On joining Freemasonry the candidate is full of anticipation and eager to acquaint himself well in this new realm of allegory. He is variously admonished to make improvements in his knowledge and he has an expectation that his curiosity will be satisfied by answers given by the more expert Brethren. But, many times I have heard disappointed members remark that there seems to be nothing else to do but initiation, passing and raising.

To many the acquisition of skill and proficiency in working the Rituals is a sufficient and satisfying answer and without this necessary part of our training most of the beauty and significance of the Ritual would be lost. However, there comes a time when the thinking man likes to get a satisfying answer to questions raised in his mind by the Ritual, where significant phrases seem to have only partial explanations. This lack in turn gives way to deeper problems, many of a philosophical, or a historical nature and rather than emulate, it is often more satisfying to seek, but one comes up against a paucity of information and may become disheartened in the search.

Masonic Ritual has an esoteric significance which is often not stressed, but which provides a very satisfying quest for those prepared to trace the path backwards. Careful study of the Ritual reveals that it is a fabric woven of materials taken from many places and times.

Candidates are exhorted to be patient but even Job, during his repeated trials and approbations, called out “where shall Wisdom be found and where is the place of understanding?” Many will be surprised to learn that his question was answered by “Under an apple tree, by pure meditation, on a Friday evening, in the season of apples when the moon is full,” but this information would not be spoken to him, but transmitted by signs and tokens given to him during the greeting and whilst his Comforters sat by him.

Freemasons too have signs and tokens which transmit information and they are constantly reminded that ‘Silence is golden’ and the words are only lettered. If both conditions are to be met then there is a problem. How are worthy brethren to be instructed? It cannot be written, nor delineated, etc, so in this blog I have set out to try to find out.

What follows is the result of many false starts and is not given as true, in the sense that every item can be supported by irrefutable evidence, but it is a good story and may prove interesting as a source of discussion.

I believe that the Ritual is soundly based on historical facts rather than myth and that a lot of it was universally known throughout Europe, during the Operative days when speculative monks were given refuge and asylum from their persecutors within the Lodge of the Free Masons, and in return, they transmitted esoteric knowledge, as well as practical knowledge, of Math’s and Geometry, to the Operative Brethren.

The ritual performance of an act ensures that strict obedience be paid to those items, actions and words, proven most efficacious in securing a desired effect. Analysis seeks to eliminate all items of ritual which cannot be repeatedly proven to be effective and this gives rise to the split between Religion and Science.

Similarly, Grammar has laid down strict rules and criteria for establishing the truth of written and spoken words, or phrases, thereby ensuring that the orderly sequence of words, made up in an orderly sequence of letters forming those words, will accurately transmit the thoughts of the writer to the reader of the text.

Thus writing follows an established ritual known only to those knowledgeable of the rules, written secrets are revealed to all who can read. But in the days when reading and writing was limited to a few, these few were very powerful.

True ritual adds an esoteric extension to mundane acts and becomes revealing only to those in possession of the esoteric significance of the act. Certain well known phrases are called “self involving expressions” and can be typified by “I name this ship,” etc, at which a bottle of wine is smashed against the bows and the ship is launched into the water.

After this act the ship can be registered, insured, paid for, etc, BUT behind it all is the age old esoteric ritual. The “I” who names the ship is usually an important person. The Name is significant, not just any old name. And the breaking of the bottle spills the wine onto the ship. A chosen person has poured out a libation to Poseidon, in the hope that a gift of the fruit of the earth will make this constructed thing, acceptable in the Kingdom of the sea. An acceptance of human frailty in the face of the power of the Sea Gods, who had to be propitiated, for this intrusion into their realm.

When knowledge gives power to the recipient, the greatest care must be exercised and the earliest societies of men, such as the Pythagoreans, separated themselves from the crowd, just as later Christian Monks did in Europe.

The Celtic and Nordic Bards were given high regard by the Kings and Chieftains and were accorded the seat at the Kings right hand. Thus, the Bard was to the King what the Prophet was to Israel and Hiram Abiff to Solomon and the King of Tyre; men of great knowledge and wisdom, skilled in the accumulated science, history, traditions and rituals of the tribe, possessing secrets of men and nature.

These Bards were sacrosanct and often acted as messengers, or heralds, between tribes. They were also teachers and Law givers, as well as Tribal Priests. History tells us that they “spoke in riddles”.

The Bible records that in the Temple at Jerusalem, the High Priest, spoke the Name of the Most High, but once per year, at the Feast of Atonement. Masonic Ritual tells us that he spoke the Name, only in a whisper, within the confines of the Sanctum Sanctorum. If, as we are told, he was alone, then the question arises, as to how he was given the Name in the first place and how he transmitted it to his successor in office?

Why the Name was a secret could be elaborated on to a lengthy blog entirely of its own, but reference to Ecclesiastes tells us that “there is a time for everything, a time to sow and a time to reap, a time to be born and a time to die..” and it is a fact, that man’s life is governed by time and season. His very existence depends on getting enough food and the ability to win it.

The fisherman who fails to take account of the tide is unlikely to get a good catch and the agriculturist is even more time dependent. All religions celebrate festivals to make auspicious these significant dates and the Priest is the man with the knowledge of the ritual and when to perform it. Therefore, the Priest had to be skilled in Calendrical Lore, with a complete knowledge of the movements of the sun, moon and the planets, which was vital in his predictive capacity.

The continued tribal prosperity was associated with a Deity, particular to the tribe who believed themselves to be his children. It was important to the tribe that they alone were the beneficiaries of this bounty and when called by his secret name the tribal god must appear. Masonic Ritual has overtones of the same belief in the Ritual, “for where the Name of God is invoked….”

Many Biblical wars can be attributed to attempts to capture the God of a more prosperous tribe. The God was captured when his Name was known and spoken profanely. The Romans exploited this belief by establishing Temples, in Rome, to all the Gods of the captive peoples.

The Jews were no exception to this rule and absolute secrecy had to be maintained and it is likely that the Sacred Name would have Calendrical significance.

Masonic Ritual is based on accounts of the building of a house to enclose the Sanctum Sanctorum. Three significant people were involved, two kings and a master Craftsman, who came from the tribe of DAN. This latter is very significant in the later text.

King Solomon is credited with the ability to talk with animals, birds and trees and we can assume from this, that his job in the Triad, was to preserve the Totemic significance of the Temple Ritual. We find that the Bards, in their riddles, spoke of birds and trees and animals, in a manner similar to Solomon. The Bible tells us of the birds and beasts acceptable as sacrifices and names the woods allowed in the construction of the temple.

The whispered word can be heard by any person determined to do so and current usage appears to clash, with the injunction for strict secrecy. To argue that a whispered word cannot be heard, is to denigrate the knowledge of acoustics known and exploited by ancient brethren. A trip to the Hypogeum (Malta,) or the Delphic Tripod, will quickly dispel any doubts on that score. As the Temple was an oracular chamber, we must assume that another way of lettering the words was used to maintain the secrecy desired.

I suggest that the Masonic Grip is a survival of the means used, but in a manner different from that now in use. Before this aspect can be developed, I must talk about ‘numbers.’

Three rule a Lodge, Five make a Lodge and Seven, or more make it perfect. Masonic Ritual gives an explanation which is adequate, unless born with a curious nature. There are many explanations for Three, but why five, or seven or more?

We find that 5 x 3, is given as the number of Fellowcraft in a later degree and also the number of conspirators, until 3 x 4 withdrew. Following the admonition to study Nature and Science, we have five fingers on each hand and five toes on each foot, five petals on the flowers of the wild rose, hawthorn and apple blossom and fifteen knuckles on each hand, if we count the lower thumb joint. 3 x 4 x 3 x 5 gives us half a circle, in degrees, or Sun stations, in the old calendar and a pentagon is the only cursive figure which looks like a man, or a star.

There are five vowels and 3 x 7 consonants in our written language. All these numbers have significance in the Jewish Kabbalah, or in Pythagorism. It is also known that the Greeks used five dice of four numbers, in Divination and similar sets have been found in Ireland.

Those who are interested in dates can easily obtain them from the Internet, but to save boring others, I will just say that, about the time of the destruction of King Solomon’s Temple, the Celts were arriving in Britain and prior to that time, there had been a good trade with Egypt and the Middle East.

A Welsh Bard, in one of his poems, describes how a Bronze Age Priesthood, was expelled by agriculturists who owed allegiance to the tribal God Bel, Beli, or Belius, the God of the Danaans. This was the result of the joining of two likeminded tribes, one of whom were latecomers having arrived from the middle east, by way of Libya, Spain and the route around the coast. They instituted a religion, with the Dog, Roebuck and the Lapwing, as their guardians or totems.

These are the same as would be sacred to Hiram Abiff and the King of Tyre and we are told, the Lapwing knew all Solomon’s secrets and wisdom.

Julius Caesar wrote that the Britons had a transcendent God, equal to Dis, in the Roman Pantheon, who took control over the Gods, Minerva, Apollo, Mars, Jupiter and Mercury. He also noted that the Gauls went to Britain for their religious instruction and that the priests were so powerful that they could stop wars between tribes. Thus, the British God was, in many respects, similar to the God of the Jews.

Graves, traces the People of the Sea, through the place names they left and concludes that these people were the civilizers of the Semites and the Indo-European tribes, as well as the Asiatic fringe, so that religious traditions and myths, become the basis of the traditions of the Israelitish Confederacy and were welded together in the Pentateuch. Thus the Hebrews, Greeks and Celts have similar myths, as a result of the influence of the Danaans.

Pythagorous of Samoas (the student of Abaris the Hyperborean), was in Croton, in Sicily, in 510 B.C. and the Druic and Orphic Rites contain much that is common to Pythagorianism, so the mystical use of numbers can be accounted for and it is highly likely, that this was basically Calendar making, of a highly refined order.

We still have to account for how this knowledge was kept secret and unspoken and yet transmitted to those who were deemed worthy of instruction. The Bards of Ireland and Wales seem to have supplied the answers

Much of the poetical works of the Celtic Bards continued to be set in the Dactylic meter and written in OGHAM, even after the script of Latin and Greek had been adopted into regular use. This may be dismissed as an anachronism, such as the use of Old English in modern poetry, if it were not for the fact that much of the poetry seems to be nonsense, or describe such ridiculous things, as the wars of the trees and the bottles of flowers, or peculiar beasts.

Many riddles are set and strange things attributed to animals. Scholars such as Frazer, Graves and Mary Castlereagh, have studied these and find that the trees, birds and beasts are totemistic descriptions, sacred to various Deities, days of the week, festivals etc.

Ogham, the language of the Celtic poet, is a system of writing by means of nicks, cut into the edge of a stick, and differs from Runic, or Pictish, by being only straight lines.

Stick Ogham has fifteen letters and five vowels – our old friends again.

The letters are B, L, F, S, N, H, D, T, C, Q, M, G, Ng, Z, and R.

The vowels are A, O, U, E, I.

The whole being known as Beth Louis, after the first letters. The last vowel is Iochan.

