated, and who instruct them; that it places the winds and the seasons at their disposal, and heals the bites of serpents, the lame, the maimed, and the blind."
In the chapter of the Koran en titled Araaf, it is written: "God has many excellent names. Invoke him by these names, and separate your selves from them who give him false names." The Mohammedans believe that God has ninety-nine names, which, with that of Allah, makes one hundred; and, therefore, their chaplets or rosaries are composed of one hundred beads, at each of which they invoke one of these names; and there is a tradition, that whoever frequently makes this invocation will find the gates of Paradise open to him. With them Allah is the Ism al adhem, the Great Name, and they bestow upon it all the miraculous virtues which the Jews give to the Tetragrammaton.
This, they say, is the name that was engraven on the stone which Japheth gave to his children to bring down rain from heaven; and it was by virtue of this name that Noah made the ark float on the waters, and governed it at will, without the aid of oars or rudder. Among the Hindus there was the same veneration of the name of God, as is evinced in their treatment of the mystical name Aum. The "Institutes of Menu" continually refer to the peculiar efficacy of this word, of which it is said, "All rites ordained in the Veda oblations to fire, and solemn sacrifices pass away; but that which passes not away is the syllable Aum, thence called aishara, since it is a symbol of God, the Lord of created beings."
There was in every ancient nation a sacred name given to the highest god of its religious faith, besides the epithets of the other and subordinate deities.
The old Aryans, the founders of our race, called their chief god Dyaus, and in the Vedas we have the invocation to Dyaus Pitar, which is the same as the Greek Zev cramp, and the Latin, Jupiter, all meaning the Heaven-Father, and at once reminding us of the Christian invocation to "Our Father which art in heaven."
There is one incident in the Hindu mythology which shows how much the old Indian heart yearned after this expression of the nature of Deity bv a name.
There was a nameless god, to whom, as the "source of golden light," there was a worship. This is expressed in one of the Veda hymns, where the invocation in every stanza closes with the exclamation, "Who is the god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?"
Nor, says Bunsen (God in History i, 302), "the Brahmanic expositors must needs find in every hvmn the name of a god who is invoked in it, and so, in this case. their have actually invented a grammatical divinity the god Who." W'hat more pregnant testimony could we have of the tendency of man to seek a knowledge of the Divine nature in the expression of a name?
The Assyrians worshiped Assur, or Asarac, as their chief god. On an obelisk, taken from the palace of Nimrod, we find the inscription, "to Asarac, the Great Lord, the King of all the great gods."
Of the veneration of the Egyptians for the name of their supreme god, we have a striking evidence in the writings of Herodotus, the Father of History, as he has been called, who, during a visit to Egypt. was initiated into the Osirian mysteries. Speaking of these initiations he says (book u, chapter 171), "the Egyptians represent by night his sufferings, whose name I refrain from mentioning." It was no more lawful among the Egyptians than it was among the Jews, to give utterance aloud to that Holy Name.

At Byblos the Phenicians worshiped Eliun, the Most High God. From him was descended El, whom Philo identifies with Saturn, and to whom he traces the Hebrew Elohim. Of this El, Max Muller says that there was undeniably a primitive religion of the whole Semitic race, and that the Strong One in Heaven was invoked under this name by the ancestors of the Semitic races, before there were Babylonians in Babylonia, Phenicians in Sidon and Tyre, or Jews in Mesopotamia and Jerusalem. If so, then the Mosaic adoption of Jehovah, with its more precise teaching of the Divine essence, was a step in the progress to the knowledge of the Divine Truth. In China there is an infinite variety of names of elemental powers, and even of ancestral spirits, who b are worshiped as subordinate deities; but the ineffable name is Tien, compounded of the two signs for great and one, and which, the Imperial Dictionany tells us, signifies "The Great One—He that dwells on high, and regulates all below."
Drummond (Origines) claimed that Abaur was the name of the Supreme Deity among the ancient Chaldeans. It is evidently the Hebrew signifies "The Father of Light." The Scandinavians had twelve subordinate gods, but their chief or supreme deity was Al-Fathr, or the All Father.

Even among the Red Men of America we find the idea of an invisible deity, whose name was to be venerated. Garcilasso de la Vega tells us that while the Peruvians paid public worship to the sun, it mvas but as a symbol of the Supreme Being, whom they called, Pachacamac, a word meaning the soul of the world, and which was so sacred that it was spoken only vith extreme dread.

