QUESTIONS AS TO YORK AND SCOTTISH RITE.

THE AMERICAN FREEMASON
MAY 1914

THE article contributed by Brother Tait, given first place in last issue, raises questions more easily asked than answered.  This able writer puts very squarely, and very fairly, the differences in form and methods between the York and Scottish Rite systems of Freemasonry, at least so far as these have showing in the United States. At least one contention of this editor is borne out by a brother who writes with a knowledge of both systems: that one is essentially and truly Masonic, in that it is based upon the principle of representation of the constituent bodies; that its rulers are amenable for their actions to those from whom power is derived.  Such principle is American and Masonic.  The other system, still taking the definitions supplied by Brother Tait, is oligarchical, if not autocratic, self-perpetuating in power and in no wise responsible to those governed, and from whom the revenues are derived.

I know there are many men, well-informed beyond the ordinary, who can present excellent reasons for a belief in the superiority of such method of government.  These will argue for a continuity and a coherency of policy as against the vacillations and weaknesses of changing and popularly-chosen leaders they present the strongest defense of the Scottish Rite system. I am pointed by one such brother to the difference in strength and power in the world exhibited by England and Germany.  In the one, as my correspondent writes, government is the sport of parties, while the larger interests of the Empire are more and more neglected.  The other, ruled by an oligarchy, though under the name of a constitutional monarchy, is able to hold in leash the restless elements, and to concentrate all efforts and all energies of the people to a constant increase in the strength and influence of the nation in world politics.  Yet, to my mind, this very argument is based upon a fallacy.  The weaknesses of English political and governmental methods, are really a part of the education of a great democracy.  Spite of flamboyant orators, the people have not yet learned to exercise self-government, yet they are learning, as we may hope, from the mistakes being made.  Because the masses have not yet attained to control in moments of crisis, and are apt to be swept by whirlwinds of passion or panics of fear, gives no sufficient reason why the whole power and responsibility of rule should be placed unreservedly in the hands of a few men.  And, still further to pursue the contrast presented between two great nations, it must be remembered that Germany's system is imposed by geographical conditions.  The first requisite for existence of the empire is the maintaining of a fighting machine of such strength as to impose fear upon others beyond its frontiers.  Germany is surrounded by potential foes, and the military system of government is perhaps, for the time being, its sole salvation.  But who is there among us so pessimistic as to hold that present adjustments between the nations, the legacies of centuries of wrong, can not or will not be bettered.  Though there be wars and rumours of war, the day of autocracies and oligarchies and military despotisms is passing to its close.  In place of these will come true governments of the people, under which men shall learn to rule themselves, and thus, despite slips and pitfalls innumerable, they will work to their destiny, and a realization of the brotherhood of man.

Now I am not prepared to say that the Masonic oligarchy is without purpose, and utterly bad.  It may, also, be bridging over some present gulf, and preparing the way toward a fraternity of the future. Only my limited observation of the Scottish Rite system has not shown any attempt to educate members for such advancement.  Instead it would appear to an outsider that the few in control are more than ever resolved on the close corporation, asking only that adherents shall pay over the money, without even a glimmer of knowledge as to how the funds are expended.

I am fixed in opinion that had the original design of Albert Pike been carried, and the Scottish Rite made and maintained as a place of honour, the situation would have been far different.  Had these degrees, whatever their Masonic or historical or philosophical worth, been conferred only on brothers who had abundantly proven their quality and their worth to the Craft, the Rite would have high place in the estimation of all.  It would not then have been necessary to bribe and coerce Grand Lodges into acknowledgment of its place in the Masonic system.  And the long years that have been filled with quarrels among brothers would not have, had place in our history.  But from such high ideals as were held by the great reorganizer of the Scottish Rite and his immediate colleagues there has been a vast lowering.  The recruiting for the bodies of the Rite begins as soon as one has taken his E. A. degree.  The young brother is rushed through to a place of mere numerical advancement, and with an altogether false conception of his own position in Masonry.  It may be that for the man "duly and truly prepared" by previous study, and with a real knowledge of Masonry as it should be taught in the Lodge, there is, as I am told, "a philosophical content" to the degrees of the Rite not obtainable elsewhere.  But the big classes that are ground through the Consistories in about three days have about as much knowledge of the teachings and tenets of the S.R. as they possess of the mysteries and morals of the Symbolic Lodge.  But few of these could visit in other than their own particular Lodge.

There is danger in such a situation - a danger not sensed, or lightly regarded or altogether ignored by very many who certainly have the good of Masonry at heart.  This increasing host of initiates, taking the three degrees without consideration of their meanings, seeing in them so many stepping-stones to a goal of whose purpose or position they have neither knowledge or care - these, instead of being a source of strength to Freemasonry, constitute today its greatest weakness, and may easily in the time to come be its greatest curse.

"There were kings before Agamemmnon," and men far wiser and with greater reach of vision in the Supreme Council of the Southern Jurisdiction of the Rite than those who have succeeded to their honours.  Twenty years ago, immediately after the death of Albert Pike, I find that some of the best of his colleagues inaugurated a movement to change the form of government from a close corporation, self-perpetuating and irresponsible, to a system more in harmony with the time and with American ideas and ideals.  The movement failed, because some others could not forget their own personal interests for the sake of the common good.  Of this present writer it can be said - has indeed been often said - that he can not write intelligently of these matters, because not a member of the Rite in question.  But the same can not be said of the late T. S. Parvin, who until the time of his death was Inspector-General for Iowa.  Of him it can be asserted that he was among the best and ablest men that American Masonry has produced.