Thus we recall that we have fifteen knuckles and five finger tips, which provide a full set of ‘working tools’ for the silent communication of any word, by lettering, or halving it with another, in the secret. Therefore, our fifteen Fellowcraft, two Deacons, Wardens and a Master, form a complete alphabet. I often wondered why the Deacons had to ‘bear’ all messages, but if they had to be given by touch, the phrase begins to make sense.

If we accept that messages were transmitted in this manner, we can see that the Bard was in the same situation as a Signals Officer, ready to detect and interpret touches on the hand, or nose, by one of his Fellows. Thus his position at the Kings right hand would be one of convenience as well as honour.

Bardic texts indicate that there were some 150 variations of the Ogham alphabet and that part we see on the Manx crosses, is known as Stick Ogham, but the alphabet most likely to have been used for touch transmission, is that known as Beth Luis Ogham, in which the finger tips and knuckles were used to represent letters .

Under the old Calendar of 364 days, plus 1, (a year and a day) made up of 13 months, of 28 days which was the Agricultural Year, the Seasons were under the control of the vowels and were five in number-

A-Winter Solstice (sun stand)

0-Spring Equinox

U-Summer Solstice

E-Autumn Equinox

I-Winter Solstice,

Each season with its own totemic bird and tree. There is a similarity to Masonic ritual, to much that was known to the Bard and when Freemasons state that they will always ‘hele, conceal and never reveal…,’ they are repeating part of the initiation oath taken by the Celtic Bard, when he started on the first, of his three, seven year periods of training, to become a Bard of the lowest order.

I hope this blog will help to indicate that a study of Ritual, will lead to a search for more satisfying answers, which are to be found in the old pathways of our culture, where truth is veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols.

“Why travel from the East to the West? “ “To seek that which was lost.”

“How came them to be lost?” Therein lies the subject of another lecture!

Parts of this blog were posted by Brother Jimmy McCallum on Masonic Network.  Brother Jimmy did not know the original author of this work. If you are the author, or know who is perhaps you would let me know, so I can give credit, where due, or remove it from display.

In order of the Celebration of Scotlands most famous Freemason, I thought it would be nice to republish this address given by Brother Reverend Doctor Fort Newton, Past Grand Chaplain, Iowa, USA.  He gave this address in proposing the toast “To the Immoral Memory of Brother Robert Burns” at the Burns Meetings of the Scots Lodge, No. 2319 EC on 24^th January 1918.

We are met this evening, as I understand it, just to love Robert Burns and one another.  Somehow I feel that Burns would rejoice to be here, for he love more than all else that festival that was half a frolic and the feast where joy and goodwill were guests.

The social magnetism of his spirit found its way into his songs, and we feel it to this day, and he was nowhere more happy, nowhere more welcome than in the fellowship of his Masonic Brethren.

Higher tribute there is none for any man to say, justly, that the world is gentler and more joyous for his having live – and this was true of Burns, whose very name is an emblem of pity, joy and the genius of fraternity.  And it is therefore that we love Robert Burns, as much for his weakness as for his strength, and all the more for that he was such an unveneered human being.

If he was a sinner, he was in that akin to ourselves, as God wots, a little good and a little bad, a little weak and a little strong, foolish when he thought he was wise and wise, often, when he feared he was foolish.

It is given but to few men thus to live in the hearts of their fellows; and today, from Ayr to Sydney, from Chicago to Bombay, the memory of Burns is a sweet perfume.  Yet, more that a fragrances, it is a living force uniting men of many lands, by a kind of Freemasonry, into a league of liberty, justice and pity.

If ever of any one, it can be said of Robert Burns, that his soul goes marching on, striding over continents and years, trampling tyrannies down.  He was the harbinger of the nineteenth century, the poet of the rights and reign of the common people, whom, it has been said, God must love because He made so many of them.

That which lives in Robert Burns, and will live while human nature is the same, is his love of justice, of honesty, his touch of pathos, of melting sympathy, his demands for liberty, his faith in man, in nature and in God – all uttered with simple speech and the golden voice of song.  His poems were little jets of love and liberty and pity finding their way out through the fissures in the granite-like theology of his day.  They came fresh from the heart of a man whom the death of a little bird set dreaming of the meaning of a world wherein life in woven of beauty, mystery and sorrow.

Such was the spirit of Robert Burns – a man passionate and piteous, compact of light and flame and beauty, capable of withering scorn of wrong, quickly shifting from the ludicrous to the horrible, poised between laughter and tears – and if by some art we could send it into all the dark places of the world, pity and joy would return to the common ways of man.

Long live the Spirit of Robert Burns, may it grow and glow to the confounding of all unkindness, all injustice, all bitterness.

He haunts his native land

As an immortal youth;                 

his hand Guides every plough                   

His presence haunts this room tonight                         

A for of mingled mist and light                 

From that far coast

His feet may be in the furrow, but the nobility of manhood is in his heart, on his lips the voice of eternal melody, and in his face the light of the morning star.

Robert Burns

The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (AASR) is one of several different rites belonging to the worldwide fraternity known as Freemasonry.

A rite is a series of progressive degrees that are conferred by various Masonic organisations or bodies that all operate under the control of one central authority.  Under the AASR, the central authority is called a Supreme Council.

The thirty-three degrees of the AASR are conferred by several different controlling bodies.  The first of these is the craft lodge which confers the Entered Apprentice, Fellowcraft, and Master Mason degrees.

The AASR forms one of the more important appendant bodies of Freemasonry that a Master Mason may join for further exposure to the principles of Freemasonry.  

The AASR builds upon the ethical teachings and philosophy offered in the craft lodge, through dramatic presentation of the individual degrees. Although in the modern AASR only the 18th, 30th, 31st, 32nd and 33rd degrees are worked (at least in Scotland and England).

Organization

The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite in each country is governed by a Supreme Council. There is no international governing body, each Supreme Council in each country being sovereign unto itself.

In the United States of America there are two Supreme Councils headquartered in Washington, DC, and Lexington, Massachusetts. Individual states are referred to as “Orients,” and local bodies are called “Valleys.” Each Valley has four Scottish Rite bodies: the Lodge of Perfection controls the 4th through the 14th degrees, the Chapter of Rose Croix controls the 15th through the 18th degrees, the Council of Kadosh controls the 19th through the 30th degrees, and the Consistory controls the 31st and 32nd Degrees. The Supreme Council controls and confers the 33rd Degree of Inspector General.

The Scottish Rite Degrees

Attainment of the third Masonic degree, that of a Master Mason, represents the attainment of the highest rank in all of Masonry.  Any Master Mason stands as an equal before every other Master Mason, regardless of position, class, or other degrees. Additional degrees are sometimes referred to as appendant degrees, even where the degree numbering might imply a hierarchy. Appendant degrees represent a lateral movement in Masonic Education rather than an upward movement. These are not degrees of rank, but rather degrees of instruction.

• 4° Secret Master
• 5° Perfect Master
• 6° Intimate Secretary
• 7° Provost and Judge
• 8° Intendant of the Building
• 9° Elu of the Nine (Master Elect of the Nine)
• 10° Elu of the Fifteen (Master Elect of the Fifteen)
• 11° Elu of the Twelve (Sublime Master Elected)
• 12° Master Architect (Grand Master Architect)
• 13° The Royal Arch of Solomon (Master of the Ninth Arch)
• 14° Perfect Elu (Grand Elect Mason)
• 15° Knight of the East, or of the Sword
• 16° Prince of Jerusalem
• 17° Knight of the East and West
• 18° Knight of the Rose Croix (Knight of the Rose Croix of H.R.D.M.)
• 19° Grand Pontiff
• 20° Master of the Symbolic Lodge (Master ad Vitam)
• 21° Noachite or Prussian Knight (Patriarch Noachite)
• 22° Knight of the Royal Axe (also known as Prince of Libanus in both jurisdictions)
• 23° Chief of the Tabernacle
• 24° Prince of the Tabernacle
• 25° Knight of the Brazen Serpent
• 26° Prince of Mercy, or Scottish Trinitarian
• 27° Knight Commander of the Temple (Commander of the Temple)
• 28° Knight of the Sun, Prince Adept
• 29° Scottish Knight of St. Andrew
• 30° Knight Kadosh (Grand Elect Knight Kadosh)
• 31° Inspector Inquisitor (Grand Inspector Inquisitor Commander)
• 32° Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret

Systems of Degrees

According to the various AASR jurisdictions in the world, all of which operate independently, the degrees are worked at will by their governing bodies. For example the Southern Jurisdiction separates the degrees as follows:

•  4° through 14° – Lodge of Perfection
• 15° through 18° – Chapter of Rose Croix
• 19° through 30° – Council of Kadosh
• 31° through 32° – Consistory

In Scotland, candidates are perfected in the 18th degree, with the preceding degrees awarded in name only. A minimum of a two-year interval is required before continuing to the 30th degree, again with the intervening degrees awarded by name only. Elevation beyond that is strictly by invitation only.

Description of Degrees

4th Degree – Perfect Elu (Elect)

The lessons of this degree are that Perfect Elect Masons are to be free from prejudice, intolerance and envy. The duties of a 14 Degree Mason are to protect the oppressed and relieve want and distress, and to serve the common good and do good works.

18th Degree – Knight of the Rose Croix

The lessons taught in this degree are the lessons of faith, hope and charity. The duties of a Knight of Rose Croix are to practice virtue, to labor to eliminate vice, and to be tolerant of the faith and creed of others. The symbols of the degree are those of the rose and cross, and the “pelican in her piety,” that is, a nesting pelican plucking flesh from her breast to feed her young.

The lessons taught in this degree are that man must have a new Temple in his heart where God is worshipped in spirit and in truth[citation needed], and that he must have a new law of love with all men everywhere may understand and practice.

The degree affirms the broad principals of universality and toleration.

29th Degree – Scottish Knight of St. Andrew

The duties of a Knight of St. Andrew are to serve the truth, to protect virtue and innocence, and to defend against tyranny. The degree incorporates elements of Scottish legend dealing with the survival of the Knights Templar. The lessons of the degree are symbolic and philosophical, not historical.

History

Early References to “Scots Master” Degree

There are records of lodges conferring the degree of “Scots Master” or “Scotch Master” as early as 1733.  A lodge at Temple Bar in London is the earliest such lodge on record. Other lodges include a lodge at Bath in 1735, and the French lodge, St. George de l’Observance No. 49 at Covent Garden in 1736. The references to these few occasions indicate that these were special meetings held for the purpose of performing unusual ceremonies, probably by visiting Freemasons.

Jacobite Influence

Many  Scottish Jacobites who were living in France during the early 1700’s, took an active part in high degree Freemasonry there and saw in its symbolism some hope for their political aspirations of a return of the Stuart to the thrones of England and Scotland. 

The seed of the myth of Stuart Jacobite influence on the high degrees may have been a careless and unsubstantiated remark made by John Noorthouk in the 1784 Book of Constitutions of the Premier Grand Lodge of London. It was stated, without support, that King Charles II was made a Freemason in Holland during the years of his exile (1649-60).

