Ad01001

PERRIER = JOUET & Co ' s . CHAMPAGNES . FINEST VINTAGE RESERVE-CUVEES . THE FAVOURITE MASONIC BRAND . Agent—A . BOURSOT , 9 , Hart Street , Hark Lane , London .

Ad01002

ASSURANCE . HANGE EXC L ROYA INCORPORATE !) A . I ) . i ; 20 . Funds in Hand Exceed - - £ 5 , 250 , 000 Claims Paid Exceed - - , £ 42 , 000 , 000 FIRE , LIFE , SEA , ACCIDENTS , BURGLARY , EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY , ANNUITIES . The Corporation will act as : — EXKCUTOK OF WILLS , TRUSTEE OF WILLS AXI ) SETTLEMENTS . Apply for full Prospectus to Hie Secretary . Head Office : —EOYAL EXCHANGE , LONDON , E . G .

The Master's Obligations.

The Master ' s Obligations .

TttCMASONtt

hLUSTRATEP

.IN a recent issue of this journal we discussed the unwritten obligations of the Worshipful Master , and we now propose to consider the written code by which he is bound . It may be generall y taken for granted that he has

already made himself acquainted with the nature of some of his new responsibilities . During his Masonic career he has had the advantage of hearing the Antient Charges recited , and of witnessing a considerable portion of the ceremony of installation . But when these things take the personal application they often assume an entirely new form , and the

new Worshipful Master finds in them very often much that he never suspected before . The written obligations assume a threefold form . The Antient Charges explain his duty to the Craft at large , the S . O . in open lodge , his duty to his own lodge in particular , and the third obligation recites his

responsibilities in the new Order to which he is about to be admitted . The Antient Charges not onl y occur in the forefront of the installation ceremony , but thev are the very first words we read in the bound volume of the Constitutions . What is read to the Master elect is but a summary of what

immediately follows , which in its turn is a compilation of the charges and regulations that have bound Masons , whether operative or speculative , ever since the Craft underwent organization . Some of them are of great antiquity . They were first printed and made accessible in 1722 . Up to about

18 70 there were some thirty of these old manuscripts known to exisl , but Bro . Hughaii , in his preface in ( he " Ok !

Charges" ( 18 95 ) , states that there are now sixty-live 111 all , of which the oldest probably dates from 1390 . They are amongst the most treasured possessions of the Freemason , and claim our respect , whether by reason of their antiquity or their adaptability . Just as men and women , in spite of all the advance of modern thought , have never been able to

improve on the canons of conduct laid down in the Sermon on the Mount , nor indeed to lind any higher ideal , no higher standard has ever been placed before the Freemason than he will find laid down as soon as he opens the Book of Constitutions . He that runs may read , for there is little

enshrined in them that is not clear to the meanest comprehension . The fifteen Charges are conveniently arranged in three groups of five each , and to put it briefly these define his duty to his neighbour , to himself , and his duty in the new capacity he proposes to take upon himself . These last are all that is newfor he has heard the first ten epitomised in the Charge

, in the First Degree . Number ' eleven-practically asserts the unchangeability of the landmarks , and with respect to this it is permissible to regret that an official statement does not exist as to what are the landmarks . The last four are backed

up by provisions in the Book of Constitutions . I he obligation taken in open lodge does not contain much that is new , but there is one provision that has occasionally required interpretation . The Master elect promises that he will continue to discharge his new duties until a successor has been elected and installed in his stead . In foreign parts

there are many lodges in which there is little or no choice when a Master has to be elected , and the transfer of both Wardens during the year has very considerably limited the choice of a successor . Perhaps the only possible successor ' s qualification does not mature until after the appointed day , and then it is not unusual for an alteration of the by-laws to

be made to lit in with the emergency . But would the W . M . in the chair be justified in retaining his seat and refusing to allow the ordinary course to be modified ? Moreover the obligation is in apparent conflict with Article 135 , which limits continuance in the chair to two years , unless b y dispensation . Now the very word dispensation means a legalized illegality , and infers a possibility of refusal . Again

this is the first mention in a Masonic obligation of the landmarks , and this emphasizes the remark already made as to the desirability of an official statement of the landmarks . How can any brother pledge himself to an observance of something he can only guess at . The obligation of the Master is not a one-sided proceeding .

It is in the nature of a covenant . What are the duties of the brethren to him ? They are not put in the form of a S . O ., but they are none the less real and binding . The officers are not obligated , but as they may be said to emanate from the Master , what binds him binds them . Since the necessity of

perfect concord is so forcibl y impressed on the Initiate at his investiture , how much more necessary for the Officers . There must be perfect loyalty . Should , unhappily , the Master not come up to anticipation in the performance of his duty , then especially the Wardens must " close up " so as to present a

united front . Obedience must be of the active type and not passive . For instance , the Master ' s ruling , even if obviously wrong , must be acquiesced in , unless the protest be the preliminary to an appeal to higher authority .

Peace and harmony in the lodge room are far more essential than a rigid adherence to the trifles as to which many hyper-sensitive brethren are so especially careful . And even in the case suggested where an obviously wrong decision lays the Master open to be successfull y appealed against , is it not more Masonic , unless a rank injustice is

involved , to forego any such right . The self-iestraint shown by an aggrieved brother in a case of this kind affords a valuable object lesson that will permeate the whole lodge . The Master does not err intentionally . It may be ignorance , is it Masonic for a brother of superior knowledge to belittle his Master by showing it up ? He has to give a decision for

which there may be no precedent to guide him , and perhaps it is not the decision that he would give had he time for mature reflection . Is it fair for the brother who has that