Help Me Maintain OUR Website!!!!!!
An unfriendly fate dogs the steps of women who write about Freemasonry, and pro or con; if one of them makes up a book about it by rewriting some old volume too obscure for anybody ever to have heard of, a Masonic book-worm (and there are many of them) ungallantly turns up that obscure volume and gives her away; if she writes an attack on the Fraternity from "original documents loaned by one of the chancelleries" some unexpected expert spoils everything by proving it to be a forgery. This fate shadowed the unfortunate Miss Elizabeth Durham, an English lady, who set out to prove that Masons had both planned and carried out the assassi nation of the Austrian Arch Duke and his wife at Sarajevo in 1914.
She had for authority a document which she had been told was the official minutes of the trial, and this document proved that the accused men had been Masons, and had received their instructions from a Grand Lodge. But when the actual and official records were finally made public they contained nothing in common with Miss Durham's document; she had been "had."
Her document purported to have been written by "Professor Pharos"; it was discovered that "Professor Pharos" was Father Puntigam, leader of the Jesuits in Sarajevo. Even the Rev. Father Hermann Gruber, S. J., who was an Anti-Mason by profession, protested against this dreadful hoax; he pointed out among other things that whereas the assassins were under twenty years of age, it was the common rule in Danubian Masonry to accept no candidate under twentyfive. Miss Durham also relied on a Mr. H. C. Norman, another English Anti-Mason, and on Horatio Bottomley, later to be proved a swindler. Her book was entitled The Sarajevo Crime.
NOTE.—The continent-wide Anti-Masonic campaign which was carried on between the two World Wars shows nowhere any evidence of spontaneity, and still less of sineerity; both the external and internal evidences prove it to have been planned; character assassination, the outright forging of documents, newspaper campaigns of inuendo, open attacks known to be false but made to start talk, these same techniques appear and re-appear from Czecho-Slovakia to Spain, and including both Ireland and France—there was much more open and dangerous AntiMasonry in England than American Masons heard about because of the lack of any press of their own.
Freemasonry was introduced into this kingdom in 1737 (Rebold, History of Three Grand Lodges, page 686).
Hebrew, Odem. The first stone in the first row of the High Priest's breastplate. It is a Species of carnelian of a blood-red color, and was appropriated to the Tribe of Reuben.
A pretended exposition of Freemasonry, published at Baumberg, Germany, in 1816, under the title of Sarsena, or the Perfect Architect, created a great sensation at the time among the initiated and the profane. It professed to contain the history of the origin of the Order, and the various opinions upon what it should be, "faithfully described by a true and perfect Brother, and extracted from the papers which he left behind him." Like all other expositions, it contained, as Gadicke remarks, very little that was true, and of that which was true nothing that had not been said before.
An old regulation noted by Doctor Mackey on the subject of wearing sashes in a procession is in the following words: "None but officers, who must always be Master Masons, are permitted to wear sashes; and this decoration is only for particular officers." In the United States the wearing of the sash appears, very properly, to be confined to the Worshipful Master, as a distinctive badge of his office.
The sash is worn by the Companions of the Royal Arch Degree, and is of a scarlet color, with the words holiness to the Lord inscribed upon it. These were the words placed upon the miter of the High Priest of the Jews.
In the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, the white sash is a decoration of the Thirty-third Degree. A decree of the Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction confined its use to honorary members, while active members wore the collar.
The sash, or scarf, is analogous to the Zennar, or sacred cord, which was placed upon the candidate in the initiation into the mysteries of India, and which every Brahman was compelled to wear. This cord was woven with great solemnity, and being put upon the left shoulder, passed over to the right side and hung down as low as the fingers could reach.
The Brethren of the Province of Saskatehewan assembled at Regina on the 10th day of August, 1906, and formally resolved themselves into the Grand Lodge of Saskatehewan. Twenty-five Lodges out of twenty-eight in the Province were represented. Brother H. H. Campkin was elected Grand Master and was installed by Brother McKenzie, Grand Master of Manitoba.
One of the sacred books of the Hindu law.
SAT B'HAI, ROYAL ORIENTAL ORDER OF THE.
Said to have originated in India, and so named after a bird held sacred by the Hindus, whose flight, invariably in sevens, has obtained for the Society the appellation of the Seven Brethren, hence the name. It embosoms seven Degrees—Arch Censor, Arch Courier, Arch Minister, Arch Herald, Arch Scribe, Arch Auditor, and Arch Mute. It promises overmuch. The figure illustrated here is termed the Mystery of the Apex.