The Jews had, besides the Tetragrammaton or fourlettered name, two others: one consisting of twelve and the other of forty-two letters. But Maimonides, in his More Nevochim (part i, elxii), remarks that it is impossible to suppose that either of these constituted a single name, but that each must have been composed of several words, which must, however, have heen significant in making man approximate to a knowledge of the true essence of God. The Cabalistical book called the Sohar confirms this when it tells us that there are ten names of God mentioned in the Bible, and that when these ten names are combined into one word, the number of the letters amounts to forty-two.
But the Talmudists, although they did not throw around the forty-two-lettered name the sanctity of the Tetragrammaton, prescribed that it should be communicated only to men of middle age and of virtuous habits, and that its knowledge would confirm the n as heirs of the future as well as the present life. The twelve-lettered name, although once common, became afterward occult; and when, on the death of Simon I, the priests ceased to use the Tetragrammaton, they were accustomed to bless the people with the name of twelve letters. Maimonides very wisely rejects the idea that any power was derived from these letters or their pronunciation, and claims that the only virtue of the names consisted in the holy ideas expressed by the words of which they were composed.

The following are the ten Cabalistic names of God, corresponding to the ten Sephiroth:
  • 1. Eheyeh;
  • 2. Jah;
  • 3. Jehovah;
  • 4. E1;
  • 5. Eloah;
  • 6. Elohim;
  • 7. Jehovah Sabaoth;
  • 8. Elohim Sabaoth;
  • 9. Elhi;
  • 10. Adonai.
Lanzi extends his list of names to twenty-six, which, with their signification, are as follows:
  1. At. Aleph and Tau, that is, Alpha and Omega. .A name figurative of the Tetragrammaton.
  2. Ihoh. Eternal, absolute principle of creation.
  3. Hoh. Destruction. the male and female principle, the author and regulator of time and motion.
  4. Jah. Lord and remunerator.
  5. Oh. Severer and punisher.
  6. Jao. Author of life.
  7. Azazel. Author of death.
  8. Jao-Sabaoth. God of the co-ordinations of loves and hatreds. Lord of the solstices and the equinoxes.
  9. Ehie. The Being, the Ens.
  10. El. The First Cause. The principle or beginning of all things.
  11. Elo-hi. The Good Principle.
  12. Elo-ho. The Evil Principle.
  13. El-raccum. The Succoring Principle.
  14. El-cannum. The Abhoring Principle.
  15. Ell. The Most Luminous.
  16. II . The Omnipotent.
  17. Ellohim. The Omnipotent and Beneficent.
  18. Elohim. The Most Beneficent.
  19. Elo. The Sovereign, the Excelsus.
  20. Adon. The Lord, the Dominator.
  21. Etoi. The Illuminator, the Most Effulgent.
  22. Adonai. The Most Firm, the Strongest.
  23. Elion. The Most Sigh.
  24. Shaddai. The Most Victorious.
  25. Yeshurun. The Most Generous.
  26. Noil. The Most Sublime.
Like the Mohammedan Ism Allah, Freemasonry presents us as its most important feature with this science of the names of God. But here it elevates itself above Talmudical and Rabbinical reveries, and becomes a symbol of Divine Truth. The names of God were undoubtedly intended originally to be a means of communicating the knowledge of God himself. The name was, from its construction and its literal powers, used to give some idea, however scanty, in early times, of the true nature and essence of the Deity. The Ineffable Name was the symbol of the unutterable sublimity and perfection of truth which emanate from the Supreme God, while the subordinate names were symbols of the subordinate manifestations of truth. Freemasonry has availed itself of this system, and, in its reverence for the Divine Name, indicates its desire to attain to that truth as the ultimate object of all its labor. The significant words of the Masonic system, which describe the names of God wherever they are found, are not intended merely as words of recognition, but as indices, pointing—like the Svmbolic Ladder of Jacob of the First Degree, or the Winding Stairs of the Second, or the Three Gates of the Third—the way of progress from darkness to light, from ignorance to knowledge, from the lowest to the highest conceptions of Divine Truth. And this is, after all, the real object of all Masonic science.
The precedency of Lodges does not depend on their names, but on their numbers The rule declaring that "the precedency of Lodges is grounded on the seniority of their Constitution" was adopted on the 27th of December, 1727 (Constitutions, 1738, page 154). The number of the Lodge, therefore, by which its precedency is established, is always to be given by the Grand Lodge. In England, Lodges do not appear to have received distinctive names before the latter part of the eighteenth century. Up to that period the Lodges were distinguished simply by their numbers. Thus, in the first edition of the Book of Constitutions, published in 1723, we find a list of twenty Lodges, registered by their numbers, from No. 1 to No. 20, inclusive. Subsequently, they were further designated by the name of the tavern at which they held their meetings.
Thus, in the second edition of the same work, published in 1738, we meet with a list of one hundred and six Lodges, designated sometimes, singularly enough, as Lodge No. 6, at the Rummer Tavern, in Queen Street; No. 84, at the Black Dog, in Castle Street; or No. 98. at the Bacchus Tavern, in Little Bush Lane. With such names and localities, we are not to wonder that the "three small glasses of punch," of which Doctor Oliver so feelingly speaks in his Book of the Lodge, were duly appreciated; nor, as he admits, that "there were some Brethren who displayed an anxiety to have the allowance increased." In 1766 we read of four Lodges that were erased from the Register, under the similar designations of the Globe, Fleet Street; the Red Cross Inn, Southwark; No. 85, at the George, Ironmongers' Lane and the Mercers Arms, Mercers Street. To only one of these, it will be perceived, was a number annexed. The name and locality of the tavern was presumed to be a sufficient distinction. It was not until about the close of the eighteenth century, as has been already observed, that we find distinctive names beginning to be given to the Lodges; for in 1793 we hear of the Shakspeare Lodge, at Stratford-on-Avon; the Royal Brunswick, at Sheffield; and the Lodge of Apollo, at Alcester. From that time it became a usage among our English Brethren, from which they have never since departed.