However, there were no lodges of Freemasons on the continent during those years. The statement was undoubtedly made to flatter the fraternity by claiming membership for a previous monarch. This folly was then embellished upon by John Robison (1739-1805), a professor of history at the University of Edinburgh, in an anti-Masonic work published in 1797. The lack of scholarship exhibited by him that work even caused the Encyclopedia Britannica to denounce it.

By the mid-19th century, the story had gained currency. The well-known English Masonic writer, Dr. George Oliver (1782-1867), in his “Historical Landmarks,” 1846, carried the story forward and even claimed that King Charles II was active in his attendance at meetings — an obvious invention, for if it had been true, it would not have escaped the notice of the historians of the time.

James II died in 1701 at the Palace of St. Germain en Laye, and was succeeded in his claims to the British throne by his son, James Edward Stuart (1699-1766), the Chevalier St. George, better known as “the Old Pretender,” but recognized as James III by the French King Louis XIV.

He was succeeded in his claim by Charles Edward Stuart (“Bonnie Prince Charles”), also known as “the Young Pretender,” whose ultimate defeat at the Battle of Culloden in 1746 effectively put an end to any serious hopes of the Stuarts regaining the British crowns.

Estienne Morin and his Rite of 25 Degrees

A French trader, by the name of Estienne Morin, had been involved in high degree Masonry in Bordeaux since 1744 and, in 1747, founded an “Ecossais” lodge (Scots Masters Lodge) in the city of Le Cap Francais, on the north coast of the French colony of Saint-Domingue (now Haiti).

Over the next decade, high degree Freemasonry continued to spread to the Western hemisphere as the high degree lodge at Bordeaux warranted or recognized seven Ecossais lodges there. In Paris in the year 1761, a Patent was issued to Estienne Morin, dated 27 August, creating him “Grand Inspector for all parts of the New World.”

This Patent was signed by officials of the Grand Lodge at Paris and appears to have originally granted him power over the craft lodges only, and not over the high, or “Ecossais”, degree lodges.

 Later copies of this Patent appear to have been embellished, probably by Morin, to improve his position over the high degree lodges in the West Indies. The authenticity of the enlarged powers named in later copies of Morin’s Patent is further weakened by the Declaration of the Grand Lodge of the 3 Globes at Berlin.

Early writers long believed that a “Rite of Perfection” consisting of 25 degrees, the highest being the “Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret,” and being the predecessor of the Scottish Rite, had been formed in Paris by a high degree council calling itself “The Council of Emperors of the East and West.” The title “Rite of Perfection” first appeared in the Preface to the “Grand Constitutions of 1786,” the authority for which is now known to be faulty. It is now generally accepted that this Rite of twenty-five degrees was compiled by Estienne Morin and is therefore more properly titled “The Rite of the Royal Secret,” or “Morin’s Rite.”

Morin returned to the West Indies in 1762 or 1763, to Saint-Domingue, where, armed with his new Patent, he assumed powers to constitute lodges of all degrees, spreading the high degrees throughout the West Indies and North America. Morin stayed in Saint-Domingue until 1766 when he moved to Jamaica. At Kingston, Jamaica, in 1770, Morin created a “Grand Chapter” of his new Rite (the Grand Council of Jamaica). Morin died in 1771 and was buried in Kingston.

Henry Andrew Francken and his Manuscripts

The one man who was most important in assisting Morin in spreading the degrees in the New World was a naturalized French subject of Dutch origin named Henry Andrew Francken. Morin appointed him Deputy Grand Inspector General as one of his first acts after returning to the West Indies. Francken worked closely with Morin and, in 1771, produced a manuscript book giving the rituals for the 15th through the 25th degrees. Francken produced at least two more similar manuscripts, one in 1783 and another about 1786. The second and third of these manuscripts included all the degrees from the 4th through the 25th.

A Loge de Parfaits d’ Écosse was formed on 12 April 1764 at New Orleans, becoming the first high degree lodge on the North American continent. Its life, however, was short, as the 1763 Treaty of Paris ceded New Orleans to Spain, and the Catholic Spanish crown had been historically hostile to Freemasonry. Documented Masonic activity ceased for a time and did not return to New Orleans until the 1790s.

Francken travelled to New York in 1767 where he granted a Patent, dated 26 December 1767, for the formation of a Lodge of Perfection at Albany. This marked the first time the Degrees of Perfection were conferred in one of the thirteen British colonies. This Patent, and the early minutes of the Lodge, are still extant and are in the archives of Supreme Council, Northern Jurisdiction.

Birth of the Scottish Rite

Although most of the thirty-three degrees of the Scottish Rite existed in parts of previous degree systems, the Scottish Rite did not come into being until the formation of the Mother Supreme Council at Charleston, South Carolina, in May 1801.

Albert Pike

Born in Boston, Massachusetts, 29 December 1809, Albert Pike is commonly asserted as the man most responsible for the growth and success of the AASR from an obscure Masonic Rite in the mid-1800’s, to the international fraternity that it became.

Pike received his Degrees from the American Masonic historian, Dr. Albert G. Mackey, in Charleston, S.C., in March 1853, and, in that same year, Pike was appointed Deputy Inspector for Arkansas.

At this point, the degrees were in only a rudimentary form, and often only included a brief history and legend of each degree as well as other brief details which usually lacked a workable ritual for their conferral. In 1855, the Supreme Council appointed a committee to prepare and compile rituals for the 4th through the 32nd Degrees.

In March 1858, Pike was elected a member of the Supreme Council for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States, and in January 1859 he became its Grand Commander. The War between the states interrupted his work on the Scottish Rite rituals. After the War, he moved to Washington, DC, and in 1868 his revision, and de-christianisation, of the rituals was complete.

Pike also wrote lectures for all the degrees which were published in 1871 under the title “Morals & Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite”.

Controversy surrounding the Scottish Rite

In 1856 Albert Pike revised and re-issued the rituals,  illustrating his interpretations of his revised rituals in Morals and Dogma. These rituals and the interpretation in Morals and Dogma provide much of the source for criticism of Freemasonry as a whole, despite the factual inaccuracies.

The Scottish Rite Creed

The Scottish Rite Creed of Freemasonry is as follows:

Human progress is our cause, liberty of thought our supreme wish, freedom of conscience our mission, and the guarantee of equal rights to all people everywhere our ultimate goal.

From the records of the Masons Company of London concerning its ‘accepted members’ we find without doubt the earliest authentic evidence of 17th century Freemasonry in England.

 “But, by whatever name it was known in this or another country, Masonry has existed as it now exists, the same in spirit and at heart, not only when Solomon built the temple, but centuries before–before the first colonies emigrated into Southern India, Persia, and Egypt, from the cradle of the human race.”        Albert Pike 1857ce

In this blog I would like to bring to light the names and lives of six non-operative Freemasons who worked within the craft for decades long before Elias Ashmole was initiated in 1646ce.  It my opinion they were the first recorded Speculative Freemasons.

Robert Freke Gould’s  ‘Concise History of Freemasonry’ has been the gold standard for Masonic research for over 100 years, but even Gould was human and subject to an occasional error. The problem with Gould making an occasional error is his work is so well respected that no one ever questions it. His is after all the most quoted source for Masonic history.  

So what do you do when you stumble across an error which changes some of the most basic understanding of who were the first non-operative or speculative Masons, when this occurred and what documentation do we have to substantiate it?

On page 111 of Gould’s work, it states “Seven persons were received into the ‘acception’ or Lodge in 1620-21, all of whom were already members of the company…” , Who were these Seven men and is there was anything significant about them?

On examining a copy of Edward Conder’s book ‘Records of the Hole Crafte and Fellowship of Masons’ which Gould had used as his source for the information but when compared they did not come close to agreeing with each other!

Conder’s book states;  As early as the year 1620 or twenty-one years before any mention of the society is made by any writers of the 17th century, we find in the first years entered in the account book, which is the earliest document concerning the Guild still remaining in the company’s possession, an entry referring to certain gratuities received from new members in consequence of their being accepted on the livery.

“In the following year occur entries of certain payments made by these new members when they were made masons, doubtless by some ancient ceremony which survived the troublous period of the Reformation.”  

Gould says these men were already members of the company and “were received into the ‘acception’ (i.e., the Acception) or Lodge”, but according to Conder the records state otherwise. His book includes copies of the minutes which make it quite clear these men were first Accepted and then Made Masons and not the other way around. He goes on to say the word “accepted” is rarely used throughout the 500 pages of the surviving account book.  When it is used, it is always used to describe someone who is admitted into the company upon accepting Masonry. They did not serve an apprenticeship because, if they had, there would have been no reason to accept Masonry in order to join the company.

The words “coming on the Acception” Gould uses are not to be found anywhere in the records for the year 1620ce or 1621ce provided to Conder by the Company of Masons.  Nowhere in the records of the Worshipful Company of Freemasons, is there any mention of an ‘acception’ (i.e., the Acception) or of a ‘Lodge’ in 1620-21. However, Conder does make the following statement about Speculative Masonry on page 9:

“This we cannot say for certain, but we can say that as early as 1620 and inferentially very much earlier, there were certain members of the Masons Company and others who met from time to time to form a Lodge for the purposes of Speculative Masonry; and this account given by the records of the Masons Company concerning its ‘accepted members,’ is without doubt the EARLIEST AUTHENTIC EVIDENCE of 17^th century Freemasonry in England”

Contrary to Gould’s statement, the only occurrence in the records of the Masons Company of the word ‘acception’ is found in a 1648ce entry made in regards to a Warden paying for “coming on the Acception”. By 1648ce already have separate evidence of at least two other lodges, one in Chester and one in Warrington, being run by Speculative Masons.

Conder states there could be little or no inducement for persons not in any way connected with the building trade to join this small and comparatively poor company. Yet a careful reading of the records of the Masons Company which Condor provides us show these six men, not seven as Gould states, did more than just join, they contributed greatly to the company for more than a decade.

These men were not operative Masons as clearly indicated in the way they joined the company by immediately coming on to the livery. This shows that as early as 1621ce non-operatives were able to gain admission into a guild of operative stonemasons by paying a huge sum of money. It is in direct contrast to the normal way an apprentice gains his freedom of the company.  Condor tells us the act of joining on the livery normally comes years after a man finishes his apprenticeship. More importantly we see here in the earliest extant records of the Worshipful Company of Freemasons there is already in existence a set fee for joining the company by acceptance of Masonry. This fact suggests this practice may have predated 1620ce.

Conder quotes from the existing records the account of six men paying “for their gratitude at their acceptance unto the livery”.  Livery is the second highest standing in the company.  According to the records of the Masons Company it also requires those being elevated to be able to afford the robes of a Gentleman and to outfit one’s servants in robes.  It was an expensive undertaking and not one easily affordable to the average craftsman. 

