Historical And Fraternal.

HISTORICAL AND FRATERNAL .

Address by Bro . Charles H . Martin , Deputy Grand Lecturer , when constituting Palestine Lodge , A . F . and A . M ., at Palestine , Illinois , 28 th October 1897 . nnHIS address was prepared in particular for the members of

JL the Craft and may fail to interest outsiders . It relates to "Speculative or Philosophical Masonry alone . It relates to the three degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry alone . It does not purport to be exhaustive , but rather to give an epitome or brief recital of the speaker ' s conception of the Institution . ¦

In the minds of those without the pale of the Institution Freemasonry , whether considered historically or as a present active force , occupies uncertain ground . While this is simply the statement of a fact , patent to the thinking mind , it is in a sense astonishing . In this day , so near the close of the nineteenth century , during which the searching eye of investigation has

removed the veil of mystery from so many subjects ; when a knowledge of the material universe has been extended in almost every direction , and research into speculative philosophy has become so commonplace , how should it happen that in the popular mind Freemasonry continues to be an unknown quantity ?

Masonry purports to be an ancient institution , and its votaries are in . the habit of apostrophising by saying of it in effect : " Men may come ancl men may go ; but I go on for ever . " If their claim has any reasonable foundation , how does it happen that its origin is not known ?

At this present time the simple fact is , that so far as trustworthy evidence as now offered shows , the origin of this venerable society is lost in the mists of the far distant past . Permit me here to venture the opinion that there exists in the mind of the great mass of mankind almost as great a degree of

uncertainty as to its utility as an active moral force , as there is with reference to its origin . I go farther , if you please , and express the conviction that the members of the Craft themselves , taken generally , are more or less uncertain in their minds with regard to both the history of Masonry and the scope of its real usefulness .

Notwithstanding this uncertainty Masonry has something of a history , and among the active moral forces holds a place . To my mind there are several causes which tend to account for the fact that the history of Masonry is so meagre and incomplete . 1 . Priory to the year A . D . 1717 , what is in modern times known as the " Grand Lodge system " was unknown . ' Before

that time , so far as we know , the Lodge was the controlling organisation and in a sense the unit , and acted independently of every other body , being subject to no authority or power on earth , and making returns of its work , or business transacted , to no person or body . Under this state of affairs the records kept were , as niighfr be expected , meagre , and no great care was

exercised to preserve what little was at the time written . 2 . It is within the last two centuries that the art of printing as we now know it has become common , ancl therefore until very recently , comparatively speaking , the facilities for preserving a record were not at hand as they now are .

3 . Previous to the adoption of the Grand Lodge system in 1717 , the written records of Lodge proceedings were not only meagre , as above stated , but what was written was kept so secret that it was almost impossible for anyone either inside or outside of the Institution to obtain the privilege of an examination thereof . Our ancient Brethren entertained much more rigorous scruples

with reference to secrecy than we do . This disposition was evinced in a striking manner when upon the organisation of the first Grand Lodge of England Dr . Anderson , a man of great learning and ability , was appointed as a Committee to cull from , the records and manuscripts in the possession of individuals and of Lodges , with a view of formulating and reporting a constitution

tor the Grand Lodge , we are informed that in scores of instances the Brethren in whose custody the records and manuscripts were kept consigned them to the flames rather than allow the world or even the Grand Lodge to be made acquainted with their contents . It appears that those Brethren regarded it as sacrilegious to make public the substance of the contents of the records in their custody .

4 . At times of which we know , and altogether likely at other times of which we are not informed , Freemasonry has been under the ban of the church—so much so that excommunication stared in the face the man who would avow a knowledge of the Institution or of any other society not under the control of the clergy . During those dark centuries the will of the masses was so

completely dominated by the clergy that the individual was permitted to engage in nothing for business or educational purposes , nor for the purpose of recreation or amusement , without fully acquainting the priests of all that was said and done . They assumed to control everything . Under these circumstances , with the sentence of excommunication always before them , it is small wonder that the Brethren who at tbat time participated in the

Historical And Fraternal.