But a better taste began to prevail at a much earlier period in Scotland, as well as in Continental and Colonial Lodges. In Scotland, especially, distinctive names appear to have been used from a very early period, for in the very old Charter granting the office of Hereditary Grand disasters to the Barons of Rosslyn of which the date cannot be more recent than 1600, we find among the signatures the names of the officers of the Lodge of Dunfermline and the Lodge of Saint Andrew's. Among the names in the list of the Scotch Lodges, in 1736 are those of Saint Mary's Chapel, Kilwinning, Aberdeen, etc. These names were undoubtedly borrowed from localities; but in 1763, while the English Lodges were still content with their numerical arrangement only we find in Edinburgh such designations as Saint Luke's, Saint Giles's, and Saint David's Lodges.

The Lodges on the Continent, it is true, at first adopted the English method of borrowing a tavern sign for their appellation; whence we find the Lodgc at the GoldenLion, in Holland, in 1734, and before that the Lodge at Nure's Tavern, in Paris, in 1725. But they soon abandoned this inefficient and inelegant mode of nomenclature; and accordingly, in 1739, a Lodge was organized in Switzerland under the apepropriate name of Stranger's Perfect Union. Tasteful names, more or less significant, began thenceforth to be adopted by the Continental Lodges. Among them we may meet with the Lodge of the Three Globes, at Berlin, in 1740; the Minava Lodge, at Leipsic, in 1741; Absalom Lodge, at Hamburg, in 1742; Saint George's Lodge, at the same place, in 1743; the Lodge of the Crowned Column, at Brunswick, in 1745; and an abundance of others, all with distinctive names, selected sometimes with much and sometimes with but little taste. But the worst of them was undoubtedly better than the Lodge at the Goose and Gridiron, which met in London in 1717.
In the Colonies of America, from the very first introduction of Freemasonry into the western world, significant names were selected for the Lodges; and hence we have, in 1734, Saint John's Lodge, at Boston; a Solomon's Lodge, in 1735, at both Charleston and Savannah; and a Union Kilwinning, in 1754, at the former place.

This brief historical digression will serve as an examination of the rules which should govern all founders in the choice of Lodge names. The first and most important rule is that the name of a Lodge should be technically significant; that is, it must allude to some Masonic fact or characteristic; in other words, there must be something Masonic about it. Under this rule, all names derived from obscure or unmasonic localities should be reflected as unmeaning and inappropriate. Doctor Oliver, it is true, thinks otherwise, and says that "the name of a hundred, or wahpentake, in which the Lodge is situated, or of a navigable river, which confers wealth and dignity on the town, are proper titles for a Lodge." But a name should always convey an idea, and there can be conceived no idea worth treasuring in a Freemason's mind to be deduced from bestowing such names as New York, Philadelphia, or Baltimore, on a Lodge. The selection of such a name shows but little originality in the chooser; and, besides, if there be two Lodges in a town, each is equally entitled to the appellation; and if there be but one, the appropriation of it would seem to indicate an intention to have no competition in the future.

