“A degree indescribably
more august, sublime and important than any which precede it; and is,
in fact, the summit and perfection of ancient Masonry. It impresses
on our minds a belief in the being of a God, without beginning of
days or end of years, the great and incomprehensible Alpha and Omega,
and reminds us of the reverence which is due to His holy Name.”
Oliver's Historical Landmarks.
SYMBOLICAL DESIGN.
In
the preceding degrees we see the gradual progress of man from the
cradle to the grave, depicted in his advancement through the several
grades of the masonic system. We see him acquiring at his initiation
the first elements of morality, and when about to represent the
period of manhood, invested with new communications of a scientific
character, and discharging the duties of life in various conditions.
Again, at a later stage of his progress we find him attaining the
experience of a well-spent life, and in the joyful hope of a blessed
resurrection putting his house in order, and preparing for his final
departure.
And
now with reverential awe we continue the sacred theme, and in the
last degree symbolically allude to the rewards prepared for those
who, in the pursuits of life, have distinguished themselves by a
patient “continuance in well-doing.”
Life,
without some definite object in view, would be but a wearisome and
monotonous existence. Every man, therefore, by the very instinct, as
it were, of his nature, sets out with the proposed pursuit of some
particular aim. To one it is wealth—to another, fame—to
a third, pleasure. But whatever it may be, its attainment is
considered as necessary to the happiness of the party seeking it.
The
great object of pursuit in masonry—the scope and tendency of
all its investigations—is TRUTH. This is the goal to which all
masonic labor evidently tends. Sought for in every degree, and
constantly approached, but never thoroughly and intimately embraced,
at length, in the Royal Arch, the veils which concealed the object of
search from our view are withdrawn, and the inestimable prize is
revealed.
This
truth which masonry makes the great object of its investigations, is
not the mere truth of science, or the truth of history, but is the
more important truth which is synonymous with the knowledge of the
nature of God—that truth which is embraced in the sacred
tetragrammaton or omnific name, including in its signification His
eternal, present, past and future existence, and to which He Himself
alluded when He declared to Moses—“I appeared unto
Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty: but
by my name Jehovah was I not known unto them.”
This
knowledge of divine truth is never thoroughly attained in life; the
corruptions of mortality, which encumber and cloud the human
intellect, hide it as with a thick veil from mortal eyes. It is only
beyond the tomb and when released from the burthen of life, that man
is capable fully of receiving and appreciating the revelation.
Hence, when we figuratively speak of its discovery in the Royal Arch
degree, we mean to intimate that that sublime portion of the masonic
system is a symbolic representation of the state after death. The
vanities and follies of life are now supposed to be passed away—the
first temple which we had erected with such consummate labor and
apparent skill, for the reception of the Deity, has proved an
imperfect and a transitory edifice; decay and desolation have fallen
upon it, and from its ruins, deep beneath its foundations, and in the
profound abyss of the grave, we find that mighty truth, in the search
for which, life was spent in vain, and the mystic key to which death
only could supply, when, having passed the portals of the grave, we
shall begin to occupy that second temple, that house not made with
hands, eternal in the heavens.
HISTORICAL SUMMARY.
Every
reflecting mason must at once be struck with the fact that the third
degree, or, as Hutchinson calls it, “The Master Mason's Order,”
presents all the appearance of being in a mutilated condition—that
it is imperfect and unfinished in its history, and that, terminating
abruptly as it does, it leaves the mind unsatisfied and craving for
something that it does not and cannot supply. Now a reference to
this fact is the first step towards an acquaintance with the true
origin of the Royal Arch degree.
As an independent degree, given
under a distinct jurisdiction and furnished with a separate but
appropriate ritual, it is undoubtedly a modern degree, of
comparatively recent establishment; but as a complement of the Master
Mason's order, as supplying the deficiency of that degree in masonic
symbolism it is, and of course must be, as old as the organization of
which it forms so important and so necessary a part. The third
degree is a symbolic memorial of events which took place at the first
temple. The Royal Arch is equally a symbolic memorial of events that
occurred at the second, and as the one would be incomplete without
the other, we have every reason to suppose that each was adopted at
the earliest period of the modem organization of Freemasonry as a
memorial system. Indeed they must go together. The Royal Arch is
the cape-stone of the masonic edifice, but the third degree is its
foundation, and without the presence of both the building would be
incomplete. The Royal Arch is absolutely necessary to the perfection
of the Master's degree as a science of symbolism, and the latter
cannot be understood without the developments of the former. They
are the first and second volumes of a continuous history, and the
absence of either would mutilate the work.
