  OUR MASONIC PENALIITIES

Penalties

by John Salmon, MPS

Many of the Brethren of our order 
believe, quite genuinely, that our Ma-
sonic Penalties have been handed down 
to us since the days of King Solomon. 
They are equally sure that the penalties 
were engraved on 'two tablets of stone,' 
therefore not one single word of them 
should ever be altered. There is also a 
very strong belief that King Solomon, in 
his own Lodge, practiced the same ritual 
as they do today.

The purpose of this paper is to trace 
from their origin to the present day, the 
history of our Masonic Penalties, and I 
promise that there will be no 'fairy tales. ' 
The majority of the statements that will 
be made in this paper can be proved by 
documents which are available at the 
majority of our Grand Lodge Libraries. 
When this is not the case, they will be 
based on quotation from " Masonic 
Scholars of Today. "

Let us now turn our attention to some 
historical facts.

Of the 113 copies of our "Old Charges, 
(a.k.a. Old Constitutions) of which ap-
proximately 75 date before the penalties 
were included in our Obligation, not one 
makes any reference to the type of pcnalty in use 
today, nor to any other type of a physical 
penalty.

"The Early Masonic Catechisms" by 
D. Knoop, G. P. Jones and D. Hamer 
was first published in 1943, was revised 
and enlarged in 1963 and required a 
further reprint in 1975. This book listed 
20 exposures. The first 13 date between 
1696 and 1726. Of these 13, not one 
includes a penalty in the Obligation.

Of the remaining 7,dated between
1727 and 1750, five list a penalty in the 
Obligation which is uery similar with that in 
usc today.

   The Edinburgh Register House
      MS. of 1696. (E.R.H.):

This Manuscript, along with "The 
Chetwode Crawley MS," c. 1700; "The 
Kevan MS," c. 1714; and "The Haugh-
foot Fragment," dated 1702, belong to 
what is known today among Masonic 
Historians as "The Edinburgh Group of 
MSS. " They all originated from a com-
mon source even though the arrange-
ment of their contents, phraseology and 
spelling differ, showing that they were 
not copied from each other.
Of the above four " The Edinburgh 
Register House MS," dated 1696 is the 
oldest surviving description of our Ma-
sonic ceremonies of its day. As the Ob-
ligation in the E.R.H., C.C. and the 
Kevan MSS are all very similar in their 
content, I will list that as for the E . R . H . 
MS only.

        "Obligation"

"By God himself and you shall an-
swer to God when you shall stand 
naked before him, at the great day, 
you shall not reveal any part of what 
you shall hear or see at this time 
whither by word or write nor put it in 
write at any time nor draw it with the 
point of a sword, or any other instru-
ment upon the snow or sand, nor shall 
you speak of it but with an entered 
Mason, so help you God. "

So here we have it, proof positive, that 
in the late 1600s and the early 1700s there
was no such thing as a penalty in our 
obligation.

It should be noted that prior to taking 
the "Oath" (Obligation), the candidate 
must promise secrecy. After he has taken his 
Obligation he is removed from the 
Lodge, where he is taught, among other 
things, a penalty, much like ourprescnt day 
one if he should break his promise of 
secrecy.
The ritual goes on as follows:--
"After he has taken the Oath he is 
removed out of the company 
(Lodge),...he is to learn from the 
Mason the manner of making his Due 
Guard which is the sign and the pos-
tures and words of his entrance which 
is as follows,...here come I the 
youngest and last entered appren-
tice...under no less pain than having 
my tongue cut out under my chin and 
being buried, within the flood mark 
where no man shall know, then he 
makes the sign again with drawing his 
hand under his chin alongst his throat 
which denotes that it be cut in case he 
should break his word. "

Under questions to be asked, along 
with the answers to prove yourself a 
Mason, No. 3 was as follows:--

"Q. 3. What is the first point? Ans. 
Tell me the first point Ill tell you the
second, the first is to heil and conceal, 
second, under no less pain, which is 
then cutting of your throat, for you 
must make that sign when you say 
that. "

This should prove, beyond doubt, that 
from our oldest Masonic ritual we find 
not only was there no penalty within the 
"Oath (Obligation), but that our present 
E.A. penal sign was at one time used as 
both a punishment if he should break his 
word and as a Mode Of Recognition. It 
will be shown later that this "Mode of 
Recognition" was "relocated " and "in-
serted into our Obligation" where today, 
we know it as the "penal sign" of an 
Entered Apprentice.