Yet, barren of Masonic meaning as are such geographical names, the adoption of them is one of the most common faults in American Masonic nomenclature. The examination of a very few old Registers, taken at random, will readily evince this fact. Thus, eighty-eight, out of one hundred and sixty Lodges in Wisconsin, were named after towns or counties; of four hundred and thirty-seven Lodges in Indiana, two hundred and fifty-one have names derived from the same source; geographical names were found in one hundred and eighty-one out of four hundred and three Lodges in Ohio, and in twenty out of thirty-eight in Oregon. But, to compensate for this, we had seventvone Lodges in View Hampshire, and only two local geographical appellations in the list. There are, however, some geographical names which are admissible, and, indeed, are highly appropriate These are the names of places celebrated ia Masonic history. Such titles for Lodges as Jerusalem, Tyre, Lebanon and Joppa are unexceptionable. Patmos. which is the name of a Lodge in Maryland, seems. as the long residence of one of the Patrons of the Order. to be unobjectionable.
So, too, Bethel, because it signifies the House of God; Mount Moriah, the site of the ancient Temple; Calvary, the small hill on which the sprig of a eacia was found; Mount Ararat, where the ark of our father Noah rested; Ophir, whence Solomon brought the gold and precious stones with which he adorned the Temple; Tadmor, because it was a city built by King Solomon; and Salem and Jebus, because they are synonyms of Jerusalem, and because the latter is especially concerned with Ornan the Jebusite, on whose threshing-floor the Temple was subsequently built—are all excellent and appropriate names for Lodges. But all Scriptural names are not equally admissible- Cabul, for instance, must be rejected, because it was the subject of contention between Solomon and Hiram of Tyre; and Babylon, because it was the place where "language was confounded and Freemasonry lost," and the scene of the subsequent captivity of our ancient Brethren; Jericho, because it was under a curse; and Misgab and Tophet, because they were places of idol worship. In short, it may be adopted as a rule, that no name should be adopted whose antecedents are in opposition to the principles of Freemasonry.

The ancient patrons and worthies of Freemasonry furnish a very fertile source of Masonic nomenclature, and have been very liberally used in the selection of names of Lodges. Among the most important may be mentioned Saint John, Salomon, Hiram, King David, Adoniram, Enoch, Archimedes, and Pythagoras. The Widow's Son Lodge, of which there are several instances in the United States, is an affecting and significant title, which can hardly be too often used.
Recourse is also to be had to the names of modera distinguished men who have honored the Institution by their adherence to it, or who, by their learning in Freemasonry, and by their services to the Order, have merited some marks of approbation. And hence we meet, in England, as the names of Lodges, with Susser, Moira, Frederick, Zetland, and Robert Burns; and in the United States with Washington, Lafayette, Clinton, Franklin, and Clay. Care must, however, be taken that no name be selected except of one who was both a Freemason and had distinguished himself, either by services to his country, to the world, or to the Order. Brother Oliver says that "the most appropriate titles are those which are assumed from the name of some ancient benefactor or meritorious individual who was a native of the place where the Lodge is held; as, in a city, the builder of the cathedral church."
In the United States we are, it is true, precluded from a selection from such a source; but there are to be found sorne of those old benefactors of Freemasonry, who, like Shakespeare and Milton, or Homer and Virgil, have ceased to belong to any particular country and have now become the common property of the world-wide Craft. There are, for instance Carausius, the first Royal Patron of Freemasonry in England; and Saint Alban, the first Grand Master; and Athelstan and Prince Edwin, both active encouragers of the art in the same kingdom. There are Wykeham, Gundulph, Giffard, Langham, Yevele (called, in the old records the King's Freemason), and Chicheley, Jermyn, and Wren, all long celebrated as illustrious Grand Masters of England, each of whom would be well entitled to the honor of giving name to a Lodge, and any one of whom would be better, more euphonious, and more spirit-stirring than the unmeaning, and oftentimes crabbed, name of some obscure village or post-office, from which too many of our Lodges derive their titles.