All
of this, it must be remembered, is to be understood of the two
degrees, simply in their modern organization, as a record,
appropriated to a symbolic purpose, of the events to which they
allude. Of course no one can indulge in the absurdity of supposing
that the Royal Arch degree could have existed contemporaneously with
the Master's at the time of the building of the first temple.
Neither degree, in fact, in its present form is to be dated even at
the later period of the building of the second. The events which
they record of course occurred at the correct historic periods; but
the organization and establishment of these degrees as records or
memorials of these events, must have been a subsequent invention,
when, we know not; nor is it essential to know. Certainly it was at
a period beyond the memory of man, and outside of the records of
history.
The
Third Degree records a loss intrinsically of but little value, yet,
in its symbolical reference, of the utmost importance. The Royal
Arch records a recovery which is equally symbolical. The recovery
cannot be appreciated unless we have first experienced the loss, and
the loss would be unmeaning did we not subsequently meet with the
recovery.
Accordingly,
the Royal Arch degree was, anciently, always considered as a
complement of the Master's, and was, therefore, originally conferred
in symbolic lodges under the sanction of a Master's warrant. But as
to the time when it was first dissevered from this connection and
placed under a separate jurisdiction,masonic writers were not able to
agree until the lucid explanations of the venerable Oliver have
completely settled the long vexed question. [See Oliver, George.
Some Account of the Schism which took place during the Last
Century amongst the Free and Accepted Masons in England, showing
the presumed Origin of the Royal Arch Degree; &c.]
It seems to be evident, from the
researches of this learned masonic historian, that until the year
1740, the essential element of the Royal Arch constituted a component
part of the Master's degree, and was of course its concluding
portion; that as a degree, it was not at all recognized, being but
the complement of one; that about that time it was dissevered from
its original connection and elevated to the position and invested
with the form of a distinct degree by the body which called itself
“the Grand Lodge of England according to the old
Constitutions,” but which is more familiarly known as the
Dermott or the Atholl Grand Lodge, and frequently as “the
ancients,” in contradistinction to the legitimate Grand Lodge
which was styled “the moderns.”
The
jurisdiction of the degree still however continued to be under
Master's lodges, and many years elapsed before it was taken thence
and placed under the control of distinct bodies called Grand
Chapters. In America it was not until 1798 that a Grand Chapter was
formed, and many lodges persisted for some years after in conferring
the Royal Arch degree under the authority of their warrants from
Grand Lodges.
CHAPTER OF ROYAL ARCH MASONS.
The
title of the High Priest is “Most Excellent.” He
represents Joshua, or Jeshua, who was the son of Josedech, and the
High Priest of the Jews, when they returned from the Babylonian
exile. He is seated in the east and clothed in the apparel of the
ancient High Priest of the Jews. He wears a robe of blue, purple,
scarlet and white linen, and is decorated with a breast-plate and
mitre. On the front of the mitre is inscribed the words “Holiness
to the Lord.” His jewel is a mitre.
The
King represents Zerubbabel, who was the son of Shealtiel, and the
Prince of Judah, being lineally descended from King Solomon. He was
the leader of the first colony of Jews who returned from the
captivity at Babylon to rebuild the city of Jerusalem and the temple
of the Lord. He sits on the right hand of the High Priest, clothed
in a scarlet robe, with a crown on his head and a sceptre in his
hand. His jewel is a level surmounted by a crown.
The
Scribe represents Haggai the prophet, who returned with Joshua and
Zerubbabel to Jerusalem at the liberation of the Jews by Cyrus from
their Babylonish captivity. He sits on the left hand of the High
Priest clothed in a purple robe and wearing a turban of the same
color. His jewel is a plumb-line surmounted by a turban. The Sophar
or Scribe among the Jews at the period to which the Royal Arch
degree refers, was a learned man whose duty it was to expound the
law, and to take care of the records. He may be considered as in
some measure a minister of state. Dr. Beard, in Kitto's Cyclopaedia
of Biblical Literature, thus describes the functions of the Scribes:
“The Scribes had the care of the law; it was their duty to make
transcripts of it; they also expounded its difficulties and taught
its doctrines, and so performed several functions which are now
distributed among different professions, being keepers of the
records, consulting lawyers, authorized expounders of holy writ, and,
finally, schoolmasters—thus blending together in one character
the several elements of intellectual, moral, social, and religious
influence. It scarcely needs to be added that their power was very
great.” These three officers constitute the Grand Council.