So who were these six men? The records identify them as Evan Lloyd, Thomas Preestman, James French, Timothy Townsend, John Hince, and John Kifford.  There is a follow-up entry regarding some of these men being ‘made’ Masons in 1621ce. Three of them Hince, Lloyd and French are listed along with four others, who were presumably apprentices. This could account for Gould’s tally of seven persons. 

How expensive was it for a man to join the Masons Company by accepting Masonry? To get an idea, compare that cost in comparison with the wages of a Stonemason in the early 1600’s.

At the completion of his apprenticeship a mason would pay one pound, three shillings and four-pence, or about a month’s earnings at Stones wage scale, to become a Journeyman. To advance to Livery a mason would need to pay an additional fee of nine pounds, almost a full year’s earnings. It becomes clear that anyone who can afford to do that were not  simple masons but well to do gentlemen.

So why would six well-to-do gentlemen pay so much to join the Worshipful Company of Freemasons? Conder writes, “There could be little or no inducement for anyone not in the building trade to join this small and poor company”. Certainly in view of the cost, there would have to be a compelling reason for them to do so. The question is what was it?

Each of these six men came from long established families. They were not lords of the Shires or the company records would have recorded their titles. So we have six men from established families, not nobles but able to pay a heavy fee to join the guild. More than likely they were members of England’s newly created middleclass, the country’s first capitalists, descendents of Knights and stewards of nobility who had become successful merchants and farmers.  While they were not qualified by rank to be included in the privileged 10% of titled Nobility but probably controlled more wealth than their titled relatives.

Knowing who these men were and what class of English society they belonged to identifies them as prosperous but still doesn’t tell us why they chose to join this small and poor company.  What did they expect to gain from joining?

The answer might have a lot to do with the social and political environment in western Europe in the early 1600’s. The transition from a insular country to a worldwide empire would be both cruel and bloody. In the process, a monarch would be executed and another dethroned.

If we look at the literature of the time, William Shakespeare produces plays with definite moral lessons. This type of literature goes back as far as the Norman Conquest. Stories of Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable had been told for centuries before the 14th century epic ‘The Green Knight’ appeared. It is clear that the search for enlightenment was underway, but literature and the realities of life in 17th century England have little in common.

Governments and universities were not open to progressive thought in the late 16th and early 17th century. The Church, once open to the heliocentric theory of the universe, suddenly collapses inwards retreating to the Ptolemaic theory propounded in 150 AD which views Earth as a stationary center of the universe.

Copernicus’ book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres) is published and placed in his hands the very day he dies in 1543ce. However, it would be printed with a preface written by Lutheran theologian Andreas Osiander stating the heliocentric account of the earth’s movement is a mere mathematical hypothesis, not an account which contains truth or even probability.

There can be no doubting the rabid fervor of the still powerful Inquisition which brought the greatest inventor, scientist and mathematician of the era Galileo, to his knees.  After inventing the telescope he used it to observe the four satellites of Jupiter.  Only Galileo’s fame saves him from the stake.

By this time Europe was being ripped apart by a bloody religious war and those who thirsted after knowledge, who wanted to study the sciences and philosophy risked their freedom by discussing their work in public.

It is difficult today to comprehend the level of fear and frustration existing in Europe and particularly in England in 1620ce.  Scientists, philosophers, and astronomers were forced to work in secret to avoid being branded as heretics. Some, like the men who would later form the Royal Society, met quietly in locations around Oxford. There were few places in England where one could speak his mind in safety.

The harsh realities of early 17th century life belied the stories of chivalry. There are no declarations of support for the Stuart King in the existing Worshipful Company of Freemasons records but they did record their feelings about the execution of their lawful king. On January 30, 1649ce there is a note in the records of the company, which read, “King Charles murdered at Whitehall”.

The age of enlightenment had yet to dawn.

The masons of the 17^th century understood that mathematics and geometry are not restricted to the building trades but expand into the fields of navigation and astronomy. They were among those who sought knowledge, kept their trade secrets, and by adhering to the ancient charges of their craft, each man was committed to the protection and support of his fellow mason. These would have been valid reasons why these six men  might have sought the sanctuary offered within the lodge rooms of The Worshipful Company of Freemasons.

No matter their reasons for joining, these six men left their mark on the company. Out of the original six, at least three became Wardens of the company and two or three, would actually serve as Master. John Hince served as Warden in 1626ce and in 1628ce while he served as Master of the company, Thomas Priestman was one of his wardens. The kings’ architect, Nicholas Stone served with Timothy Townsend as a Warden in 1630ce. Thomas Priestman would be elected Master of the company in 1636ce. Lloyd only appears in the records twice, one of which is in connection to being fined for having an argument in the company.

By the 1640’s the word “Accepted” had begun to be replaced with a new description. Ashmole uses the word “Freemason” in his description of his initiation into the society. In Ashmole’s description of those present at the time there is a striking example of the tremendous pull of the growing fraternity of men who would lay aside their religion and politics to meet as Brothers.  There, in a small room in Warrington in 1646ce, with the civil war still raging, Roundhead sat down with Royalist, Catholic with Protestant; each man trusting the others enough to risk their life in the pursuit of light, just as six other men had done 21 years before.

Sources: 

• Based on an Original article by W. Bro. Jack Buta Paradise Valley Silver Trowel Lodge #29, Arizona
• Records of the Whole Crafte and Fellowship of Masons by Edward Conder
• The Concise history of Freemasonry by R.F. Gould 
• The Century of Revolution 1603-1714 by Christopher Hill
• Royalists and Patriots Politics and Ideology in England 1603-1640 by J P Sommerville
• A Brief History of British Kings & Queens by Michael Ashley

In the years between World War 1 and World War 2 The blue Forget Me Not Emblem (Das Vergissmeinnicht) was a standard symbol used by most charitable organizations in Germany, with a very clear meaning: “Do not forget the poor and the destitute“.

It was first introduced in German Masonry in 1926, well before the Nazi era, at the annual Communication of the Grand Lodge Zur Sonne, in Bremen, where it was distributed to all the participants. That was a terrible time in Germany, economically speaking, further aggravated in 1929 following that year’s Great Depression.

That economic situation, contributed to Hitler’s accession to power. Many people depended on charity, some of which was Masonic. Distributing the forget-me-not at the Grand Lodge Communication was meant to remind German Brethren of the charitable activities of the Grand Lodge. 

In early 1934, it became evident that Freemasonry was in danger.  In that same year, the Grand Lodge of the Sun (one of the pre-war German Grand Lodges, located in Bayreuth) realising the grave dangers involved, adopted the little blue Forget Me Not flower as a substitute for the traditional square and compasses.

It was felt the flower would provide brethren with an outward means of identification while lessening the risk of possible recognition in public by the Nazis, who were engaged in wholesale confiscation of all Masonic Lodge properties. Freemasonry went undercover, and this delicate flower assumed its role as a symbol of Masonry surviving throughout the reign of darkness.

In 1936 the Winterhilfswerk (a non- Masonic winter charity drive) held a collection and used and distributed the same symbol, again with its obvious charitable connotation. Some of the Masons who remembered the 1926 Communication possibly also wore it later as a sign of recognition. We have no evidence of that and its general signification still was charity, but not specifically Masonic charity.

During the ensuing decade of Nazi power a little blue Forget Me Not flower worn in a Brother’s lapel served as one method whereby brethren could identify each other in public (although even then it was not always safe to wear any non-Nazi pin), and in cities and concentration camps throughout Europe. The Forget Me Not distinguished the lapels of countless brethren who staunchly refused to allow the symbolic Light of Masonry to be completely extinguished.

When the Grand Lodge of the Sun was reopened in Bayreuth in 1947, by Past Grand Master  Beyer, a little pin in the shape of a Forget Me Not was officially adopted as the emblem of that first annual convention of the brethren who had survived the bitter years of semi-darkness to rekindle the Masonic Light.

At the first Annual Convent of the new United Grand Lodges Of Germany AF&AM (VGLvD), in 1948 Bro. Theodor Vogel, Master of the Lodge “Zum weißen Gold am Kornberg”, in Selb (then in Western-occupied Germany), remembered the 1926 and 1936 pin, had a few hundred made and started handing it out as a Masonic symbol wherever he went. When Brother Vogel was later elected GM of the Grand Lodge AFuAM of Germany and visited a Grand Masters’ conference in Washington, DC, he distributed.

But is the story True?

Information about the Masonic tradition surrounding the blue forget me not amounts to very little. It is true that the flower was used by some German Masons about 1926, and it appears likely that in March 1938 some of them did wear it again as a Nazi badge, even though by an extraordinary coincidence, it had been chosen as a Masonic emblem twelve years earlier. It is likely not true that it was ever worn after March 1938 as a secret mean of recognition.

However, even if many German Masons (together with the great majority of German citizens of that time) never objected to the Nazi politics and went so far as to support Hitler, some were brave enough to fight him openly.

Based on the membership of all the then existing German Lodges, it is likely that around 1 or 2%. Out of the 174 Lodges which participated in the creation of the first United Grand Lodge of Germany, five only belonged to the Symbolical Grand Lodge of 1930, the only German Grand Lodge which resisted Hitler.

For human and political reasons as well, those Masons who thought it their duty to rebuild German Freemasonry once the War was over could hardly tell the whole truth to their foreign brethren. I personally believe they might have told the story of those dark years in a different way, but I am ready to admit that it is probably easier to say so in 2009 than it was in the 1950s.

Accordingly a legend was born. Not the legend of the forget-me-not, but that of a German Freemasonry too weak to resist, banned as soon as Hitler became Chancellor of the Reich, wearing a badge on the streets and – of all things ! – in concentration camps. That legend was likely born as the result of an unconscious effort to inhibit the past as well as a conscious manoeuvre. It was believed not only because it was the logical thing to do, but also because it was reassuring to imagine Freemasons acting according to their ideals, fighting for freedom and defending it.

Lets keep it at that and let us admit to the Masonic Brotherhood of the blue Forget Me Not  and thus did a simple flower blossom forth into a symbol of the fraternity, and become perhaps the most widely worn emblem among Freemasons in Germany.

In the years since adoption, its significance world-wide has been attested to by the tens of thousands of brethren who now display it with meaningful pride.

Many freemasons are curious as to what is the oldest Masonic Lodge in the World?

Many believe that Mother Kilwinning in Scotland is the oldest particularly as it holds number 0 on the role of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, but Mother Kilwinning claim that most of its early records were last in fires or other disasters.

With actual evidence Lodge of Edinburgh No.1 Edinburgh is the oldest lodge in the world, this lodge is sometimes known as Mary’s Chapel.  Its oldest Masonic Lodge Minutes are dated 31st July 1599ce and it is 410 years old.

More impressively, the first 5 pages of minutes incorporate the Schaw Statutes  which are dated 28th December 1598ce. Six months later, on 31st July 1599ce are to be found the minutes which confirm the lodge’s claim as having the oldest existing masonic minutes.