rites of Masonry preserved but a meagre written record , and that what little record was kept was made difficult of access . 5 . Not only did our ancient Brethren at times fall under the prohibitive edict of the church , but it was also their misfortune to be misunderstood at times and in some places by the rulers of the state . Many times during the dark ages , and in a very few

instances in comparatively modern times , monarchs have taken it into their heads that the Institution of Masonry is unfriendly to government , and have consequently proscribed its rites , and undertaken under heavy pains and penalties to prevent the assembling of our Lodges . Under these circumstances we can understand why the Secretaries of Lodges may not have preserved

very full and complete minutes , and that for fear of government detectives what was recorded was securely kept . It is suggested by the way at this point that in no country and at no time has Masonry been unfriendly to law and order , nor has it been unfriendly to the person of any monarch or ruler , nor to his administration while he sought to rule well . ¦ !

6 . But , iu my judgment , the two principal causes for the uncertainty surrounding the history of Masonry remain yet to be noticed , and I mention the two together for the sake of antithesis or contrast . These two causes are , ( a ) the ignorance and credulity of writers . among the members of the Craft , and ( b ) the hypercritical skepticism of writers not members of the Craft . The former accept and appear to believe all of our dogmas and

traditions , without once inquiring whether they are to be accepted or not in a literal sense , and without once inquiring about the evidence if any there be of their authenticity as statements of facts . We have , for instance , Doctor Oliver , an English clergyman , a Mason and a voluminious Masonic writer , who claims that Masonry had its origin in the garden of Eden , and that Noah , Moses , Joshua and many others ancient worthies were Grand Masters . This claim is made in the face of the fact that it does

not appear from any reliable history , nor from , any manuscript , record or other authentic source , that such a thing as a Grand Lodge , or any sort of a general assembly of Masons , was known prior to the year A . D . 1717 . If there was no Grand Lodge , with * what degree of consistency can it be said there was a Grand Master ? *

* It is almost needless to say that his claim that Masonry originated with Adam is as absurd , and has as little evidence to support it , as his claim that Moses was a Grand Master three thousand years before there was a Grand Lodge . Scores of other writers of less prominence have written upon the history" of Masonry , and they are in general simply less fanciful , credulous

and incoherent than Dr . Oliver . This character of writers generally start out with a preconceived opinion or theory , with reference to the origin of Masonry , which their so-called histories are written for the purpose of exploiting . Some of these writers have traced the origin of Masonry to tbe ancient Egyptian mysteries ; others to ancient religious or quasi-religious bodies such as the

Essenes , the builders , & c . ; others to the Eoman Colleges ; others to the stone masons of Germany of the Middle Ages ; others to the Craft Guilds of France ; and still others find that Masonry , as we know it , sprang from the labour organisations of the builders of the Middle Ages . The limits of this address forbid my discussing the grounds upon which these various claims are made , or even the

enumeration of all the various bodies or societies from which some writer of greater or less prominence and ability has claimed that Masonry emanated . It is my opinion that none of these claims have ever been made good by satisfactory evidence , but rather that they rest upon certain analogies between these other various bodies and societies and Masonry , and that the prejudice ,

fancies and preconceived notions of the writers supply details , thus lending some degree of plausibility to their positions . The analogies will , however , upon careful scrutiny , be found to be accidental rather than an evidence of any connection between these bodies and Masonry . The evidence tending to show that Masonry originated from any one of those various bodies , or that there is any legitimate connection between them and Masonry , is

not conclusive , and the so-called histories of Masonry are on this account comparatively valueless . But the skepticism and hypercriticism of the writers among the detractors from and enemies of Freemasonry have likewise contributed to make the position of the Institution , historically considered , equivocal and uncertain . The would be historian who rejects evidence that ought to be considered is just as unreliable and untrustworthy as the one who accepts and affects to believe everything .

Before concluding this part of my discourse , permit me to express tbe opinion , that in the history of Masonry in the future there will be more light thrown upon its origin . Careful , painstaking , scholarly men within tbe ranks of the Craft are at work searcning the avenues of information for the purpose of securing

a knowledge of the facts , and reliable evidence with reference to the history of the Institution . Every character of evidence bearing upon the origin and subsequent growth of the Institution is being examined ancl arranged , and sooner or later there will be evolved an authentic history which shall be faithful in detail ancl