The
Captain of the Host represents the general or leader of the Jewish
troops who returned from Babylon and who was called “Sar el
hatzaba” and was
equivalent to a modern general. He sits on the right of the council
in front, and wears a white robe, and cap or helmet with a red sash,
and is armed with a sword. His jewel is a triangular plate, on which
an armed soldier is engraved.
The
Principal Sojourner represents the spokesman and leader of a small
party of Israelites who had sojourned in Babylon for a short time
after the departure of the main body of exiles, and subsequently came
up to Jerusalem. He sits on the left of the council, in front, and
wears dark robe with a rose colored tesselated border, and a slouched
hat and pilgrim's rod or staff. His jewel is a triangular plate, on
which a pilgrim is engraved.
The Royal Arch Captain
represents the “Sar hatabahim” or Captain
of the King's guards. He sits in front of the council and at the
entrance of the fourth veil. He wears a white robe and cap, and is
armed with a sword, and bears a white pennon or banner. His jewel is
a sword.
The
Grand Masters of the three veils represent the attendants on the
tabernacle. They sit at the entrance of their respective veils, and
wear robes and caps of different colors. The Master of the third
veil wears a scarlet robe and cap, the Master of the second a purple
robe and cap, and the Master of the first a blue robe and cap. Each
is armed with a sword, and bears a flag or pennon of the same color
as his robe and the veil which he guards. Their jewel is the same as
that of the Royal Arch Captain.
The
Jewels of a Chapter are of gold, and each is suspended within a
triangle. Those of a Grand Chapter are suspended within a circle.
The
symbolic color of this degree is scarlet.
The
collar and sash of a Royal Arch Mason are scarlet, edged with gold.
The sash passes from the left shoulder to the right hip; and on that
part of it which crosses the breast, the words “Holiness to the
Lord” should be painted or embroidered in gilt letters.
The
apron is of white lamb-skin, edged with scarlet ribbon.
THE ROYAL ARCH EMBLEM.
The emblem of Royal Arch Masonry
is the triple tau which is a figure of three tau crosses,
conjoined after the following form:
The
signification of this emblem has been variously interpreted. Some
have supposed it to be the initials H. T. which may stand for Hiram
of Tyre, or for Templum Hierosolymae, the Temple of
Jerusalem; and others, that it was intended to typify the sacred name
of God. The following explanation is offered as the most probable
one of the true meaning of this important emblem.
The
tau-crossT, so
called from its resemblance to the Greek letter tau, was among
the ancients the hieroglyphic of eternal life. Among the Brahmins it
was marked upon the bodies of candidates as a sign that they were set
apart for initiation. It was also familiarly known to the Hebrews,
and is thus alluded to in the vision of Ezekiel (9:4), “Go
through the midst of the city and set a tau upon the foreheads
of the men that sigh, and that cry for all the abominations that be
done in the midst thereof.” And this mark, or tau, was
intended to distinguish those upon whom it was placed, as persons to
be saved on account of their sorrow for sin, from those who as
idolators were to be slain. The tau was therefore a symbol of those
who were consecrated or set apart for some holy purpose. The triple
tau may, with the same symbolic allusion, be supposed to be used in
the Royal Arch degree, as designating and separating those who have
been taught the true name of God, from those who are ignorant of that
august mystery.
In
English masonry, this emblem is so highly esteemed as to be styled
the “emblem of all emblems,” and the “grand emblem
of Royal Arch Masonry.” Within a triangle and circle it
constitutes the Royal Arch jewel. [The English Royal Arch lectures
thus define it. “The Triple Tan forms two right angles on each
of the exterior lines, and another at the centre by their union; for
the three angles of each triangle are equal to two right angles.