The Schaw Statues are named for William Schaw, who was Master of Works to His Majesty, King James VI  and General Warden of the Masonic Craft. In the statues, he declared that these ordinances issued by him for the regulation of lodges considered the lodge at Edinburgh to be for all time, the first principal Lodge

Lodge of Edinburgh No. 1 was first called “The Lodge of Edinburgh” and retained this name until 1688ce, when the Grand Lodge of Scotland confirmed its charter in the 1730’s, it designated the lodge as: ” The Lodge of Edinburgh (Mary’s Chapel ) No1”.

Prominent members belonging to the Lodge in its very early days included His Royal Highness, The Prince of Wales (afterwards called King Edward VII) and His Royal Highness King Edward VIII.

Both were affilated within  the Lodge, taking the obligation on the “Breeches Bible” which was printed in 1587ce. The pen with which these 2 brethren signed the roll is still preserved in the Edinburgh Lodge No. 1 museum.

As early as 1600ce, The Lodge of Edinburgh began to admit non-operative freemasons. In June 1600ce the Laird of Auchinleck was made a speculative member, the first authentic record of the making of such a member.

When the Grand Lodge of Scotland was established on 30th November 1736ce the Lodge of Edinburgh took an active part. Thirty Three lodges were represented at the meeting which was held in the lodge room of the Edinburgh Lodge. Because the oldest minute of a  lodge was that of Edinburgh Lodge, it was placed first on the roll of the Grand Lodge

As many of you are undoubtedly aware, there are several theories regarding a possible physical relationship between Freemasonry and the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon, commonly known as the Knights Templar.

Many modern scholars vehemently refuse to examine objectively the prospect of any connection between the two Orders, however, there is a significant handful of learned scholars whose hearts and imaginations have been stirred by the possibility and who keep tripping over little hints of evidence which keep the theories alive.

The purpose of this Blog is to acquaint you with a theory that could suggest a potential Link between Freemasonry and the ancient Knights Templar.  This Link is represented by the St Clair (Modern: Sinclair) family of Scotland and a small unfinished Collegiate  chapel, constructed and lying in a tiny hamlet just south of Edinburgh, named Rosslyn.

After the Dissolution

When Pope Clement V and King Philip of France affected the successful dissolution of the Templars on 13th October 1307ce, many knights escaped and some managed to take refuge in the highlands of Scotland. The Scots were currently embroiled in a struggle for sovereignty and against their neighbours, England.

Their emerging leader, Robert De Bruce, was then under an order of excommunication issued by the Pope and was at war with Edward II of England and his allies.

Consequently, having nothing to loose, De Bruce gave his approval for the outlawed Templars to be sheltered and merged into the Knights Hospitallier or to take refuge in the Highlands of Scotland, thus enabling them to live out their lives.

Seven years later, in 1314ce, Sir Henry St. Clair, who was allegedly a member of the Knight Templar, and his two sons, William and Henry, took part in the famous Battle of Bannockburn where the Scots were able to preserve an independent Scotland for the King, Robert the Bruce.

An exciting and romantic legend links the Templars to the battle of Bannockburn. The legend tells us that Scots were outnumbered three to one and were struggling desperately against the forces of Edward II, losing men and ground rapidly, when there appeared on the horizon a well-equipped and obviously highly professional band of knights in full armor and mounted on heavy horses. the knights, although superbly equipped and obviously experienced in military battle tactics, bore no markings on their shields and carried no battle standards flying their colours.

These mysterious soldiers joined the battle on the side of King Robert the Bruce and quickly turned the tide in favour of the Scots who won the battle and freedom for Scotland. The knights then rode off over the horizon without making known their identities or from whence they came.

Many scholars believe these mysterious knights to be a contingent of the refugee and internationally outlawed Knights Templar that the King had permitted to take refuge in the highlands. Were they returning the favor while pledging loyalty to Scotland and King Robert the Bruce?  There is a Masonic degree based on this story.

Many sources tell us that years later, Sir Henry St. Clair was appointed the Hereditary Grand Master of all the Masonic guilds of Scotland by royal charter (the King of Scotland remains the Sovereign Grand master).

This Hereditary Grand mastership was to abide with the Sinclair family until 1736ce, when Sir Henry’s heir, Sir William St. Clair of Rosslyn resigned his stewardship of the Scottish Masons to affect the creation of the Grand Lodge of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons of Scotland. A body to which he was immediately elected the Grand Master.

Rosslyn Chapel

In 1440ce a mere 133 years (just two generations) after the suppression of the Templars by King Philip and Pope Clement, the Earl of Orkney, a descendant of Sir William St. Clair designed and began the project of building a church in the family seat of Rosslyn. His intention was to build a great sanctuary to the glory of God and the Templar tradition. It was to be constructed in the form of a cross with a lady Chapel and a high tower in the centre.

He imported the best stonemasons available, as well as tradesmen from the other guilds as necessary. The Master masons were paid a sum of 40 pounds per annum and the lesser skilled masons were paid 10 pounds. Simultaneously, he built the small hamlet of Rosslin to support and house his craftsmen during the project and see to their every need. The great sanctuary’s construction was never completed.

Through the centuries, St Clair’s unfinished sanctuary survived several invading armies and the brutalities of the Reformation as well as Scotland’s civil war of the mid-seventeenth century. It’s said that during this period, the armies of Oliver Cromwell occupied the areas in and around Edinburgh, including Rosslyn. Indicative of the disdain for which the Puritan church and Cromwell held divergent theological beliefs, after razing nearby Rosslyn castle, Cromwell stabled his invading troops horses and livestock in the chapel at Rosslyn.

There is a legend that says Cromwell recognizing the exoteric religious and Masonic symbolism and himself being a Brother, the unit’s commander was careful to preserve and protect the chapel and its artifacts during his troops occupation. Other religious structures and their icons did not fare as well during this turbulent time.

The Dirge of Rosabell is described in prose as our Brother Sir Walter Scott spoke of the ancient Barons of Rosslyn who were buried in the crypt of the chapel. His famous poem, The Lay of the Last Minstrel speaks of the ghosts and spirits of the honoured knights laid to rest in the ancient Gothic chapel’s crypt.

In 1787ce, our esteemed Brother Robert Burns, the recognized Poet laureate of Scotland and Masonry visited the chapel with a friend and artist, Alexander Nasmyth and implored him to paint his portrait while at Rosslyn.

Conclusion

The chapel that remains today, many scholars say, is probably one of the most remarkable examples of Gothic architecture in Scotland, not because of its design when viewed primarily from and architectural point of view, but because of the profusion of overt and esoteric design and symbolism shown in such abundance everywhere within the chapel.

When first viewed Rosslyn Chapel has an almost haunting quality exhibited not only in its Gothic spires and flying buttresses, but the chapel’s spiritual and ghostly esoteric qualities are manifested in the profuse and intricate carvings and hieroglyphics evidenced on the interior’s every square inch of masonry surface.

In this small cathedral, it’s a short and misty road from the present to the past. It’s a place where you enter into a world of “intellectual oblivion” expressed in design and stone by our spiritual Brothers of a different time. It is impossible, in this environment to deny that the genesis of our Order is shrouded in esoteria and rooted in the cryptic origins of contemplative man.

The ornate carvings and depictions in stone are almost overwhelming to everyone who views the chapel. But the abundant, half-hidden Templar and Masonic symbolism is profound and easily identified by the Initiated. There abounds hundreds of references to Christian parables, Biblical characters, the ancient Knights Templar, Freemasonry, and commentary on the religious-political climate of that time in our long past.

The chapel is a perfect exemplification of our sacred geometry and incorporates many easily recognized Masonic and Templar symbols in its architectural designs. The Apprentice Pillar with its attendant carvings, the Master’s Pillar, the hidden and much speculated upon contents of the subterranean crypt, the proliferation of Templar splayed and floriated crosses, obvious reference to the Masonic degrees, transparent references to Templarism, and so much more, can be found everywhere. There is a lintel at the east end of the south aisle bearing a familiar inscription in Latin which translates:

“Wine is strong, a King is stronger, women are even stronger, but Truth conquers all”

There is such a profusion of intricate carvings incorporated into the design and construction of every minute detail, that you can easily lose yourself for hours while just wandering.

To the best of my knowledge, Rosslyn Chapel represents the only place where such an obvious and overtly profuse collection of Masonic and Templar esoterica and symbolism is displayed together in a structure predating the traditional origins of the Craft.

Additionally, the founder and builder was documented as an heir to the heritage of the Knights of the temple as well as a Knight Templar himself. The dating of the construction of the chapel as well as its proximity to other known Templar and Masonic sites of pilgrimage leads me to the conclusion that Rosslyn Chapel is of significant importance to Masons and Knights Templar and may well be the common factor linking the respective orders.

The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon (Latin: Pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Solomonici), popularly known as the Knights Templar, was one of the most famous of the Christian military orders. It existed for about two centuries in the Middle Ages, created in the aftermath of the First Crusade of 1096 to ensure the safety of the large numbers of European Pilgrims who flowed toward Jerusalem after its conquest.

The Templars were an unusual order in that they were both monks and soldiers, making them in effect some of the earliest “warrior monks” in the Western world. Members of the Order played a key part in many battles of the Crusades, and the Order’s infrastructure innovated many financial techniques that could be considered the foundation of modern banking. The Order grew in membership and power throughout Europe, until it ran afoul of King Philip IV of France (Philip the Fair), who caused members in France to be tortured into confessions and burned at the stake. Under influence from King Philip, Pope Clement V then forcibly disbanded the order on Friday 13 October, 1307.

Organization 

The High Templars were organized as a monastic order, following a rule created for them by their patron, Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, a member of the Cistercian Order. Each country had a Master of the Order for the Templars in that region, and all of them were subject to the Grand Master, appointed for life, who oversaw both the Order’s military efforts in the East, and their financial holdings in the West.

There were four divisions of brothers in the Templars:

1. the knights, equipped as heavy cavalry (wore a white habit with red cross);
2. the sergeants (serjens), equipped as light cavalry and drawn from a lower social class than the knights (wore a brown mantle);
3. the serving brothers — the rural brothers (frères casaliers), who administered the property of the Order, and the frères de métiers, who performed menial tasks and trades;
4. the chaplains, who were ordained priests and saw to the spiritual needs of the Order.

With the high demand for knights, there were also knights who signed up to the Order for a set period of time before returning to secular life, as well as the Fratres conjugati, who were married brothers. Both of these wore a black or brown mantle with a red cross to delineate them from the celibate lifetime members, and were not considered to be of the same status as the celibate brothers. It also appears that the serving brothers (frères casaliers and frères de métiers) were not separate from the sergeants, but rather that a sergeant who was a skilled tradesman or was unable to fight due to age or infirmity would perform these other functions. The majority of the Templars, including the knights and the Grand Masters, were both uneducated and illiterate (as were most knights of the day), having come not from the upper nobility but from more obscure families.

At any time, each knight had some ten people in support positions. Some brothers were devoted solely to banking (typically those with an education), as the Order was often trusted with the safekeeping of precious goods by participants in the Crusades; but the primary mission of the Knights Templar was warfare.