I have before me a rare pamphlet, published at Washington in September, 1893.  This contains a number of articles contributed by Brother Parvin to the Masonic Constellation of St. Louis.  A brief introduction is also given, signed by J.L. Dobbin, 32 degree, Wm. Oscar Roome, 33 degree and A.H. Holt, 32 degree, which sets forth the position of the pamphlet's author, and the endorsement of the committee, as follows:

He is opposed to the life-tenure of office; to the manner in which the Supreme Council is at present constituted and self-perpetuated; to taxation without representation; to the present exorbitant rate of taxation, and the extravagant expenditure of revenues.  As the position occupied by Brother Parvin is so nearly analogous to that of the Representatives in Convention assembled at Washington, D.C., in October last, they are reproduced in their present form with Brother Parvin's consent.

The distinguished writer of the articles mentioned was not a disappointed man, and therefore anxious for a revolution in methods.  In the Supreme Council he held the offices of Grand Chamberlain and afterwards Minister of State.  This latter high position he voluntarily resigned, that he might be more free to express his opinions.  He also twice tendered his resignation of the office of active 33d, Inspector-General of Iowa, but this was not accepted by the body.  At the same time, and for like reasons, Fellows, of Louisiana, another of the best and brainiest of the Supreme Council, offered his resignation as Inspector-General, but was not allowed by his colleagues to retire from active participation.  At that time the agitation for reforms in the government of the Rite was not a new subject.  It was not, as now, a popular organization.  It was recruited from those who knew most of Masonry, rather than from those who had least acquaintance therewith.  The discussions of the time were characterized by courtesy, by high-mindedness and a knowledge of what would best serve the interests of the entire Craft.  Brother Parvin informs us that the general subject of reforms, taking up the points enumerated above, "had been quietly discussed among the active members of the Supreme Council for several years past.  More than this, the late General Pike himself, in more than one of his allocutions, referred to the subject-matters we shall present, and gave to them his most unqualified endorsement."

It is surely no unpardonable sin for one, twenty years after, to recite again something of the arguments then brought up by men wise beyond their generation.  Yet is that daring individual who now ventures to doubt the perfection of the system of the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction convict at once of heresy and of desire to inflict injury upon the whole fraternity.  Conditions since the time of Parvin, Fellows and these others have gone from bad to worse.  Under the rule of lesser men the organization has diverged further and further from true Masonry.

Writing in support of his resolution, presented in the Supreme Council in 1892, urging an abolition of "life-tenure," Brother Parvin said: "Inasmuch as the Scottish Rite is an outgrowth from, or engrafted upon, the York Rite, why should it be so very peculiar, and depart so far from the original plan of Masonry on which it is based?" Further on he wrote: "The members of the Supreme Council are not chosen by the members of the Consistories, as the members of Grand Lodges are chosen by members of the subordinate bodies; but they are in a measure self-created by the higher body, and have no interest in common with the subordinate bodies, to whom in no sense are they responsible." And still again: "There is not a single jurisdiction holding allegiance to the Supreme Council, in which there are not private members whose education, knowledge, experience and service are equal to the active thirty-third of that jurisdiction, and in many cases superior; yet the one is in for life, and the others are out until death shall open the way."

At the time the articles were written the entire membership of the Rite did not exceed four thousand, and these in a way picked men.  They then held no claim to the recognition of Grand Lodges, and acknowledged dependence upon so-called York Masonry.  But since that time the caudal appendage of the Craft has acquired sufficient weight and momentum to pretty effectually swing the entire dog.  The dangers that T. S. Parvin saw looming in the future, and to which he so earnestly directed the attention of his fellows, are now upon Masonry.  But because the bulk of our brothers are ignorant or indifferent or curiously self-satisfied, they are not perceived.  In more than one Grand Jurisdiction the Masonry of Lodges and Grand Lodges has fallen to a state of utter subserviency to this Rite, "engrafted," as says the writer quoted, "upon the body of Masonry." The chief officers are sometimes chosen - let us hope not often, by means of "tricks that are dark and ways that are strange," with an eye largely to their concurrence with the plans and desires of a little group of men utterly alien in thought and methods to real Masonry and real Americanism.

Twenty years ago reform might have come into the Rite from within; it may be now too late for those who are earnestly moving in some of the Consistories to accomplish what they desire.  To be effective now reform must be forced from without.  It is necessary for Lodges and Grand Lodges to again assert their supremacy, and to curb the arrogance of the Supreme Council.  It should be made a Masonic offense for recruiting in the Lodges, among immature Masons, for this so-called "higher" body of Masonry.  Require, as in some of the European bodies, that a definite and sufficient time shall elapse before the Master Mason can seek for further degrees of any kind.  The body or, bodies worth while will not lose by such a provision; will gain, because those coming into their ranks will be qualified to proceed.  If such a law of Grand Lodge interfered with the revenues of a Supreme Council, that body might thereby be taught a reasonable humility.