This being triplified, illustrates the jewel worn by the companions
of the Royal Arch; which by its intersection forms a given number of
angles, that may be taken in five several combinations; and reduced,
their amount in right angles will be found equal to the five Platonic
bodies which represent the four elements and the sphere of the
Universe.”] In America, this symbol has not been generally
adopted; but at the triennial session of the General Grand Chapter of
the United States, held at Chicago, in 1859, a Royal Arch apron was
prescribed, consisting of a lamb-skin, (silk or satin being strictly
prohibited,) to be lined and bound with scarlet; on the flap of which
should be placed a triple tau, within a triangle and all within a
circle.
Chapters
of Royal Arch Masons are “dedicated to Prince Zerubbabel.”
Candidates
receiving this degree are said to be “exalted to the august
degree of the Holy Royal Arch.”
Documents
connected with Royal Arch Masonry are dated from the era of the
building of the second temple and the time of that important
discovery which gave origin to the degree. Hence such documents are
dated as A:. I:. that is, Anno Inventionis, or, in
the Year of the discovery, and as the second temple was begun to
be built 530 before Christ, the Royal Arch date is found by adding
530 to the date of the Christian era. Thus the year 1858 would in
Royal Arch documents be marked as A:. I:. 2388.
SCRIPTURE READING AT THE OPENING OF A CHAPTER OF ROYAL ARCH MASONS.
The
following charge is read at the opening of a chapter:
“Now
we command you, brethren, that ye withdraw yourselves from every
brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he
received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us; for
we behaved ourselves not disorderly among you. Neither did we eat
any man's bread for nought, but wrought with labor and travail day
and night that we might not be chargeable to any of you. Not because
we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to
follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you,
that if any would not work, neither should he eat; for we hear there
are some who walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are
busy-bodies. Now them that are such, we command and exhort, that
with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. But ye, brethren,
be not weary in well doing. And if any man obey not our word, note
that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet
count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. Now the
Lord of peace himself give you peace always.” —
2 Thessalonians 3:6-16.
The
passage of Scripture here cited is an exhortation against idleness;
and is very appropriately selected to be read at the opening of a
chapter, to teach us that as Royal Arch Masons we are still called on
to labor, freely and without weakness. Though the old temple be
destroyed, we must labor in building the new; though the word be
lost, we must labor for its recovery. Masonic labor is the search
for the word—the search after Divine truth. This and this only
is the mason's work, and the word is his reward.
Labor,
said the old monks, is worship—“laborare est orare”—and
thus in our sacred retreats do we worship—working for the
truth—working for the word—ever looking forward—casting
no glance behind—well knowing that, “if any will not
work, neither shall he eat;” but cheerily hoping for the
consummation and the reward of our labor in the sublime knowledge
which is promised to him who plays no laggart's part; and which, when
this earthly temple is dissolved, we shall find in that second
temple, not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
LECTURE AND RECEPTION.
The
lecture in the Royal Arch degree is divided into two sections; and as
Webb has very properly said, “It should be well understood by
every Royal Arch Mason, as upon an accurate acquaintance with it will
depend his usefulness at our assemblies, and without it he will be
unqualified to perform the duties of the various stations in which
his services may be required by the chapter.” But beyond this
assistance, which it gives in the practical working of the ceremonial
of the degree, the lecture is of no utility. When the student
desires light upon the history, the traditions and the symbolism of
the Royal Arch, he must apply to other sources, and must make himself
acquainted with the profane as well as sacred history of the times
and events to which the degree refers, if he would thoroughly
appreciate its esoteric teachings.
The
following works, among others, are especially recommended to the
perusal of the student in Royal Arch Masonry. They are all easily
accessible:
“The
Antiquities of the Jews,” by Flavius Josephus; the 9th, 10th
and 11th books.
“The
Old and New Testament connected in the History of the Jews and
Neighboring Nations,” by Humphrey Prideaux, D.D. Part I. Books
1, 2 and 3 are of essential use.
“A
System of Speculative Masonry,” by Rev. Salem Town, A.M.;
especially the 13th and 19th chapters.
“Some
Account of the Schisms which took place during the last century
amongst the Free and Accepted Masons in England, showing the Presumed
Origin of the Royal Arch Degree,” by Rev. Geo. Oliver, D.D.
“The
Insignia of the Royal Arch, as it was used at the first establishment
of the degree, illustrated and explained,” by the same author.
These two works are always printed together; the one being
supplementary to the other. Morris has republished them in the 13th
volume of his Universal Masonic Library. They are highly
interesting; but no Royal Arch Mason can expect to be a thorough
master of his science unless he attentively reads the following:
“The
Historical Landmarks of Freemasonry,” by Dr. Oliver; from the
33d to the 48th chapter. The 44th chapter on the tetragrammaton must
he closely studied.