The Templars used their wealth to construct numerous fortifications throughout the Holy Land and were probably one of the best trained and disciplined fighting units of their day. They were also famous and easily recognized, with a white surcoat with distinct red cross emblazoned above the heart or on the chest, as seen in many portrayals of crusading knights.

Initiation into the Order was a profound commitment, and involved a secret ceremony. Few details of the rituals were known at the time, fueling the suspicions of medieval inquisitors, but initiates, at least in the early days of the Order, had to be of noble birth, of legitimate heritage, and had to be willing to sign over all of their wealth and goods to the Order. Further, joining the Order required vows of poverty, chastity, piety, and obedience. For the warriors of the Order, there was a cardinal rule of never surrendering. This fearless uncompromising nature of the Templars, along with excellent training and heavy armament, made them a feared and elite fighting force in medieval times.

History 

The order was founded around 1118 by French knights Hughes de Payens, a veteran of the First Crusade, and Geoffrey de St. Omer for the protection of pilgrims on the road from Jaffa and Jerusalem. At first, the order had only nine knights as members and relied on gifts and cast-offs. As a result, they were originally known as the Poor Knights of Christ. King Baldwin II of Jerusalem gave them a headquarters on the Temple Mount, above what was believed to be the ruins of the Temple of Solomon. It was from this location that the Order took its name of Poor Knights of Christ and the Temple of Solomon.

The Order grew rapidly because of support from key church leaders such as Bernard de Clairvaux, and was exempt from all authority except that of the Pope. Because of this official sanction, the order received massive donations of money, land, and noble-born sons from families across Europe, who were encouraged to donate support as their way of assisting with the fight in the Holy Land. Templar Knights also fought alongside King Louis VII of France, King Richard I of England, and in battles in Spain and Portugal.

Though the primary mission of the Order was a military one, only a small percentage of its members were actually at the front lines, while many others were involved in developing a financial infrastructure to support the warrior branch. The Order also innovated ways of generating letters of credit for pilgrims who were journeying to the Holy Land, which involved pilgrims depositing their valuables with the Order before setting off on the journey. This may have been the first form of checking put into use. From this mixture of donations and shrewd business dealing during the 12th and 13th centuries the Order acquired large tracts of land both in Europe and the Middle East, built churches and castles, bought farms and vineyards, was involved in manufacturing, import and export, had its own fleet of ships, and for a time even owned the entire island of Cyprus.

After Jerusalem was lost to Saladin in 1187, the Crusades gradually wound down and European support for the Order began to falter. In the early 1300s, King Philip IV of France (also known as “Philip the Fair”) was in desperate need of money to continue his war with the English. He began by approaching the Templars’ Grand Master, Jacques De Molay, asking him to respond to allegations of malpractice. De Molay rejected the allegations out of hand. On Friday, October 13, 1307 (a date possibly linked to the origin of the Friday the 13th legend), Philip had all French Templars simultaneously arrested, charged with numerous heresies, and tortured by French authorities nominally under the Inquisition until they allegedly confessed. This action released Philip from his obligation to repay huge loans from the Templars and justified his looting of Templar treasuries. In 1312 due to public opinion and scandal, and under pressure from King Philip (who had been responsible for maneuvering Pope Clement V into the Vatican), Clement officially disbanded the Order at the Council of Vienne. Even though all their lands were supposed to be turned over to the Hospitallers, Philip retained a great deal of the Templar assets in France. Some other European leaders followed suit in an effort to reduce the amount of Church-owned lands and property. In 1314 three Templar leaders, including Grand Master Jacques De Molay, Hugh De Perault and Godfrey De Goneville were burned alive at the stake by French authorities after publicly renouncing any guilt.

Remaining Templars around Europe, having been arrested and tried under the Papal investigation (with virtually none convicted), were either absorbed into other military orders such as the Order of Christ and the Knights Hospitaller or contemplative Benedictine or Augustinian orders; returned to the secular life with pension; and in some cases possibly fled to other territories outside of Papal control such as England and excommunicated Scotland. But questions still remain as to what happened to the few hundreds of Templars across Europe, or to the fleet of Templar ships which, according to various works of fiction and nonfiction (including the alternative history work Holy Blood, Holy Grail) vanished from La Rochelle on October 13, 1307. Also, the extensive archive of the Templars, with detailed records of all of their business holdings and financial transactions, was never found, though it is unknown whether it was destroyed, or moved to another location, or ever existed in the first place.

In modern times, it is the Roman Catholic Church’s position that the persecution was unjust; that there was nothing inherently wrong with the Order or its Rule; and that the Pope at the time was severely pressured into suppressing them by the magnitude of the public scandal and the dominating influence of King Philip IV. In 2002, a copy of the Chinon Parchment was discovered by Dr. Frale in the Vatican Secret Archives. The parchment gave direct documented evidence and a new perspective on the Knights Templar and overturned some of the centuries-old myths and misconceptions that have grown around the Order.

Grand Masters

Starting with founder Hughes de Payens in 1118, the Order’s highest office was that of Grand Master, a position which was held for life, though considering the warrior nature of the Order, this could be a very short period of time. The Grand Master oversaw all of the operations of the Order, including both the military operations in the Holy Land and eastern Europe, and the financial and business dealings in the Order’s infrastructure of Western Europe. Grand Masters could also be active military commanders, though this was not always a wise choice, as seen by the fate of the defeated Grand Master Gérard de Ridefort, who ended up beheaded by Saladin in 1189 at the Siege of Acre. The last Grand Master was Jacques DeMolay.

Legends

The Knights Templar have become surrounded by legends concerning secrets and mysteries handed down to the select from ancient times. Most of these legends are connected with the long occupation by the order of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, and speculation about what relics the Templars may have found there, such as the Holy Grail, the Ark of the Covenant, or fragments of the True Cross from the Crucifixion. And still more stories were started by fictional embellishments upon the Templar history, such as a treasure long hidden by the Templars. This idea has been used in two recent Hollywood movies, The Da Vinci Code and National Treasure. In the Indiana Jones film The Last Crusade, there was a rather more fantastical view of the history of the Templar. The idea has also been used in the graphic novel Rex Mundi (Dark Horse Comics) by Arvid Nelson, in novels by Steve Berry, The Templar Legacy, Raymond Khoury, The Last Templar, Jack Whyte, Knights of the Black and White, and even in a Donald Duck comic story by Don Rosa.

Other legends have grown around the suspected associations of the Templars. Many organizations claim traditions from the original Order especially in relation to anonymous charity and good deeds. Some of these organizations which claim (spuriously) to be associated with the Templars are still active within communities across the globe supporting humanistic causes such as hospitals and medical treatment centers for the less fortunate. Additionally, while not claiming any direct descent from Templar Jacques de Molay, the Order of DeMolay, a youth fraternity associated with the Freemasons, cite de Molay’s loyalty to his fellow Templars in the face of execution as a bedrock moral imperative.

The dissolution of the Templar order is well documented, and its remaining members after the destruction of the order in 1314 were absorbed into the Knights of the Hospital of Saint John, which continued as a minor military entity throughout the middle ages. However, the story of the Templars’ persecution has proved a tempting source for many organizations to use to enhance their own dignity, history, and mystery. There are a variety of claims to descendance from around the western world, none of whom are able to produce any evidence, or plausible theory explaining their descent.

Another legend originates around Switzerland, and associates the Knights Templar with the founding of the Swiss country.

Sources

Malcolm Barber, The New Knighthood: A History of the Order of the Temple. Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0-521-42041-5

Peter Partner, The Knights Templar and their Myth. Destiny Books; Reissue edition (1990). ISBN 0-89281-273-7

Frale, Barbara (2004). “The Chinon chart — Papal absolution to the last Templar, Master Jacques de Molay”. Journal of Medieval History 30 (2): 109–134. DOI:10.1016/j.jmedhist.2004.03.004.

The History Channel, Decoding the Past: The Templar Code documentary, 2005

George Smart, The Knights Templar: Chronology, Authorhouse, 2005. ISBN 1-4184-9889-0

Sean Martin, The Knights Templar: The History & Myths of the Legendary Military Order, 2005. ISBN 1-56025-645-1

Dr. Karen Ralls, The Templars and the Grail, Quest Books, 2003. ISBN 0-8356-0807-7

Alan Butler, Stephen Dafoe, The Warriors and the Bankers: A History of the Knights Templar from 1307 to the present, Templar Books, 1998. ISBN 0-9683567-2-9

Malcolm Barber, “Who Were the Knights Templar?”. Slate Magazine, 20 April 2006.

Brighton, Simon (2006-06-15). In Search of the Knights Templar: A Guide to the Sites in Britain (Hardback), London, England: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 0-297-84433-4.

J M Upton-Ward, The Rule of the Templars: The French Text of the Rule of the Order of the Knights Templar. The Boydell Press, 1992. ISBN 0-85115-315-1

The Norwegian Order of Freemasons is a detached independent body of men from all walks of life and from all parts of the country. They meet regularly initially to work on their personal development. These meetings which are based on Christian Faith are conducted with dignity and bound in tradition.
 
The ideas behind and the aim of Freemasonry is to influence the process of ennoblement and personal improvement by promoting humility, tolerance and compassion. Those qualities which the members master in the lodge should be practised in their daily lives.

These human qualities can of course be attained and practised by others who are not Freemasons, but the Order of Freemasons is an organisation where this thought has taken a practical form which enables its members to develop it through ancient rituals, and with dignity.

The Norwegian Order of Freemasons does not engage itself in national or international political issues, nor does it engage itself in religious or social disputes.

The members show loyalty to the authority and laws of the country. They show respect for the Order itself and the aims of Freemasonry.
 

A Short History

Present day Freemasonry grew forth in Scotland and England in the 1600´s as an ethical and philosophical system based on the art of building, its symbolism and history. The Order, in its original form, was consecrated in 1717 when four Masonic lodges in London amalgamated to form what was to become the first Grand Lodge.

The system was quickly adopted and became predominant in continental Europe. The first Norwegian lodge was founded on the June 24th 1749 on Bygdoey, a peninsular on the Oslo Fjord.
 

What is a Lodge

It is the name given to the assembly room or building where the Masonic brothers meet. A lodge meeting, as a rule, includes a solemn ceremony where new brothers are received into their respective degrees. These admissions are conducted within a framework of solemnity with opening and closing ceremonies, with music and rituals rich in tradition. The lodge evening closes with a simple meal in an air of informality among the brothers.

The foundation for our Masonic system is the first three degrees, which are called St John’s, Craft or Blue Masonry where brothers receive the titles appropriate to their degree -

I. Entered Apprentice (EA)
II. Fellow Craft (FC)
III. Master Mason (MM)

as in accordance with the art of building.

This is followed by St. Andrew’s Masonry, which works within the IV, V and VI degrees.

The final section is the Chapter or Chivalric Masonry for brothers of the VII – X degree.

A few brothers with special responsibility within the Order may receive titles like Knight and Commander of the Red Cross XI degree.