And, then, again, among the great benefactors to Masonic literature and laborers in Masonic science there are such names as Anderson, Dunckerley, Preston, Hutchinson, Town, Webb, and a host of others, who, though dead, still live by their writings in our memories. The virtues and tenets—the inculcation and practise of which constitute an important part of the Masonic system—form very excellent and appropriate names for Lodges, and have always been popular among correct Masonic nomenelators. Thus we everywhere find such names as Charity, Concord, Equality, Faith, Fellowship, Harmony, Hope, Humility, Mystic Tie, Relief, Truth, Union, and Virtue. Frequently, by a transposition of the word Lodge and the distinctive appellation, with the interposition of the preposition of, a more sonorous and emphatic name is given by our English and European Brethren, although the custom is but rarely followed in the United States. Thus we have by this method the Lodge of Regularity, the Lodge of Fidelity, the Lodge of Industry, and the Lodge of Prudent Brethren, in England; and in France, the Lodge of Benevolent Friends, the Lodge of Perfect Union, the Lodge of the Friends of Peace, and the eelebrated Lodge of the Nine Sisters.

As the names of illustrious men will sometimes stimulate the members of the Lodges which bear them to an emulation of their eharaeters, so the names of the Masonic virtues may serve to incite the Brethren to their praetise, lest the inconsistency of their names and their conduct should excite the ridicule of the world.
Another fertile and appropriate source of names for Lodges is to be found in the symbols and implements of the Order. Hence, we frequently meet with such titles as Level, Trowel, Rising Star, Rising Sun, Olive Branch, Evergreen, Doric, Corinthian, Delta, and Corner-Stone Lodges. Acacia is one of the most common, and at the same time one of the most beautiful, of these symbolic names; but unfortunately, through gross ignorance, it is often corrupted into Cassia—an insignificant plant, which has no Masonic or symbolic meaning.

An important rule in the nomenclature of Lodges, and one which must at once recommend itself to every person of taste, is that the name should be euphonious, agreeable sounding. This principle of euphony has been too little attended to in the selection of even geographical names in the United States, where names with impracticable sounds, or with ludicrous associstions, are often affixed to our towns and rivers. Speaking of a certain island, with the unpronounceable name of Srh, Lieber says, "If Homer himself were born on such an island, it could not become immortal,-for the best-disposed scholar would be unable to remember the name"; and he thinks that it was no trifling obstacle to the fame of many Polish heroes in the Revolution of that country, that they had names which left upon the mind of foreigners no effect but that of utter confusion. An error like this must be avoided in bestowing a name upon a Lodge.
The word selected should be soft, vocal—not too long nor too short—and, above all, be accompanied in its sound or meaning by no low, indecorous, or ludicrous association. For this reason such names of Lodges should be rejected as Sheboygan and Oconomowoc from the Registry of Wisconsin, because of the uncouthness of the sound; and Rough and Ready and Indian Diggings from that of California, on account of the ludicrous associations which these names convey. Again, Pythagoras Lodge is preferable to Pythagorean, and Archimedes is better than Archimedean, because the noun is more euphonious and more easily pronounced than the adjective. But this rule is difficult to illustrate or enforce; for, after all, this thing of euphony is a mere matter of taste, and we all know the adage, "De gustibus non est disputandum," there is no disputing about tastes.

A few negative rules, which are, however, easily deduced from the affirmative ones already given, will complete the topic. No name of a Lodge should be adopted which is not, in some reputable way, connected with Freemasonry Everybody will acknowledge that Morgan Lodge would be an anomaly, and that Cowan Lodge, would, if possible, be worse. But there are some names which, although not quite as bad as these, are on principle equally as objectionable. Why should any of our Lodges, for instance, assume, as many of them have, the names of Madison, Jefferson, or Taylor, since none of these distinguished men were Freemasons or Patrons of the Craft.
The indiscriminate use of the names of saints unconnected with Freemasonry is for a similar reason objectionable. Beside our Patrons, Saint John the Baptist and Saint John the Evangelist, but three other saints can lay any claims to Masonic honors, and these are Saint Alban, who introduced, or is said to have introduced, the Order into England, and has been liberally complimented in the nomenclature of Lodges; and Saint Swithin, who was at the head of the Craft in the reign of Ethelwolf; and Saint Benedict, who was the founder of the Masonic Fraternity of Bridge Builders. But Saint Mark, Saint Luke, Saint Andrew all of whom have given names to numerous Lodges, can have no pretensions to assist as sponsors in these Masonic baptisms, since they were not at all connected with the Craft.