FIRST SECTION OF THE LECTURE.
The
first section explains the organization of a chapter, and the
stations and duties of its officers. With this section every officer
of a chapter should be intimately acquainted. A knowledge of it is
essentially necessary to all who are engaged in the ceremony of the
opening of a chapter.
A
Royal Arch Chapter represents the tabernacle erected by our
ancient brethren near the ruins of King Solomon's Temple.
SYMBOLISM OF THE VEILS.
Blue,
is emblematic of universal friendship and benevolence, and teaches us
that those virtues should be as expansive in the breast of every
mason as the blue vault of heaven itself.
Purple,
being formed by a due admixture of blue and scarlet, is intended to
remind us of the intimate connection that exists between symbolic
masonry and the Royal Arch degree.
Scarlet,
is emblematic of that fervency and zeal which should actuate all
Royal Arch Masons, and is peculiarly characteristic of this degree.
White,
is emblematic of that purity of life and rectitude at conduct by
which alone we can expect to gain admission into the holy of holies
above.
SECOND SECTION.
The
Second Section of the Royal Arch Lecture furnishes valuable
information in reference to the events that are commemorated in this
degree, and correctly details the ceremony of exaltation. It may,
for convenience, be appropriately divided into two clauses, each
referring to a different historic period.
FIRST CLAUSE.
Our
attention is here invited by appropriate symbolic ceremonies to the
destruction of the city of Jerusalem, and the temple of the Lord by
the Chaldean monarch Nebuchadnezzar, who carried the Jews as captives
into Babylon.
The
following passages of Scripture are to be recited during this clause
of the ceremony of exaltation:
“I
will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in
paths that they have not known; I will make darkness light before
them, and crooked things straight; these things will I do unto them
and not forsake them.” — Isaiah 42:16.
As
the return of the captives from Babylon forms a prominent reference
in the Royal Arch degree, it was exceedingly appropriate to
commence the ritual by a selection of these words from Isaiah, which
form a part of that series of sublime chapters in which, as Bishop
Lowth remarks, “the return of the Jews from the captivity of
Babylon is the first, though not the principal thing in the prophet's
view.” These verses, in particular, contain a promise of
guidance and protection to the captives through the uncultivated
deserts and barbarous people that were interposed between Babylon and
Jerusalem. Of course it has a sublimer prophetic sense, which the
pious and intelligent candidate will readily apply. Masonically it
is analogous to a similar encouragement given in the commencement of
the Entered Apprentice's degree to him who puts his trust in God. It
is well, on all such occasions, in the incipiency of his masonic
journey to remind the candidate that he is in the hands of a true
and trusty friend in whom he may well confide, which
friend is none other than the G:. A:. O:. T:. U:.
The
Divine Master has said, “he that humbleth himself shall be
exalted,” (Luke 14:11); and thus after being first taught to
put his trust in God as a faithful friend and guide, the recipient
next learns by an impressive ceremony the necessity of humiliation
and self-abasement. Humility is an essential virtue to all who are
engaged in the search after truth. Plato says, that truth lies
concealed in a well, which thought may perhaps be intended to teach
us that we should look for it in the humblest places. Humility is a
virtue carefully inculcated throughout the Sacred Scriptures, as ever
meeting its reward in subsequent exaltation. It is with diffidence
and humility that the wise man should approach such mysterious
subjects as the nature and attributes of Deity. The mason who seeks
advancement must lay aside all pride and arrogance, and with an
humble spirit, a readiness to learn, and an anxiety to be taught,
must throw himself at the feet of his preceptor and receive the new
light and truth for which he craves. And so the candidate for the
sublime mysteries of this august degree is first to learn on its very
threshold to bow his head and to stoop low, ever remembering that, he
that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
PRAYER AT EXALTATION.
During
the ceremony of exaltation, it is proper to recite the following
prayer.
