- I don't claim to understand the York Rite well. I do understand that the 'Ancients' considered the Royal Arch Degree to be a part of Craft Masonry, but I'm given to understand that in the York (American) Rite there are other Degrees between the Master Mason and the Royal Arch? Or does the R…
- I don't claim to understand the York Rite well. I do understand that the 'Ancients' considered the Royal Arch Degree to be a part of Craft Masonry, but I'm given to understand that in the York (American) Rite there are other Degrees between the Master Mason and the Royal Arch? Or does the Royal Arch Degree directly follow the Master Mason?
- The Scottish Rite has always been a great love of mine. The traditions of the Degrees, and how it all came to be are quite well known and documented, but the Governance of the Rite is much less clear. While there is the official history of both the SJ and the NMJ, both seemed to go out of existence at points after founding, both fought bitter battles, perhaps unfairly against Cerneau, and the SJ had all manner of battles in New Orleans as well. Things have been well settled for a very long time of course, but they don't seem to have been easy at all in the early days.
And of course the whole bit with Frederick the Great. Alas.
- OES, as I understand it, a three body system consisting of OES, Queen of the South, and Amaranth. Now all divorced from each other and what was intended to be a Rite now three completely different organizations. I don't doubt but that there is some extremely interesting history there for the person who wants to explore it.
Concerning the York Rite, in this case, the Royal Arch, there are indeed three degrees preceding the actual Degree of the Royal Arch. The Mark Master degree is also an 18th Century degree, and from what I understand, there are Mark Master Lodges in England, which is one of the reasons why the English refer to our York Rite as the American Rite.
Another of those Chapter degrees is the degree of Past Master. In the 18th Century, in some Lodges, you had to be a Past Master to receive the Royal Arch, which is the rest of the story of the Master Mason degree. In some cases, some Brothers were able to "pass the chair" and get the RA degree without presiding over a Masonic Lodge. I believe this is one of the causes of the Schism, but I don't know for sure, as there's a ritual story and a real story, and I don't know if they're both the same. Now, in America, the PM degree in the York Rite is a ceremony of investiture, and is colloquially called the "virtual Past Master" degree, and is simpler, but very similar, to the degree we received shortly after our first terms as WM's in our Lodges.
From a ritualistic standpoint, the Royal Arch degree answers questions that might arise from the MM degree ritual. Attentive candidates who receive the RA degree will no doubt go, A-ha! from time to time as some key aspects to the drama of OGMHA becomes more clear. Then you do the research and find out that the degree isn't a 20th century afterthought, it was developed around the same era as the MM drama itself and was associated with it. Therefore, it is my opinion that anyone who is a serious into the historical and ritualistic aspects of Freemasonry should receive at least the Royal Arch degree of the York Rite. If you are at least a 14th degree SR Mason, it is similar, as I think it's in the 12th or 13th degree (I can't remember.) But for those Master Masons who are not members of any concordant body, I strongly recommend the Royal Arch degree.
I've read the same as you have concerning the early OES, and its 3 'degrees.' All that broke up before the turn of the 20th Century. I've heard (but don't know for sure) that the Prince Hall version of the OES still has the Queen of the South.
Just a few thoughts, in no particular order, and probably not important, but they spring to mind.
- As you say, the UGLE defines Ancient Craft Masonry as the Three Degrees, and no more, including the Royal Arch. An artful dodge that allowed the union to take place.
But from that, given that there are two additional Degrees in the York (American) Rite between the MM and the RA, we could not assume that a guy could receive the Three, including the RA, and have that entire experience be Ancient Craft Masonry. Because there are the other two slipped in there.
If of course we were overly concerned about the UGLE. Personally, I think that it lost its way quite some time ago, most visibly with its change to our traditional Square and Compass identifier.
- There are popular, contemporary Masonic historians who claim that at the founding of the Grand Lodge system in 1717 there were only two Degrees, that of the EA and FC, and that the MM came later.
In my view, that belief holds zero water. Without the MM Degree, Masonry wouldn't be Masonry. It is the fundamental essence of Freemasonry.
What I believe is that the EA and FC Degrees were conferred upon the general membership, just as we now confer the EA, FC, and MM Degrees on the general membership.
That in those earliest days of the Grand Lodge system, the MM Degree was reserved for those who were in fact Masters of their Lodge. When a Mason moved into the East, at that time he was made a Master Mason.
Once the change was made so that all Three Degrees were conferred on the general membership, then it would have made perfect sense to restrict the RA to those who were in fact Masters of their Lodge.
But then once more, there was desire to more openly confer the RA, so the Virtual PM made that possible, and it is very likely that out of that grew our PM Degree. I think it should be pointed out though that the PM Degree isn't done everywhere, not even everywhere within this Jurisdiction as far as I know.