Of the first 13 ritual exposures printed 
in the "Early Masonic Catechisms," 
which are dated prior to 1727, the Ob-
ligation follows along the same line and 
there are no penalties included in these 
obligations. Let us therefore now turn 
our attention to the exposures of 1727 
and 1730.

            A Masons Confession, ?1727:

This exposure was printed in " The 
Scots Magazine, 1755/6, and claims to 
represent the workings of a Scottish 
operative Lodge of about 1727. If this is 
correct, it is the oldest dated Masonic 
ritual that we know of which includes a 
penalty in our Obligation (or Oath), 
which was as follows:--

"As I shall answer before God at 
that great day. . . under the pain of 
having my tongue taken out from
beneath my cheeks, and my heart taken
out from beneath my left oxter, and my
body buried within the seamark, where 
it ebbs and,flows twice in the twenty-
four hours."

We can now say, with reasonable cer-
tainty, that it was in 1727 that our present
penalty was 'repositioned ' from the general 
narratiue of our ritual to the Obligation. But not 
only that, the penalty has now grown from a 
uery simple tongue cut out and buried within the 
flood mark (1696), to that which is included 
in the "Masons Confession" above (1727).

       The Wllkinson MS C. 1727

This exposure, said to have been writ-
ten in 1727 is very unique in that it 
includes an early version of our First 
Degree Lecture, along with the Tradi-
tional History. There are in total 79 
Questions and Answers along with an 
Entered Apprentice Obligation not un-
like our present one. The penalty for this 
Obligation was as follows:--

      "All this under no less a penalty than
      to have my throat cut, my tongue
      taken from the roof of my mouth, my
      heart plucked from under my left
      breast, then to be buried in the sands
      of the sea, the length of a cable rope
      from shore, where the tide ebbs and
      flows twice in 24 hours my body to be
      burnt to ashes, my ashes to be scat-
      tered upon the face of the earth, so
      that there shall be no more re-
      memberence of me among Masons. "

We have now just gone through the 
Second Version of our Masonic Penalty. 
It should be noted that the penalty has 
parts added to it which were not included 
in the "Masons Confession" version of 
1727. That part of the "Body Burned to 
Ashes" etc. being new.

      Samuel Prlchards"Masonry
        Dlssected, 1730:

This exposure, printed in the Daily 
Journal of 20 Oct. 1730 is often referred 
to by Masonic Scholars of today as the 
date of the Introduction of Penalties 
within the Obligation. It is also the date 
of the introduction of the three degrees 
in the ritual. Prior to this there was only 
one degree shown.

We cant say for certain that a penalty 
was introduced into the Obligation in 
1727 as these dates are only approxi-
mate, but we do know for certain that 
"Masonry Dissected" was published in 
1730.

This publication was also the date for 
three separate and distinct degrees, with 
a separate ritual listed for each degree. 
The Obligation shown is included in the 
E.A.D. only and is word for word the same
as that shown for the Wilkinson MS. of 
1727.

As far as we know there were no further 
exposures printed in England between
1730 and 1760.Let us therefore turn our 
attention to Masonry in France prior to
1760.

        The Early French Exposures,
             1737-1751:

This book, edited and compiled by our 
late Bro. Harry Carr lists 12 French Ex-
posures dated between 1737 and 1751. 
They include three separate degrees with 
an Obligation in the E.A.D. only. The 
penalty is very similar to the "Wilkinson 
MS of 1727. What these 12 exposures 
show us is that at least until 1751, French
Masonry still included the penalties in 
the E.A. Obligation only. Therefore, let 
us direct our attention to the 1760 expo-
sures.