Supreme Architect of the
Universe, who, by thine Almighty Word, didst speak into being the
stupendous arch of heaven, and for the instruction and pleasure of
thy rational creatures, didst adorn us with greater and lesser
lights, thereby magnifying thy power, and endearing thy goodness unto
the sons of men: We humbly adore and worship thine unspeakable
perfection. We bless thee, that when man had fallen from his
innocence and happiness, thou didst leave him the powers of
reasoning, and capacity of improvement and of pleasure. We thank
thee that amidst the pains and calamities of our present state, so
many means of refreshment and satisfaction are reserved to us, while
traveling the rugged path of life; especially would we, at
this time, render thee our thanksgiving and praise for the
institution, as members of which we are at this time, assembled, and
for all the pleasures we have derived from it. We thank thee that
the few here assembled before thee, have been favored with new
inducements, and been laid under new and stronger obligations of
virtue and holiness. May these obligations, O blessed Father! have
their full effect upon us. Teach us, we pray thee, the true
reverence of thy great, mighty, and terrible name. Inspire us with a
firm and unshaken resolution in our virtuous pursuits. Give us grace
diligently to search thy word in the book of nature, wherein the
duties of our high vocation are inculcated with divine authority.
May the solemnity of the ceremonies of our institution be duly
impressed on our minds, and have a happy and lasting effect on our
lives! O thou, who didst aforetime appear unto thy servant Moses in
a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush, enkindle, we beseech
thee, in each of our hearts, a flame of devotion to thee, of love to
each other, and of charity to all mankind! May all thy miracles and
mighty works fill us with thy dread, and thy goodness impress us with
a love of thy holy name! May Holiness to the Lord, be
engraven upon all our thoughts, words, and actions! May the incense
of piety ascend continually unto thee, from the altar of our hearts
and burn day and night, as a sacrifice of sweet smelling savor, well
pleasing unto thee! And since sin has destroyed within us the first
temple of purity and innocence, may thy heavenly grace guide and
assist us in rebuilding a second temple of reformation, and
may the glory of this latter house, be greater than the glory of the
former! So mote it be. Amen.
"The
fraternity," says Bro. Scott,
“are taught the necessity of appealing to the throne of
heaven before entering upon any important undertaking. To the Father
of all we must ask for strength and power to support us in every
trial, duty, and emergency in life. It is not difficult for us to
learn who taught us to pray, and how to pray. The Holy One prompts
the sinful heart to plead for forgiveness, and ask for heavenly
things.” [Scott, Charles.
Analogy of Ancient Craft Masonry. p. 33.]
Kneeling
is the appropriate attitude in which this sublime prayer should be
offered up. “Kneeling,” says Horne,
“was ever considered to be the proper posture of
supplication, as it expressed humility, contrition, and subjection.
For as among the ancients, the forehead was consecrated to genius,
the ear to memory, and the right hand to faith, so the knees were
consecrated to mercy.” [Horne, Thomas.
Intro. to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures,
vol. II. part III, chap. V, sect. II, p. 131.]
DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE DEGREE.
The
extended duties and obligations of this degree are next referred to
by those impressive ceremonies which are peculiar to Freemasonry.
The obligations imposed by exaltation to this august degree, although
of the most solemn nature, are still eminently practical in their
nature, for it must be remembered, to borrow the language of a
distinguished brother [Albert Pike], that as “the order of
masonry was instituted for the improvement of mankind, so it demands
the performance of no duty, the practice of no principle that is
extravagant or impracticable.”
“Now
Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of
Midian; and he led the flock to the back side of the desert, and came
to the mountain of God, even to Horeb. And the angel of the Lord
appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush, and
he looked, and, behold the bush burned with fire, and the bush was
not consumed.
“And
when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out
of the bush and said, Moses, Moses! And he said, Here am I. And he
said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for
the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. Moreover he said, I
am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and
the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look
upon God.” — Exodus 3:4-6.
THE BURNING BUSH.
It
was at the Burning Bush that Moses received that divine commission in
fulfillment of which he composed the Pentateuch. And as it is from
these writings of Moses that we derive all those significant
teachings by which a Royal Arch Mason is eminently distinguished from
the rest of the fraternity, it is peculiarly appropriate to introduce
the instructions, hereafter to be given, by a recital of the passage
which details the circumstances under which the Jewish lawgiver
received the power and authority to perform those miracles which are
referred to in subsequent parts of the degree.
But
the Burning Bush, as the spot where the G:. A:. O:. T:. U:. first
made himself known to Moses, and through him to his chosen
people, becomes to the Royal Arch Mason, the source of light and
knowledge, and takes the position occupied by the East in
symbolic masonry. And hence, in some of the higher degrees, masonic
documents are dated not from “the East” but from the “B:.