Besides Norway’s approximately 80 lodges there are numerous Lodges of Instruction which work within the same framework as the lodges, but are not allowed to initiate new members.

How does one become a member

To become a member of the Norwegian Order of Freemasons, which has today approximately 18,000 members, one must be sponsored by two members of the Order, one of whom must have obtained the degree of Master Mason. Those seeking admission must profess to the Christian faith, have reached the age of 24 and known to have stability in his daily life.
Those interested in membership must take contact with a Freemason he knows personally and who is willing to recommend him as a member. This application for membership should be a completely free decision; no one should be persuaded to become a member. It is the case of a strong personal relationship.

 
Not Secret, but Closed

The Norwegian Order of Freemasons is not a secret order. It operates openly. The list of members is available for anyone, likewise the Laws of the Norwegian Order of Freemasons, which can be read by anyone. It is evident from this that the Masonic system worked to have its basis in the Christian faith.

It is in point of fact a Christian Order, but within this framework no demands are made for adherence to special dogmas or creeds.

The Masonic learning system is closed to outsiders. Freemasonry is a school lasting a lifetime where a Mason has to work through the degrees.

The content of each degree is held closed until the Freemason himself has had the opportunity to take a standpoint on questions and challenges, which are attached to each new degree.

International cooperation

The Norwegian Order of Freemasons is an independent, national order, unbound and under no obligation to any foreign order unlike the other Nordic orders. There is however good co-operation between the lodges in the North and many other lands all over the world.

Each country’s Freemasons organisation is an independent Masonic society. There is no international organisation. Today there are about six million Freemasons throughout the world.
 

A Humanitarian Order

To show compassion and fellowship is an obligation for each human being, but a Freemason is especially bound and must be most vigilant in this area.

Regular collections are arranged to support and help our fellow mortals who might be in need of a helping hand. Annually a cause or institution is chosen for the Orders’ Common Gift, and a united collection is taken on its behalf.

The Norwegian Order of Freemasons is represented with Lodges and Brother societies in most towns and many other denser populated areas of Norway.

Rough translation of an obscure document that seems to demonstrate that the leaders of the Order of the Knights Templar were pardoned by papal investigators. For more information see the Wikipedia article

The text has also been published by Barbara Frale in Il papato e il processo ai templari : l’inedita assoluzione de Chinon alla luce della diplomatica pontificia. Le edizioni del Mulino. 2004 and on the In Rebus web site.

Investigation carried out
by the fathers commissioned by Pope Clement V
in the town of Chinon, diocese of Tours.

Chinon, August 17-20, 1308

In the name of the Lord, amen. We, Berengar, by the mercy of God cardinal presbyter of SS. Nereus and Achileus, and Stephanus, cardinal presbyter of St. Ciriacus in Therminis, and Landolf, cardinal deacon of St. Angel, declare through this official statement directed to all who will read it that since our most holy father and lord Clement, by divine providence the supreme pontific of the holy Roman and universal church, after receiving the word of mouth and also clamorous reports from the illustrious king of France and prelates, dukes, counts, barons and other subjects of the said kingdom, both noblemen and commoners, along with some brothers, presbyters, knights, preceptors and servants of the Templar order, had initiated an inquiry into matters concerning the brothers, [questions of Catholic faith] and the Rule of the said Order, because of which it suffered public infamy, the very same lord Pope wishing and intending to know the pure, complete and uncompromised truth from the leaders of the said Order, namely brother Jacques de Molay, grandmaster of the Order of Knights Tempar, brother Raymbaud de Caron, preceptor the commandaries of Templar Knights in Outremer, brother Hugo de Pérraud, preceptor of France, brother Geoffroy de Gonneville, preceptor of Aquitania and Poitou, and Geoffroy of Charny, preceptor of Normandy, ordered and commissioned us specifically and by his verbally expressed will in order that we might with diligence examine the truth by questioning the grandmaster and the aforementioned preceptors – one by one and individually, having summoned notaries public and trustworthy witnesses.

And having acted according to the mandate and commissioned by the said Lord Supreme Pontific, we questioned the aforementioned grandmaster and the preceptors and examined them concerning the matters described above. Their words and confessions were written down exactly the way they are included here by the notaries whose names are listed below in the presence of witnesses listed below. We also ordered these things drawn up in this official form and validated by the protection of our seals.

In the year of our Lord 1308, the 6^th indiction, on the 17^th day of August, in the 3d year of the pontificate of the said Pope Clement V, brother Raymbaud de Caron, preceptor the commandaries of Templar Knights in Outremer, was brought in front of us, the aforementioned fathers, to the town of Chinon of the Tours diocese. With his hand on the Holy Gospel of the Lord he took an oath that he would speak pure and complete truth about himself as well individuals and brothers of the Order, and about the Order itself, concerning questions of Catholic faith and the Rule of the said Order, and also about five particular individuals and brothers of the Order. Diligently interrogated by us about the time and circumstances of his initiation in the order he said that it was been forty-thee years or thereabouts since he had been knighted and admitted into the Templar Order by brother Roncelin de Fos, at the time preceptor of Provence, in the town of Richarenchess, in the diocese of Carpentras or Saint-Paul-Trois-Châteaux, in the chapel of the local Templar commandery. During the ceremony the patron said nothing to the novice that was not proper, but after the admittance a servant-brother came up to him whose name he does not recall, for he has been dead for a long time. He took him aside holding a small cross under his cloak, and when all the brothers exited and they remained alone, that is this brother-servant and the speaker, this brother-servant showed this cross to the speaker who does not recall whether it bore the effigy of the crucifix or not, but believes however, that there was a crucifix either painted or carved. And this brother-servant told the speaker: “You must denounce this one.” And the speaker, not believing himself to be committing a sin, said: “And so, I denounce.” That brother-servant also told the speaker that he should preserve purity and chastity, but if he could not do so, it was better to be done secretly than publicly. The speaker also said that his denunciation did not come from the heart, but from the mouth. Then he said that the next day he revealed this to the bishop of Carpentras, his blood relative, who was present in the said place, and the bishop told him that he had acted wrongly and committed a sin. Then the interrogated confessed on this account to the same bishop and was assigned penances with he completed, according to him.

When asked about the sin of sodomy, he said that he never was a part of it neither performing or enduring, and that he never heard that knights Templar engaged in this sin, apart from those three knights who had been punished by perpetual incarceration in Castle Pilgrim. When asked whether the brothers of the said Order were received into the order in the same manner he was received into it, he replied that he did not know that, because he never initiated anyone himself and did not see anyone being accepted in the Order other than two or three brothers. Regarding them he did not know whether they denounced Christ or not. When he was asked about the names of these brothers he said that one had the name of Peter, but that he did not remember his family name. When he was asked how old he was when he was made brother of the said Order he replied that he was seventeen years of age or thereabouts. When he was asked about the spitting on the cross and about the worshipped head, he said that he knew nothing, adding that he had never heard any mention of that head until he heard the lord Pope Clement speak of it this past year. When he was asked about the practice of kissing, he replied that the aforementioned brother Roncelin kissed him on the mouth when he received him as a brother; he said that he knew nothing about other kisses. When he was asked whether he wanted to maintain what he had said during the confession, whether it was done according to the truth, and whether he had added anything untruthful or withheld anything that is truthful, he replied that he wanted to maintain what he had previously said in his confession, that it was truthful and that he neither added anything that was untruthful nor omitted anything that was truthful. When he was asked whether he had confessed due to a request, reward, gratitude, favor, fear, hatred or persuasion by someone else, or the use of force, or fear of impending torture, he replied that he did not.

Afterwards, this very brother Raymbaud standing on his knees with his hands folded asked for our forgiveness and mercy regarding the abovementioned deeds. And as he pleaded so, brother Raymbaud denounced in our presence the abovementioned heresy, as well as any other heresy. For the second time he took an oath with his hand upon the Holy Gospel of our Lord in that he will obey the teachings of the Church, that he will maintain, uphold and observe the Catholic faith which the Roman Church maintains, upholds and proclaims, as well as teaches and requires of others to observe it, and that he will live and die as a faithful Christian. After this oath, by the authority of lord Pope specifically granted to us for that purpose, we extended to this humbly asking brother Raymbaud, in a form accepted by the Church the mercy of absolution from the verdict of excommunication that had been incurred by the aforementioned deeds, restoring him to unity with the Church and reinstating him for communion of the faithful and sacraments of the Church.

Also, on the same day, brother knight Geoffroy of Charny, preceptor of commanderies of the Templar Order in Normandy, appearing personally in the previously described manner and form, in our presence, and in the presence of notaries, as well as witnesses, modestly swore with his hand on the Gospel of the Lord and was questioned about the manner of his reception into the said Order. He testified that it has well been forty years or thereabouts since he was accepted into the Order of Knights Templar by brother Amaury de la Roche, the preceptor of France in Étamps of the diocese of Sens, in the chapel of the local Templar commandery. Present at the ceremony were brother Jean le Franceys, preceptor of Pédenac, and nine, ten or so brothers of the said Order whom he all believed to be dead now. And then, once he had been accepted in the order and the cloak of the order had been placed on his shoulders, the brother who performed the ceremony took him aside within the same chapel and showed him a crucifix with an effigy of Christ, and told him that he should not believe in the Crucified, but should in fact denounce Him. Then the newly accepted brother at the demand of the said recipient denounced Him verbally, but not in his heart. Also, he said that at the time of his induction, the novice kissed the recipient on the mouth and in his chest through the garment as a sign of reverence.

When asked whether brothers of the Templar Order while being initiated into the order were accepted in the same manner that he was, he said that he did not know. He also said that he himself received one brother into the said Order through the same ceremony through which he himself was accepted. Afterwards he accepted many others without the denunciation described earlier and in good manner. He also said that he confessed about the denunciation of the cross which he had done during the ceremony of induction and about being forced to do so by the brother performing the ceremony, to the Patriarch of Jerusalem of the time, and was absolved by him.

When diligently questioned regarding the spitting on the cross, the practice of kissing, the vice of sodomy and the worshipped head, he replied that he knew nothing of it. Further interrogated, he said that he believed that other brothers had been accepted into the Order in the same manner that he was. He said however that he did not know that for sure since when these things took place the newly received were taken aside so that other brothers who were present in the building would neither see nor hear what went on with them. Asked about the age that he was in when accepted into the said Order, he replied that he was sixteen, seventeen or thereabouts.

When he was asked whether he had said these things due to a request, reward, gratitude, favor, fear, hatred or persuasion by someone else, or the use of force, or fear of impending torture, he replied that he did not. When he was asked whether he wanted to maintain what he had said during the confession, whether it was done according to the truth, and whether he had added anything untruthful or withheld anything that is truthful, he replied that he wanted to maintain what he had previously said in his confession during which he had only said what was true, that what he said was according to the truth and that he neither added anything that was untruthful nor omitted anything that was truthful.