To the Indian names of Lodges there is a radical objection. It is true that their names are often very euphonious and alwavs significant, for the Red Men of the American Continent are tasteful and ingenious in their selection of names—much more so, indeed, than the whites, who borrow from them; but their significance has nothing to do with Freemasonry.
What has been said of Lodges may with equal propriety be said, mutatis mutandis, the necessary changes having been made, of Chapters, Councils, and Commanderies.
We may supplement what Doctor Mackey says here with a few allusions to peculiar names of Lodges Gaelic Lodge of Glasgow, Seotland, has the peculiaritv that once a year the Brethren confer a Degree in that quaint old Celtic language of the Scotch. America Lodge of London, England comprises exclusively onlv those who were born in the United States. There is a Lodge of lawyers at Belfast. Ireland which bears the significant name of the Lodge of Good Counsel. A Lodge at London comprises a membership keenly interested in the improvement of the condition of the blind, and the name of their Lodge, Lux in Tenebris, or Light Among Shadows has a meaning that touches the heart.
Titles of many foreign Lodges have a peculiar significance as they exhibit a tendency to group Brethren of certain professions and pursuits. The London Hospital Lodge, the Middlesex Hospital Lodge and the City of London Red Cross Lodge are particularly significant names and several of the leading clubs, permanent schools, societies of musicians, of architects, of chartered accountants, the London School Board as well as engineers and various other professional organizations have Lodges bearing the names of these institutions. The Telephone Lodge has an expressive title, and one might suspect that the Sanitarian and Hygeia Lodges have to do with public health, and that is correct. Aquarius Lodge recruits its members from Brethren connected with the London Water Works, Aguartus being indeed the "water bearer." The Brethren of Evening Star Lodge are concerned with the lighting of London. We Visited a Lodge at London whose members were all lawyers and all engineers; they were certified members of the Institution of Patent Agents and the name of their Lodge was Invention. Hortus Lodge comprises Brethren who are merchants or growers of flowers, hortus being the Latin word for garden.
A city of Belgium, where the Primitive Scottish Rite was first established; hence sometimes called the Rite of Namur.
The ark of the Egyptian gods. A chest or structure with more height than depth, and thereby unlike the Israelitish Ark of the Covenant. The winged figures embraced the lower part of the Naos, while the cherubim of the Ark of Yahveh were placed above its lid. Yahveh took up His abode above the propitiatory or covering between the wings of the cherubim, exteriorly, while the gods of Egypt were reputed as hidden in the interior of the Naos of the sacred barks, behind hermetically closed doors (see Cherubim).
The territory of the tribe of Naphtali adjoined, on its western border, to Phenicia, and there must, therefore, have been frequent and easy communication between the Phenicians and the Naphtalites, resulting sometimes in intermarriage. This will explain the fact that Hiram the Builder was the son of a widow of Naphtali and a man of Tyre.
Freemasonry must have been practised in Naples before 1751, for in that year Ring Charles issued an Edict forbidding it in his dominions. The author of Anti-Saint Nicaise says that there was a Grand Lodge at Naples, in 1756, which was in correspondence with the Lodges of Germany. But its meetings were suspended by a royal Edict in September, 1775. In 1777 this Edict was repealed at the instigation of the Queen, and Freemasonry was again tolerated. This toleration lasted, however, only for a brief period. In 1781 Ferdinand IV renewed the Edict of Suppression, and from that time until the end of the century Freemasonry was subjected in Italv to the combined persecutions of the Church and State, and the Freemasons of Naples met only in secret. In 1793, after the French Revolution, many Lodges were openly organized.
A Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite was established on the 11th of June 1809 of which King Joachim elected Grand Master, and the Grand Orlent of Naples on the 24th of the same month. The fact that the Grand Orient worked according to the French Rite, and the Supreme Council according to the Scottish, caused dissensions between the two Bodies, which, however, were finally healed. And on the 23d of May, 1811, a Concordat was established between the Supreme Council and the Grand Orient, by which the latter took the supervision of the Degrees up to the Eighteenth, and the former of those from the Eighteenth to the Thirty-third. In October, 1812, Wing Joachim accepted the presidency of the Supreme Council as its Grand Commander. Both Bodies became extinct in 1815, on the accession of the Bourbons.

[What is Freemasonry] [Leadership Development] [Education] [Masonic Talks] [Masonic Magazines Online]
Articles] [Masonic Books Online] [E-Books] [Library Of All Articles] [Masonic Blogs] [Links]
What is New] [Feedback]

This site is not an official site of any recognized Masonic body in the United States or elsewhere.
It is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinion
of Freemasonry, nor webmaster nor those of any other regular Masonic body other than those stated.

DEAD LINKS & Reproduction | Legal Disclaimer | Regarding Copyrights

Last modified: March 22, 2014