B:.” that is, the Burning Bush.
The
following passages of Scripture are read with impressive ceremonies:
“Zedekiah
was one-and-twenty years old when he began to reign, and reigned
eleven years in Jerusalem. And he did that which was evil in the
sight of the Lord his God, and humbled not himself before Jeremiah
the prophet speaking from the mouth of the Lord. And he also
rebelled against king Nebuchadnezzar; but he stiffened his neck, and
hardened his heart, from turning unto the Lord God of Israel.
Moreover, all the chief of the priests, and the people, transgressed
very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the
house of the Lord, which he had hallowed in Jerusalem. And the Lord
God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up
betimes and sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on
his dwelling place. But they mocked the messengers of God, and
despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the
Lord arose against his people, till there was no remedy. Therefore
he brought upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young
men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no
compassion on young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for
age; he gave them all into his hand. And all the vessels of the
house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the
Lord, and treasures of the king, and of his princes; all these he
brought to Babylon. And they burnt the house of God, and brake down
the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire,
and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof. And them that had
escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were
servants to him and his sons, until the reign of the kingdom of
Persia.” — 2 Chronicles 36:11-20.
THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM.
The
Temple was destroyed in the year of the world 3416 and 588 years
before the birth of Christ, being just 416 years since its dedication
by King Solomon. For a more particular detail of the events
connected with the destruction of the temple, the reader is referred
to the first lecture on the Royal Arch history appended to this book.
With
the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem and the
carrying of the Jews into captivity, ends the first clause of the
Royal Arch reception.
SECOND CLAUSE.
The
second clause commences by a reference to that happy period when
Cyrus, having overthrown the Chaldean dynasty, restored the captive
Jews to liberty and permitted them to return to Jerusalem for the
purpose of rebuilding the house of the Lord.
PROCLAMATION OF CYRUS.
The
ceremonies begin by a recital of the following passages of Scripture:
“Now
in the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, the Lord stirred up the
spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, that he made a proclamation
throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying: Thus
saith Cyrus, king of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me all
the kingdoms of the earth, and he hath charged me to build him an
house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all
his people? His God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem,
which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel,
which is in Jerusalem.” — Ezra 1:1-3.
“And
Moses said unto God, Behold! when I come unto the children of Israel,
and shall say unto them, the God of your fathers hath sent me unto
you, and they shall say to me, What is his name? What shall I say to
them?” — Exodus 3:13.
“And
God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: And thus shalt thou say unto
the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” —
Exodus 3:14.
The
Egyptians worshipped the Sun as their chief deity, under the
appellation of ON, and it was to distinguish himself as the true and
only God that Jehovah in the passage just recited instructed Moses to
inform the Israelites that he came to them by the authority of him
who was I AM THAT I AM, which term signifies the Self Existent
Being. This method of denoting the Supreme Deity was adopted by
the Jews under the teachings of Moses, and distinguished them from
all heathen nations of the world. It became, therefore, the
shibboleth, as it were, of their religion, and was appropriately
selected as a token by which the captives might on their arrival at
Jerusalem, prove themselves to be the true children of the covenant
and worthy to be employed in the task of rebuilding the house of the
Lord.
THE RETURN OF THE JEWS FROM THE CAPTIVITY.
The
return of the captives from Babylon to Jerusalem through a barren
wilderness beset by hostile tribes and over a dry desert unsupplied
with water to quench their thirst, or any means of subsistence, must
have proved to these weary and footsore pilgrims a rough and
rugged road. The passages of Scripture selected as a memorial of
the tribulations of that journey are appropriately taken from those
Psalms which are supposed to have been written by David when in
cirumstances of great distress—the first when he was flying
from the anger of Saul; the second when concealed in the cave of
En-gedi from the persecutions of his enemies; and the last, when in
great sorrow on account of the rebellion of his son Absalom. They
are here, however, referred, as they have been by some commentators,
to the condition of the exiles at Babylon.
“Lord, I cry unto thee:
make haste unto me; give ear unto my voice. Let my prayer be set
forth before thee, as incense: and the lifting up of my hands as the
evening sacrifice. Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth; keep the
door of my lips. Incline not my heart to any evil thing, to practice
wicked works with men that work iniquity. Let the righteous smite
me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an
excellent oil. Mine eyes are unto thee, O God the Lord; in thee is
my trust; leave not my soul destitute. Keep me from the snare which
they have laid for me, and the gins of the workers of iniquity. Let
the wicked fall into their own nets, whilst that I withal escape.”