The title given by the Greek writers to the Persian Governors of Provinces before Alexander's conquest. It is from the Persian word Satrab. The authorized version calls them the Kings Lieutenants; the Hebrew, achashdarpenim, which is doubtless a Persian word Hebraized. These were the Satraps who gave the Jews so much trouble in the rebuilding of the Temple. They are alluded to in the congeneric Degrees of Companion of the Red Cross and Prince of Jerusalem.
SAVALETTE DE LANGES.
Founder of the Rite of Philalethes at Paris, in 1773. He was also the President and moving spirit of the Masonic Congress at Paris, which met in 1785 and 1787 for the purpose of discussing many important points in reference to Freemasonry. The zeal and energy of Savalette de Langes had succeeded in collecting for the Lodge of the Philalethes a valuable cabinet of natural history and a library containing many manuscripts and documents of great importance. His death, which occurred soon after the beginning of the French Revolution and the political troubles that ensued, caused the dispersion of the members and the loss of a great part of the collection. The remnant subsequently came into the possession of the Lodges of Saint Alexander of Scotland, and of the Soeial Contrat, which constituted the Philosophic Scottish Rite.
The first Masonic Lodge in Saxony appeared at Dresden, in 1738; within four years thereafter two others had been established in Leipzig and Altenburg. The Grand Lodge was formed in 1811.
At the Revival in 1717, "Mr. Antony Sayer, gentleman," was elected Grand Master (Constitutions, 1738, page 110). He was succeeded in the next year by George Payne, Esq. In 1719, he was appointed Senior Grand Warden by Grand Master Desaguliers. Afterward he fell into bad circumstances and in 1730 a sum of £15 was granted to him by Grand Lodge, followed by a further grant of £2.2.0 in 1741. In December, 1730, a complaint was made to Grand Lodge of some irregular conduct on his part, and he was acquitted of the charge, whatever it was, but told to do nothing so irregular for the future. When he died, either late in 1791 or early in 1742, he was Tiler of what is now the Old King's Arms Lodge, No. 28. A portrait of him by Highmore, the celebrated painter, is in existence, mezzotinto copies of which are not uncommon (see also a paper "Mr. Anthony Sayer, gentleman," by Brother J. Walters Hobbs, Transactions, Quatuor Coronati Lodge, 1924, volume xxxvii, page 218). The Freemason, June 6, 1925, says of Brother Sayer:
We also find the name among the worthies of the Old King's Arms Lodge, No. 28, London, England, the name of that somewhat elusive character, Anthony Sayer the first Grand Master of England, about whom less definite information is known than of any of his successors in that high office. After serving the office of Grand Master in 1717, he, like George Payne, descended, in 1719, to the Chair of Grand Warden.
His name appears among the lists of nwembers of the Lodge which met at the Queen's Head in Knave's Acre, in Wardour Street, for the years 1723, 1725, and 1730, which Lodge stands as No. 11 on the Engraved List in the Library of Grand Lodge, and is now known as the Lodge of Fortitude and Old Cumbelland, No. 12. It is now known that he became Tyler of the Old King's Arms Lodge in 1733. It is also known that he received assistance from the Charity Fund of Grand Lodge in 1730 and again in 1741, and the Minute Books of the Old King's Arms Lodge reveal the fact that he received assistance from their funds in 1730 and 1740.
According to a notice in the London Evening Post of January 16, 1742, ten days after the election of his successor of Tyler, he passed away a few days prior to that date, evidently in good Masonic odour since the funeral cortege set out from the Shakespeare's Head Tavern, in Covent Garden, then the meeting-place of the Stewards' Lodge, followed by a great number of members of the Antient and Honourable Society of Freemasons "of the best quality," the body being "decently interred in Covent Garden Church." According to the Church Register the funeral took place on January 5, 1742.
A name given to a set of persons who, in 1741, formed a mock procession in derision of the Freemasons. Sir John Hawkins, speaking (in his Life of Johnson, page 336) of Paul Whites head, says:
In concert mith one Carey, a surgeon, he planned and exhibited a procession along the Strand of persons on foot and on horseback, dressed for the occasion, carrying mock ensigns at the Symbols of Freemasonry; the design of which wits to expose to laughter the insignia and ceremonies of that mysterious Institution; and it was not until thirty years afterward that the Fraternity recovered from the disgrace which so ludicrous a representation had brought on it.