- Yes, it is my understanding that the Queen of the South is still practiced in some other Jurisdictions.
Your comment brings up a number of thoughts:
- I don't claim to understand the York Rite well. I do understand that the 'Ancients' considered the Royal Arch Degree to be a part of Craft Masonry, but I'm given to understand that in the York (American) Rite there are other Degrees between the Master Mason and the Royal Arch? Or does the Royal Arch Degree directly follow the Master Mason?
- The Scottish Rite has always been a great love of mine. The traditions of the Degrees, and how it all came to be are quite well known and documented, but the Governance of the Rite is much less clear. While there is the official history of both the SJ and the NMJ, both seemed to go out of existence at points after founding, both fought bitter battles, perhaps unfairly against Cerneau, and the SJ had all manner of battles in New Orleans as well. Things have been well settled for a very long time of course, but they don't seem to have been easy at all in the early days.
And of course the whole bit with Frederick the Great. Alas.
- OES, as I understand it, a three body system consisting of OES, Queen of the South, and Amaranth. Now all divorced from each other and what was intended to be a Rite now three completely different organizations. I don't doubt but that there is some extremely interesting history there for the person who wants to explore it.
Concerning the York Rite, in this case, the Royal Arch, there are indeed three degrees preceding the actual Degree of the Royal Arch. The Mark Master degree is also an 18th Century degree, and from what I understand, there are Mark Master Lodges in England, which is one of the reasons why the English refer to our York Rite as the American Rite.
Another of those Chapter degrees is the degree of Past Master. In the 18th Century, in some Lodges, you had to be a Past Master to receive the Royal Arch, which is the rest of the story of the Master Mason degree. In some cases, some Brothers were able to "pass the chair" and get the RA degree without presiding over a Masonic Lodge. I believe this is one of the causes of the Schism, but I don't know for sure, as there's a ritual story and a real story, and I don't know if they're both the same. Now, in America, the PM degree in the York Rite is a ceremony of investiture, and is colloquially called the "virtual Past Master" degree, and is simpler, but very similar, to the degree we received shortly after our first terms as WM's in our Lodges.
From a ritualistic standpoint, the Royal Arch degree answers questions that might arise from the MM degree ritual. Attentive candidates who receive the RA degree will no doubt go, A-ha! from time to time as some key aspects to the drama of OGMHA becomes more clear. Then you do the research and find out that the degree isn't a 20th century afterthought, it was developed around the same era as the MM drama itself and was associated with it. Therefore, it is my opinion that anyone who is a serious into the historical and ritualistic aspects of Freemasonry should receive at least the Royal Arch degree of the York Rite. If you are at least a 14th degree SR Mason, it is similar, as I think it's in the 12th or 13th degree (I can't remember.) But for those Master Masons who are not members of any concordant body, I strongly recommend the Royal Arch degree.
I've read the same as you have concerning the early OES, and its 3 'degrees.' All that broke up before the turn of the 20th Century. I've heard (but don't know for sure) that the Prince Hall version of the OES still has the Queen of the South.
Thank you for this additional information.
Just a few thoughts, in no particular order, and probably not important, but they spring to mind.
- As you say, the UGLE defines Ancient Craft Masonry as the Three Degrees, and no more, including the Royal Arch. An artful dodge that allowed the union to take place.
But from that, given that there are two additional Degrees in the York (American) Rite between the MM and the RA, we could not assume that a guy could receive the Three, including the RA, and have that entire experience be Ancient Craft Masonry. Because there are the other two slipped in there.
If of course we were overly concerned about the UGLE. Personally, I think that it lost its way quite some time ago, most visibly with its change to our traditional Square and Compass identifier.
- There are popular, contemporary Masonic historians who claim that at the founding of the Grand Lodge system in 1717 there were only two Degrees, that of the EA and FC, and that the MM came later.
In my view, that belief holds zero water. Without the MM Degree, Masonry wouldn't be Masonry. It is the fundamental essence of Freemasonry.
What I believe is that the EA and FC Degrees were conferred upon the general membership, just as we now confer the EA, FC, and MM Degrees on the general membership.
That in those earliest days of the Grand Lodge system, the MM Degree was reserved for those who were in fact Masters of their Lodge. When a Mason moved into the East, at that time he was made a Master Mason.
Once the change was made so that all Three Degrees were conferred on the general membership, then it would have made perfect sense to restrict the RA to those who were in fact Masters of their Lodge.
But then once more, there was desire to more openly confer the RA, so the Virtual PM made that possible, and it is very likely that out of that grew our PM Degree. I think it should be pointed out though that the PM Degree isn't done everywhere, not even everywhere within this Jurisdiction as far as I know.
- Yes, it is my understanding that the Queen of the South is still practiced in some other Jurisdictions.