Some Masonic Observations.

without authority is unauthorised . It it is not authorised it is violate of Masonic law . There mxy be exceptions to this role , but , as a rule , it is so easily comprehended as to leave bufc little doubt as to its scope and etlicacy . With an

earnest desire , dear brethren , to maintain the " established " in our " Work " and " Ritaa ' , " wo have , wifch profound respect for tbe views of onr brethren , ventured to offer these reflections . Devoted to the welfare of onr

Fraternity , wo trust to tho appieciation hy our brethren of our motive in thus addressing them . Wo may be pardoned for over anxiety . The causes for ifc aie often so insidious as to pass without notice . Wo know how ollbctively the suggestion is made thafc the

novelty desired is really of no importance because it does not violate Masonic law or usage . It is plausibl y claimed thafc the landmark , if there is one , does nofc prohibit so

slight a change . Let us remember , dear brefc uen , thafc it is only comparatively in modern times thafc written constitutions aud other authority for Masonic government exist .

Whatever may bo said AS to the first manuscripts , or written or printed Masonic papers , wo are inclined to g ive sanction to tho Matthew Cooke manuscript , in the fifteenth century , ns entitled to precedence . It is in its ;! f Masonic in character and entitled to bo so regaided ,

because it contains what is now lawfully printed in constitutions , bye-laws and "charges" to elected Officers of Lodges . These " charges" chiefly relate to tho civil duties of Freemnsons .

But neither of these manuscripts aro of any authority , or indeed , have any relation to the proposition we now seek to suggest—that printing Masonic " work " or ritual is forbidden to tho Craft . So that tradition , oral teaching , is the only method of lawfull y importing Mason ' c knowledge .

The tradition was the only method of communicating Masonic law . Ifc is one of the remarkable characteristics of Freemasonry that its principles , its work , its laws , were so communicated as to have , hy this most wonderful manner , remained down to this day . It proves how carefully thoso

principles were taught . Ifc proves how earnest and eager the Craftsmen in the aforetime wore to learn and to know . It proves what strict measures wero adopted to teach the initiates these absolutely essential , fonndation , inherent laws of tho Fraternity .

The evidence we have proves that writing , and all like means of formulating our esoteric work and ritual , were nofc used , as these means wore possessed but by tho very few who had their custody . The essential , primary lesson of Freemasonry was silence to all but thow entitled to

know . Even to-day it is so . The Lodgo work proves the truth and force , emphasizes without a single exceptionfor exceptions are impossible under our laws—tbat this is , and was , and must ever be , a landmark—silence . That word " silence " expressed a symbol . There is a wonderful meaning in the teaching of silence .

If , then , Masonry was not , in the beginning , dependent on written teachings , if its usages , customs , and landmarks were only to bo known by oral communication , ifc is no argument to say that , as landmarks aro not put in print , there is a doubt as to what is to ho construed or accepted as a landmark .

Serions students of even written history know tbat , careful as authors were to obtain evidence from even the earliest periods of written language , for making statements of events , yet ifc is by tradition that much of true history is preserved .

It is moro reasonable to believe that the consensus of Masonic tradition , as to which the memory of man runs not to the contrary , is the truer exposition of Masonic law and landmark .

. To test this view , the facts of this very day may aid in presenting our contention to the acceptance of our brethren . If , for example , all that is said and dono in Lodges of the Grand Jurisdictions was printed is authoritative whafc

, would be thought of such a diverse , unintelli gible , and confused compilation ? Yefc tho traditions which are known to be from the past knowledge of our" Craffc will not fail to cxpl . in what is a landmark . The ' teaching by the ear is more effective , best concentrated , moro diront . lv

c ° nveyed to tho mind of the hearer than through the eye . We are prepared for the suggestion tint what is called the ' English language" has undergone changes in its etymology since Chancer . But the serere student of

philology will be assured fchat the wor 1 . * , a > v ovli , havo nct been changed as to tluir original sigaifioa'ior . It is very difliculo to comprehend th © iiiwuirig of words

that are not in general use . The growth of lanjur . ge is like any othor growth . Cultha ion may ioi { . r > vo the original plant , but its distinctive charaiiunsoics aro nofc obliterated .

A lino of Chaucer in hia besfc styleand a lino of Macaulay aro both English . Growth has developed more refined , ornate , and polished construction , bufc that is the effect of thc larger scops which the language has attained . Tho taste- is cultivated . The meat which the navago prepares

for ln ' s food and the meat which thu t-piuure prefers are both the same substance — meat . Therefore in Masonry wc find that tho words wo claim to h J unalterable are , and must ever be , expressive of their original meaning .

They are as recognisable now as in tho earliest of days . Tradition is not impaired , nor its message hidden . lis words aro as well understood by ns as by our fathers who first , used them .

Wo are constrained to believe that , so far as l ' roemasonry is concerned , oral teachings aro moro reliable than fcho notions , prejudices , and imperfect knowledge , even if printed , of tlioso who profess to he standard authority .

A plain story told to an earnest listener is moro certain to bo understood , aud more correctly repeated , than by tho reader of the same story , whoso interest is diluted by tho printed page .

What do wo see to-day ? The oral revelations made to those who afterwards wrote whafc God taught to the

fathers are now disputed by some who accept modern reason for original truth . Modern knowledge , as it is called , is proud that it knows so much . Wisdom is humble thafc ifc knows no more . Hundreds of centuries have concentrated tho teachings of wisdom .

You may not , dear brethren , accept these suggestions . Bufc believe , that to prevent the introduction of novelties in our work aud esoteric teachings is regarded ns so imperatively demanded fchat the very perpetuation of Freemasonry must depend on effective efforts against these aliens aud , strangers .

Would it not bo truer wisdom to accept what is claimed by acknowledged thoughtful teachers to bo landmarks than fco try to destroy them by seeking superficial objections which tend to deny them ? What is thus to bo gained ?

Iconoclasts may rejoice at the effect of such destruction , but what havo thoy to set up on the empty pedestals but tbe fragments , the ruins scattered over "the floor , " and , it may be , covering the golden rays of our " Great Light . " It is observed that in most of our Grand Lod

Jurisdictions , from time fco time , propositions aro submitted to change , alter or amend their Ahiman Eezons or Constitutions . There is always a peril in disturbing the organic law of any institution . Attempts to change the constitution of

a State are easily made , but thc results of such efforts often produce moro serions evils than those sought to be remedied . The organic law of Freemasonry is established . We know that ifc may happen that tbe existing constitution is rigid and cannot be made flexible to justify some desired

change , for most probably a temporary benefit or a special object . To alter the established rule for such reasons is making a constitution only a rule any resolution of Grand Lodge can change . Then why ordain what in its character is to be regarded as fixed , if it is nofc to be maintained as fixed and settled ?

It is so easy to propose alterations or amendments . Bufc new wine in old bottles is dangerous , for the wine is made worthless , or tbe bottles may be destroyed . A provision may be inserted in a fixed faw which , until ifc is administered , does nofc show its operation to be

destructive of other provisions which remain unchanged . Would it not be safer to suffer the evils , if so bo thoy are evils , we havo , than " fly to others wo know not of ?" Whafc would be the condition of mankind if every theorist , or expert in natural philosophy , could alter , amend , or

change the fixed laws of nature to suit his notions and afford , according to his conceptions , greater benefits . Surely the last state of man would be worse than the / ir . sr . In a far more limited degree this may be true of these

amendments to whafc ought to be a fixed law of Masonry . And , again , without desiring to trench upon forbidden ground , what advantage has come from tho efforts to correct , amend , and change the wiit en words of tbo " Great Li ght" by profane theorists or experts ; it Avas