The incorrectness of this last statement will be evident to all who are acquainted with the successful progress made by Freemasonry between the years 1741 and 1771, during which time Sir John Hawkins thinks that it was languishing under the blow dealt by the mock procession of the Scald Miserables.
A better and fuller account is contained in the London Daily Post, March 20, 1741.
Yesterday, some mock Freemasons marched through Pall Mall and the Strand as far as Temple Bar in procession, first went fellows on jackasses, with cows' horns in their hands, then a kettlekrummer on a jackass having two butter firkins for kettle-drums; then followed two carts drawn by jackasses, having in them the stewards with several badges of their Order; then came a mourning-coach drawn by six horses, each of a different color and size, in which were the Grand Master and Wardens; the whole attended by a vast mob. They stayed without Temple Bar till the Masons came by, and paid their compliments to them, who returned the same sith an agreeable humor that possibly disappointed the witty contriver of this mock Scene, whose misfortune is that, though he has some mit, his subjects are generally so ill chosen that he loses by it as many friends as other people of more judgment gain.
April 27th, being the day of the Annual Feast, 'a number of shoe-cleaners, chimney-sweepers, etc,. on foot and in carts, with ridiculous pageants carried before them, went in procession to Temple Bar, by way of jest on the Freemasons."
A few days afterward, says the same journal, "several of the Mock Masons were taken up by the constable empowered to impress men for his Majesty's service, and confined until they can be examined by the Justices." Hone remarks (Ancient Mysteries, page 242), it was very common to indulge in satirical pageants, which were accommodated to the amusement of the vulgar, and he mentions this procession as one of the kind. A plate of the mock procession lvas engraved by A. Benoist, a drawing-master, under the title of A Geometrical View of the Grated Procession of the Scald Miserable Masons, designed as they were drawn up over against Somerset House in the Strand, on the 27 th day of April Anno 1742. Of this plate there is a copy in Clavel's Histoire Pittoresque. With the original plate Benoist published a key, as follows, which perfectly agrees with the copy of the plate in Clavel:
Captain George Smith (Use and Abuse of Freemasonry, page 78) says that "about this time (1742) an order was issued to discontinue all public processions on feast days, on account of a mock procession which had been planned, at a considerable expense, by some prejudiced persons, with a riew to ridicule these public cavalcades." Smith is not altogether accurate. There is no doubt that the ultimate effect of the mock procession was to put an end to what was called the March of Procession on the Feast Day, but that effect did not show itself until 1747, in which year it was resolved that it should in future be discontinued (see Constitutions, 1756, page 248. On the subject of these mock processions there is an article by Dr. W. J. Chetwode Crawley, Transactions, Quatuor Coronati Lodge, volume xviu).
SCALES, PAIR OF.
"Let me be weighed in an even balance," said Job, "that God may know mine integrity"; and Solomon says that "a false balance is abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is His delight." So we find that among the ancients a balanse, or pair of scales, was a well-known recognized symbol of a strict observation of justice and fair dealing. This symbolism is also recognized in Freemasonry, and hence in the Degree of Princes of Jerusalem, the duty of which is to administer justice in the inferior Degrees, a pair of scales is the most important symbol.
The scallo pushed, the staff, and sandals form a part of the costume of a Masonic Knight Templar in his character as a Pilgrim Penitent. Shakespeare makes Ophelia sing—
And how shall I my true love know
Frorn any other one?
O. by his scallop-shell and staff
And by his sandal shoon!
The scallop-shell was in the Middle Ages the recognized badge of a pilgrim; so much so, that Doctor Clarke (Travels ii, page 538) has been led to say: "It is not easy to amount for the origin of the shell as a badge worn by the pilgrims, but it decidedly refers to much earlier Oriental customs than the journeys of Christians to the Holy Land, and its history will probably be found in the mythology of eastern nations." He is right as to the question of antiquity, for the shell was an ancientsymbol of the Syrian goddess Astarte, Venus Pelagia, or Venus rising from the sea.
But it is doubtful whether its use by pilgrims is to be traced to so old or so Pagan an authority. Strictly, the scallop-shell was the badge of pilgrims visiting the shrine of Saint James of Compostella, and hence it is called by naturalists the pecten Jacobacus—the comb shell of Saint James. Fuller (Church History ii, page 228) says: "All pilgrims that visit Saint James of Compostella in Spain returned thence obsiti conchis, 'all beshelled about' on their clothes, as a religious donative there bestowed upon them."