        Three Dlstlnct Knocks, 1760:

This exposure, printed in 1760, was the 
first of a whole set of English exposures 
which included a penalty in each of our 
three degrees. This publication is unique 
been once again changed where it now 
appears as three separate penalties, with 
one being allotted to each degree. They 
were as follows:--

"E.A.D. Penalty"
" . . . Than to have my throat cut 
across, my tongue torn out by the 
root, and that to be buried in the sands 
of the sea, at low-watermark, a cables 
length from the shore, where the tide 
ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four 
hours; . . . "

"F.C.D.Penalty
" . . . Than to have my heart torn 
from under my naked left breast, and 
given to the vultures of the air as a 
prey, . . .

M.M.D.Penalty
"...Than to have my body severed 
in two, the one part carried to the 
south, the other to the north, my 
bowels burnt to ashes in the south, 
and the ashes to be scattered before 
the four winds, that such a vile wretch 
as I should be remembered no more 
amongst any manner of men, (partic-
ularly Masons). . . "
Our penalties have once again gone 
through a change. Not only are there 
now three separate penalties, but the 
wording of each one has also been 
slightly changed.

       The Unlon of the Two Grand
       Lodges of England In 1813:

At the union of these two G.Ls. the 
ritual was "standardized " and a nonphysical 
penalty was included in the E. A. D., which was 
as follows:--

"...or that of being branded as a 
wilfully perjured individual, void of 
all moral worth, and totally unfit to be 
received into this or any other worthy 
and warranted Lodge, or the society 
of men who prize honor and virtue 
above the external advantages of rank 
and fortune. . . ' '

So here we have a further change to our 
Masonic Penalties. We now have not 
only our three physical penalties, but a 
further change has been made with the 
introduction of a nonphysical penalty.

       Moral Impllcatlons:

I have endeavored to show in this paper 
that many changes have been made to 
both the location and wording of the 
penalties in our Obligation.

Should the penalties be retained in the 
Obligation? Is antiquity a good sound 
reason for doing so? Perhaps we should 
consider our "Moral Implications" to see 
if this would not be a much better reason
to "relocate " them to that part of our ritual 
where the candidate is entrusted with the 
secrets.

Should we in fact retain a form of 
punishment that, Masonically, has never 
been inflicted which no one legally would 
be allowed to inflict - and allfor revealing
certain secrets which have long since ceased to
extst.

Should we ask a candidate to repeat an 
Obligation that has physical penalties 
included, especially after assuring him 
that the Obligation contains nothing that 
is incompatible with his moral, civil or 
religious duties?
Should we ask a candidate to kneel 
before an Altar place his naked right 
hand on the Volume of the Sacred Law 
and invoke the help of God in an Obliga-
tion that contains physical penalties?

Summary:
I hope I have shown in this paper that 
our penalties have gone through "numer-
ous " changes, which are as follows:-- 
(a) from an Obligation without a 
penalty (pre 1727) 
(b) to an Obligation with three 
penalties included (1727-1759) 
(c) to three Obligations with a 
separate penalty in each ( 1760-
1813) 
(d) to a non-physical penalty in-
cluded in the E.A.D. only (1813) 
(e) and many changes in the 
wording of the penalties between 
1727 and 1813.

And further:--

( 1 ) In 1893 the G. L . of Ireland 
changed the way the penalties 
were explained to the candidate. 
(2) In 1966 the G.L. of Scotland 
recommended that the penalties 
be removed from the Obligation. 
(3) In 1986 the G.L.of England 
removed the penalties from the 
Obligation and explained them 
elsewhere. 
(Here we have the three mother G. Ls. of 
the world finding that the "Moral Impli-
cations are more important.) 
(4) The majority of the G.Ls. of 
Europe have never included 
penalties in the Obligation. 
(5) In Canada the G.Ls. of Mani-
toba and Quebec have made 
changes in how the penalties are 
explained. 
(6) The G. Ls. of Australia and 
New Zealand have removed the 
penalties and explained them 
elsewhere. 
(7) Several G.Ls. in the U.S. 
have also removed the penalties 
from the Obligation and ex-
plained them elsewhere.

The majority of the G.Ls. which have 
made the change have relocated the penalties 
from the Obligation to that part of the
ritual where the " secrets are explained to 
the candidate so that he will understand 
the meaning of the signs. "

The Philalethes, April 1992