After this, we concluded to extend the mercy of absolution for these acts to brother Geoffroy, who in the form and manner described above had denounced in our presence the described and any other heresy, and swore in person on the Lord’s Holy Gospel, and humbly asked for the mercy of absolution, restoring him to unity with the Church and reinstating him for communion of the faithful and sacraments of the Church.

On the same day, in our presence and the presence of notaries, as well as the witnesses listed below, brother Geoffroy de Gonneville personally appeared and was diligently questioned about the time and circumstances of his reception and about other matters described above. He replied that it has been twenty eight years or thereabouts since he was received as a brother of the Order of the Knights Templar by brother-knight Robert de Torville, preceptor of the commandaries of the Templar order in England , in the city of London , at the chapel of the local commandery. And this receptor, after bestowing the cloak of the Knights Templar upon the this newly received member, showed him the cross depicted in some book and said that he should denounce the one whose image was depicted on that cross. When the newly received did not want to do so, the receptor told him multiple times that he should do so. And since he completely refused to do it, the receptor, seeing his resistance, said to him: “Will you swear to me that if asked by any of the brothers you would say that you had made this denouncement, provided that I allow you not to make it?” And the newly received answered “yes”, and promised that if he was questioned by any of the brother of the said Order he would say that he had performed the said denouncement. And, as he said, he made no denouncement otherwise. He also said that the said receptor told him that she should spit on the described cross. When the newly received did not wish to do so, the receptor placed his own hand over the depiction of the cross and said: “At least spit on my hand!” And since the received feared that the receptor would remove his hand and some of this spit would get on the cross, he did not want to spit on the hand with the cross being near.

When diligently questioned regarding the sin of sodomy, the worshipped head, about the practice of kissing and other things for which the brothers of the said order received a bad reputation, he said that he knew nothing. When asked whether other brothers of the Order were accepted into the Order in the same way as he was, he said that he believed that the same was done to others as it was done to him at the time of his described initiation.

When he was asked whether he had said these things due to a request, reward, gratitude, favor, fear, hatred or persuasion by someone else, or the use of force, or fear of impending torture, he replied that he did not. After this, we concluded to extend the mercy of absolution for these acts to brother Geoffroy de Goneville, who in the form and manner described above had denounced in our presence the described and any other heresy, and swore in person on the Lord’s Holy Gospel, and humbly asked for the mercy of absolution, restoring him to unity with the Church and reinstating him for communion of the faithful and sacraments of the Church.

Then on the nineteenth day of the month, in our presence, and in the presence of notaries and the same witnesses, brother Hugo de Pérraud, preceptor of Templar commanderies in France appeared personally and took an oath on the Holy Gospel of the Lord, placing his hand upon it in the manner described above. This brother Hugo, having sworn as indicated, and being diligently questioned said about the manner of his initiation that he was received in London at local Templar commandary, in its church. It was forty six years ago this past feast of St. Magdalene. He was inducted as a brother of the Order by brother Hubet de Perraud, his own father, a Visitator of the Templar commanderies in France andPoitou , who placed upon his shoulders the cloak of the said Order. This having been done, some brother of the said Order, by the name of John, who afterwards became preceptor of de La Muce, took him to a certain part of that chapel, showed him a cross with an effigy of Christ, and ordered him to denounce the One whose image was depicted there. He refused, as much as he could, according to him. Eventually, however, overcome by fear and menaces of brother John, he denounced the One whose image was depicted there only once. And although brother John multiple times demanded that he spit on that cross, he refused to do so.

When asked whether he had to kiss the receptor, he said that he did, only on the mouth.

When asked about the sin of sodomy, he replied that it was never imposed on him and he never committed it.

When asked whether he accepted others into the Order, he replied that he did many times, and that he accepted more people than any other living member of the Order.

When asked about the ceremony through which he accepted them, he said that after they were received and given the cloaks of the Order, he ordered them to denounce the crucifix and to kiss him at the bottom of the back, in the navel and then on the mouth. He also said that he imposed on them to abstain from partnership with women, and, if they were unable to restrain their lust, to join themselves with brothers of the Order.

He also said under oath that the aforementioned denunciation, which he performed during initiation, as well as other things described that he demanded from those received by him, was done in word only, and not in spirit. When asked why he felt pained and did not perform in spirit the things that he did, he replied that such were the statutes or rather traditions of the Order and that he always hoped that this error would be removed from the said Order.

When asked whether any of the members newly received by him refused to perform the described spitting and other dishonest things listed above, he replied that only few, and eventually all did as ordered. He also said that although he himself instructed brothers of the order whom he initiated to join with other brothers, nevertheless he never did that, nor heard that anyone else commit this sin, except for the two or three brothers in Outremer who were incarcerated for this in Castle Pilgrim.

When asked whether he knew if all brothers of the said Order were initiated in the same manner as he initiated others, he said that he did not know for sure about others, only about himself and those whom he initiated, because brothers are initiated in such secrecy that nothing can be known other than through those who are present. When asked whether he believed that they were all initiated in this manner, he said that he believed that the same ritual is used while initiating others as it was used in his case and as he himself administered when he received others.

When asked about the head of an idol that was reportedly worshiped by the Templars, he said that it was shown to him in Montpellier by brother Peter Alemandin, preceptor of that place, and that this head remained in possession of brother Peter.

When asked how old he was when accepted into the said Order, he replied that he heard his mother say that he was eighteen. He also said that previously he had confessed about these things in the presence of brother Guillaume of Paris, inquisitor of heretical actions, or his deputy. This confession was written down in the hand of the undersigning Amise d’Orleans and some other notaries public. He wishes to maintain that confession, just as it is, as well as maintain in the present confession that which is in concord with the previous one. And if there is anything additional in this confession in front of the Inquisitor or his deputy, as has been said above, he ratifies, approves and confirms it.

When he was asked whether he had confessed to these things due to a request, reward, gratitude, favor, fear, hatred or persuasion by someone else, or the use of force, or fear of impending torture, he replied that he did not. When he was asked whether he, after being apprehended, was submitted to any questioning or torture, he replied that he did not.

After this, we concluded to extend the mercy of absolution for these acts to brother Hugo, who in the form and manner described above had denounced in our presence the described and any other heresy, and swore in person on the Lord’s Holy Gospel, and humbly asked for the mercy of absolution, restoring him to unity with the Church and reinstating him to communion of the faithful and sacraments of the Church.

Then on the twentieth day of the month, in our presence, and in the presence of notaries and the same witnesses, brother-knight Jacques de Molay, grandmaster of  the Order of Knights Templar appeared personally and having sworn in the form and manner indicated above, and having been diligently questioned, said it has been forty-two years or thereabouts since he was received as a brother of the said Order by brother-knight Hubert de Pérraud, at the time Visitator of France and Poitou, in Beune, diocese of Autun, in the chapel of the local Templar commandery of that place.

Concerning the way of his initiation into the Order, he said that having given him the cloak the receptor showed to him <the cross> and told him that he should denounce the God whose image was depicted on that cross, and that he should spit on the cross. Which he did, although he did not spit on the cross, by near it, according to his words. He also said that performed this denunciation in words, not in spirit. Regarding the sin of sodomy, the worshipped head and the practice of illicit kisses, he, diligently questioned, said that he knew nothing of that.

When he was asked whether he had confessed to these things due to a request, reward, gratitude, favor, fear, hatred or persuasion by someone else, or the use of force, or fear of impending torture, he replied that he did not. When he was asked whether he, after being apprehended, was submitted to any questioning or torture, he replied that he did not.

After this, we concluded to extend the mercy of absolution for these acts to brother Jaques de Molay, the grandmaster of the said order, who in the form and manner described above had denounced in our presence the described and any other heresy, and swore in person on the Lord’s Holy Gospel, and humbly asked for the mercy of absolution, restoring him to unity with the Church and reinstating him to communion of the faithful and sacraments of the Church.

On the same twentieth day of the month, in our presence, and in the presence of notaries and the same witnesses, brother Geoffroy de Gonneville freely and willingly ratified, approved and confirmed his signed confession that was read to him in his native tongue, and gave assurances that he intended to stand by and maintain both this confession and the confession he made on a different occasion in front of the Inquisitor or inquisitors regarding the aforementioned heretic transgressions, in as much as it was in concordance with the confession made in front of us, the notaries and the aforementioned witnesses; and that if there is something extra contained in the confession made in front of the Inquisitor and inquisitors, as it was said earlier, he ratifies, approves and confirms that.

On the same twentieth day of the month, in our presence, and in the presence of notaries and the same witnesses, brother-preceptor Hugo de Perraud in a similar way freely and willingly ratified, approved and confirmed his signed confession that was read to him in his native tongue.

We ordered Robert de Condet, cleric of the diocese of Soissons, a notary by apostolic power, who was among us together with notaries and witnesses listed below, to record and make public as evidence these confessions, as well as each and every thing described above that occurred in front of us, the notaries and the witnesses, and also everything done by us, exactly as it is shown above, and to validate it by attaching our seal.

This was done on the year, indiction, month, day, pontificate and the place indicated above, in our presence and the presence of Umberto Vercellani, Nicolo Nicolai de Benvenuto and the aforementioned Robert de Condet, and also master Amise d’Orleans le Ratif, notaries public by the apostolic power, as well as pious and distinguished brother Raymond, abbot of the Benedictine monastery of St. Theofred, Annecy diocese, master Berard de Boiano, archdeacon of Troia, Raoul de Boset, confessor and canon from Paris, and Pierre de Soire, overseer of Saint-Gaugery in Cambresis, who were gathered specifically as witnesses.

And I, Robert de Condet, cleric of the diocese of Soissons, notary by apostolic power, observed with other notaries and witnesses each and every thing described above that occurred in the presence of the aforementioned reverend fathers lords cardinal presbyters, myself and other notaries and witnesses, as well as what was done by their lordships. On the orders from their lordships the cardinal presbyters, I made this record, and put in the official form, and sealed it with my seal, having been asked to do so.

And also I, Umberto Vercellani, cleric of Béziers, notary by apostolic power, observed with other notaries and witnesses each and every thing described above that occurred in the presence of the aforementioned lords cardinal presbyters, as well as what was done by their lordships cardinal presbyters just as it is shown above in fuller detail. On the orders from these cardinal presbyters, for further assurance, I wrote underneath this record and sealed it with my seal.

And also I, Nicolo Nicolai di Benevento, notary by apostolic decree, observed with other aforementioned notaries and witnesses each and every thing described above that occurred in the presence of the aforementioned lords cardinal presbyters, as well as what was done by their lordships just as it is shown above in fuller detail. On the orders from these cardinal presbyters, for further assurance, I wrote underneath this record and sealed it with my seal.

And also I, Arnulphe d’Orléans called le Ratif, notary by the power of the Holy Roman Church, observed with other aforementioned notaries and witnesses confessions, depositions and other each and every thing described above that occurred in the presence of the aforementioned reverend fathers lords cardinal presbyters, as well as what was done by their lordships just as it is shown above in fuller detail. On the orders from these cardinal presbyters, as a testimony of truth, I wrote underneath this record and sealed it with my seal, having been asked to do so.