Pilgrims were, in fact, in medieval times distinguished by the peculiar badge which they wore, as designating the shrine which they had visited. Thus pilgrims from Rome wore the keys, those from Saint James the scallop-shell, and those from the Holy Land palm branches, whence such a pilgrim was some times called a palmer. But this distinction was not always rigidly adhered to, and pilgrims from Palestine frequently wore the shell. At first the shell was sewn on the cloak, but afterward transferred to the hat; and while, in the beginning, the badge was not assumed until the pilgrimage was accomplished, eventually pilgrims began to wear it as soon as they had taken their vow of pilgrimage, and before they had commenced their journey.
Both of these changes have been adopted in the Templar ceremonies. The pilgrim, although symbolically making his pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulcher in Palestine, adopts the shell more properly belonging to the pilgrimage to Compostella; and adopts it, too, not after his visit to the shrine, but as soon as he has rassumed the character of a pilgrim, which, it will be seen from what has been said, is historically correct, and in accordance with the later practice of medieval pilgrims.
From the Latin Scarabaeus, a beetle, the ancient Egyptian symbol usually combining representations of the sacred insect with a pellet suggesting the sun, the whole sacred to the sun-god.
Sometimes the venerated beetle as a living soul is shown with outstretched wings or with the horned head of a ram. Scarabs often are inscribed with mottoes or other similar lettering.
In the Ancient Mysteries scenic representations were employed to illustrate the doctrines of the resurrection, which it was their object to inculcate. Thus the allegory of the initiation lvas more deeply impressed, by being brought vividly to the sight as well as to the mind of the aspirant. Thus, too, in the religious mysteries of the Middle Ages, the moral lessons of Scripture were dramatized for the benefit of the people who beheld them.
The Christian virtues and graces often assumed the form of personages in these religious plays, and fortitude, prudence, temperance, and justice appeared before the spectators as living and acting beings, inculcating by their actions and by the plot of the drama those lessons which would not have been so well received or so thoroughly understood, if given merely in a didactic form.
The advantage of these scenic representations, consecrated by antiquity and tested by long experience, is well exemplified in the ritual of the Third Degree of Freemasonry, where the dramatization of the great legend gives to the initiation a singular force and beauty. It is surprising therefore, that the English system never adopted, or if adopted, speedily discarded, the drama of the Third Degree, but gives only in the form of a narrative what the American system more wisely and more usefully presents by living action. Throughout the United States, in every State excepting Pennsylvania, the initiation into the Third Degree constitutes a scenic representation. The latter State preserves the didactie method of the English system. The ceremonies on the Continent of Europe pursue the same scenic form of initiation, and in Doctor Mackey's opinion it is therefore most probable that this was the ancient usage, and that the present English arrangement of this feature is of comparatively recent date (see Ritual).
An ensign of sovereign authority, and hence carried in several of the advanced Degrees by officers who represent kings.
This is a code of laws for the government of the Operative Seasons of Scotland, drawn up by William Schaw, the Master of the Work to James VI. It bears the following title: "The Statutis and Ordinanceis to be obseruit be all the Maister-Maissounis within this realme sett down be William Schaw, Maister of Wark to his Maieste and general Wardene of the said Craft, with the consent of the Maisteris efter specifeit."
As will be perceived by this title, it is in the Scottish dialect. It is written on paper, and dated XXVIII December, 1598, Although containing substantially the general regulations which are to be found in the English manuscripts, it differs materially from them in many particulars. Masters, Fellow Crafts, and Apprentices are spoken of, but simply as gradations of rank, not as Degrees, and the word Ludge or Lodge is constantly used to define the place of meeting.
The government of the Lodge was vested in the Warden, Deacons, and Masters, and these the Fellow-Crafts and Apprentices were to obey. The highest officer of the Craft is called the General Warden. The Manuscript is in possession of the Lodge of Edinburgh, but has several times been published—first in the Laws and Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, in 1848 then in the American edition of that work, published by Doctor Robert Morris, in the ninth volume of the Universal Masonic Library; afterward by W. A. Laurie, in 1859, in his History of Freemasonny and the Grand Lodge of Scotland; D. Murray Lyon in Histsry of the Lodge of Edinburgh gives a transcript and the last part in facsimile, and, by W. J. Hughan, in his Unpublished Records of the Craft, and in Doctor Mackey's revised Historty of Freemasons the Scotch Manuscript has extended treatment in comparison with the various codes of English origin.
A name which is intimately connected with the history of Freemasonry in Scotland. For the particulars of his life, we are principally indebted to the writer, said to have been Sir David Brewster, Lylon's History of Lodge of Edinburgh, page 55, of Appendix Q. 2, in the Constitutions, 1848, of the Grand Lodse of Scotland. William Schaw was born in the year 1550, and was probably a son of Schaw of Sauchie, in the Shire of Clackmannon.
He appears from an early period of life to have been connected with the royal household. In proof of this we may refer to his signature attached to the original parchment deed of the National Covenant, which was signed by King James VI and his household at Holyrood Palace January 28,1580-1, old style. it not being until an Act of the Privy Council in Scotland, 1599, made January 1 New Year's Day, from 1600.
In 1581, Schaw became successor to Sir Robert Drummond of Carnock, as Master of Works. This high Official appointment placed under his superintendence all the royal buildings and palaces in Scotland; and in the Treasurer's accounts of a subsequent period various sums are entered as having been paid to him in connection with these buildings for improvements, repairs, and additions. Thus, in September, 1585, the sum of £315 was paid "to William Schaw, his Majestie's Maister of Wark, for the reparation and mending of the Castell of Striueling," and in May, 1590, £400, by his Majesty's precept, was "delyverit to William Sehaw, the Maister of Wark, for reparation of the hous of Dumfermling, befoir the Queen's Majestie passing thairto."
Sir James Melville, in his Memoirs, mentions that, being appointed to receive the three Danish Ambassadors who came to Scotland in 1585, with overtures for an alliance with one of the daughters of Frederick II, he requested the King that two other persons might be joined with him, and for this purpose he named Schaw and James Meldrum, of Seggie, one of the Lords of Session. It further appears that Schaw Wad been employed in various missions to France. He accompanied James VI to Denmark in the winter of 1589, previous to the King's marriage with the Princess Anna of Denmark, which was celebrated at Upslo, in Norway, on the 23d of November. The King and his attendants remained during the winter season in Denmark, but Schaw returned to Scotland on the 16th of March, 1589-90, for the purpose of making the necessary arrangements for the reception of the wedding-party. Schaw brought with him a paper subscribed by the King, containing the "Ordour set down be his Majestie to be effectuat be his Hienes Secreit Counsall, and preparit agane his Majestic's returne in Scotland," dated in Februarv, 1589-90.
The King and his royal bride arrived in Leith on the 1st of May, and remained there six days, in a building called the King's Work, unil the Palace of Holylood was prepared for their reception. Extensive alterations had evidently been made at this time at Holyrood, as a Warrant was issued by the Provost and Council of Edinburgh to deliver to William Schaw, Maister of Wark, the sum of £1000, "restand of the last taxation of £20,000" granted by the Royal Buroughs in Scotland, the sum to be expended "in biggin and repairing of this Hienes Palice of Halyrud-house,'' 14th March, 1589-90. Subsequent payments to Schaw occur in the Treasurer's accounts for broad scarlet cloth and other stuff for "burde claythes and coverings to forms and windows bayth in the Kilk and Palace of Halyrud-house."
On this occasion various sums were also paid by a precept from the King for dresses, etc., to the ministers and others connected with the royal household. At this time William Schaw, Maister of Wark, received £133 6s. 8d. The Queen was crowned on the 17th of May, and two days following she made her first public entrance into Edinburgh. The inscription on Schaw's monument states that he was, in addition to his office of Master of the Works, Sacris ceremoniis praepositus and Reginae Quaestor, which Monteith has translated as Sacrist and Queen's Chamberlain. This appointment of Chamberlain evinces the high regard in which the Queen held him; but there can be no doubt that the former words relate to his holding the office of General Warden of the ceremonies of the Masonic Craft, an office analogous to that of Substitute Grand Master as now existing in the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
William Schaw died April 18, 1602, and was buried in the Abbey Church of Dunfermline, where a monument was erected to his memory by his grateful mistress, the Queen. On this monument is his name and monogram cut in a marble slab, which, tradition says, was executed by his own hand, and containing his Freemason's Mark, and an inscription in Latin, in which he is described as one imbued with every liberal art and science, most skilful in architecture, and in labors and business not only unwearied and indefatigable, but ever assiduous and energetic. No man appears, from the records, to have lived with more of the commendation, or died with more of the regret of others, than this old Scottish Freemason.
Thory ( History of the Foundation of the Grand orient) thus calls the Brethren who, expelled by the Grand Lodge of France, had formed in the year 1772, a rival Body under the name of the National Assembly. Any Body of Freemasons separating from the legal obedience, and establishing a new one not authorized by the laws of Freemasonry—such, for instance, as the Saint John's Grand Lodge in New York—is properly schismatic.
This, which was originally an ecclesiastical term, and signifies, as Milton defines it, "a rent or division in the church when it comes to the separating of congregations," is unfortunately not unknown in Masonic history. It is in Masonic, as in canon law, a withdrawing from recognized authority, and setting up some other authority in its place.
The first schism recorded after the revival of 1717, was that of the Duke of Wharton, who, in 1722, caused himself to be irregularly nominated and elected Grand Master. His ambition is assigned in the Book of Constitutions as the cause, and his authority was disowned "by all those," says Anderson, "that would not countenance irregularities." But the breach was healed by Strand Master Montague, who, resigning his claim to the chair, caused Wharton to be regularly elected and installed (see Constitutions, 1738, page 114).
The second schism in England was when Brother Preston and others in 1779 formed the Grand Lodge of England South of the River Trent owing to a dispute with the Grand Lodge of the Moderns, which continued for ten years (see Preston).
In France, although irregular Lodges began to beinstituted as early as 1756, the first active schism is to be dated from 1761, when the dancing-master Lacorne, whom the respectable Freemasons refused to recognize as the substitute of De Clermont, the Grand Master, formed, with his adherents, an independent and rival Grand Lodge; the members of which, however, became reconciled to the legal Grand Lodge the next year, and again became schismatic in 1765. In fact, from 1761 until the organization of the Grand Orient in 1772, the history of Freemasonry in France is but a history of schisms.
But in Germany, in consequence of the Germanic principle of Masonic law that two or more controlling Bodies may exist at the same time and in the same place with concurrent and coextensive jurisdiction, it is legally impossible that there ever should be a schism. A Lodge or any number of Lodges may with draw from the parent stock and assume the standing and prerogatives of a mother Lvdge with powers of constitution or an independent Grand Lodge, and its regularity would be indisputable, according to the German interpretation of the law of territorial jurisdiction. Such an act of withdrawal would be a secession, but not a schism.
On the other hand, in the United States of America, there have been several instances of Masonic schism. Thus, in Massachusetts, by the establishment in 1752 of the Saint Andrew's Grand Lodge; in South Carolina, by the formation of the Grand Lodge of York Masons in 1787; in Louisiana, in 1848, by the institution of the Grand Lodge of Ancient York Masons; and in New York, by the establishment in 1823 of the city and country Grand Lodges; and in 1849 by the formation of the Body known as the Philtp's Grand Lodge. In all of these instances a reconeiliation eventually took place; nor is it probable that schisms will often occur, because the principle of exclusive territorial jurisdiction has been now so well settled and so universally recognized, that no seceding or Schismatic Body can expect to receive the countenance or support of any of the Grand Lodges of the Union.
There are these essential points of difference between ecclesiastical and Masonic schism; the former, once occurring, generally remains perpetual. Reconciliation with a parent church is seldom effected. The schisms of Calvin and Luther at the time of the Reformation led to the formation of the Protestant Churches, who can never be expected to unite with the Roman Church, from which they separated. The Quakers, the Baptists, the Methodists, and other sects which seceded from the Church of England, have formed permanent religious organizations, between whom and the parent body from which they separated there is a breach which will probably never be healed. But all Masonic schisms, as experience has shown, have been temporary in their duration, and sometimes very short-lived among sincere Brethren.
The spirit of Masonic Brotherhood which continues to pervade both parties, always leads, sooner or later, to a reconciliation and a reunion; concessions are mutually made, and compromises effected, by which the schismatic Body is again merged in the parent association from which it had seceded. Another difference is this, a religious Schismatic body is not necessarily an illegal one, nor does it always profess a. system of false doctrine. "A schism," says Milton "may happen to a true church, as well as to a false." But a Masonic schism is always illegal; it violates the law of exclusive jurisdiction; and a schismatic Body cannot be recognized as possessing any of the rights or prerogatives which belong alone to the supreme dogmatic Masonic power of the State.
[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