— Psalms 141:1-10.
“I
cried unto the Lord with my voice; with my voice unto the Lord did I
make my supplication. I poured out my complaint before him; I showed
before him my trouble. When my spirit was overwhelmed within me,
then thou knewest my path. In the way wherein I walked, have they
privily laid a snare for me. I looked on my right hand, and beheld,
but there was no man that would know me; refuge failed me: no man
cared for my soul. I cried unto thee, O Lord; I said, Thou art my
refuge and my portion in the land of the living. Attend unto my cry,
for I am brought very low; deliver me from my persecutors; for they
are stronger than I. Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise
thy name.” — Psalms 142:1-7.
“Hear
my prayer, O Lord; give ear to my supplications: in thy faithfulness
answer me, and in thy righteousness. And enter not into judgment
with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.
“For the enemy hath
persecuted my soul; he hath made me to dwell in darkness. Therefore
is my spirit overwhelmed within me; my heart within me is desolate.
Hear me speedily, O Lord: my spirit faileth: hide not thy face from
me, lest I be like unto them that go down into the pit. Cause me to
hear thy loving kindness in the morning; for in thee do I trust:
cause me to know the way wherein I should walk, for I lift up my soul
unto thee. Bring my soul out of trouble, and of thy mercy cut off
mine enemies: for I am thy servant.” —
Psalms 143:1-12.
But
rough and rugged as was the road, and long and toilsome as was the
march, it at last came to an end, and the weary sojourners were
blessed with a sight of the ruined walls of Jerusalem and the
glistening tents of their brethren. Here they turned aside to rest;
and here too we may pause in our review of the ritual, to investigate
the nature of the temporary tabernacle which is said to have been
erected by the Jewish leaders near the ruins of the temple.
THE TABERNACLE.
We
are not to suppose that the tabernacle represented in the ceremonies
of the Royal Arch degree is an exact copy of the tabernacle
constructed by Moses, and which served as a pattern for that erected
by Zerubbabel and his colleagues near the ruins of King Solomon's
Temple. It is unnecessary here to enter into an elaborate
description of the Mosaic tabernacle; it will be sufficient to say
that although the colors of the veils were the same, namely, blue,
purple, scarlet, and fine linen, yet their disposition was entirely
different from that observed in the tabernacle of the Royal Arch.
This
is, however, a matter of not the slightest importance to the
substantial character and design of the degree. The tabernacle
erected by Zerubbabel and the restored captives was intended for
practical purposes of religious observances and was obliged to be
constructed according to the exact specifications laid down in the
twenty-sixth chapter of Exodus. The tabernacle used in Freemasonry
is altogether symbolical, and therefore architectural correctness was
by no means necessary to the preservation of the symbols inculcated
by it.
It
is the same thing in respect to the analogy of the blue lodge to
Solomon's temple. The former is a representation of the latter, only
in a symbolic sense. And yet a great superfluity of learning has
been wasted by some writers to prove that the whole system of
Freemasonry is a failure, simply because the position, the form and
decorations of the temple are not accurately preserved in every
village lodge room throughout the country. For instance, Dr. Dalcho,
in his “Orations,” thinks he discovers an insurmountable
error in the ritual of the Master's degree, because in the ancient
temple “there was a gate on the north side, but
none on the west, because the Sanctum Sanctorum was
built there.” Dalcho, in this passage, as well as in many
others of the same work, and in the notes to his Ahiman Rezon, shows
very conclusively that he was not intimately conversant with the
esoteric symbolism of the order. It is essential to the symbolic
instruction of Masonry, that there should be a gate on the west and
none on the north of the lodge, but it by no means affects the
integrity of our system that a different arrangement existed at the
temple. We must preserve the symbolism, but we may
neglect the architectural details.
So
in the Masonic tabernacle, the four colors of the veils in the Mosaic
tabernacle have been preserved because these colors are symbolic; but
no attention has been paid to their correct distribution, as in this
there was no symbolism.
We
say then, with these explanatory remarks, that in the Royal Arch
degree, we represent the tabernacle erected by our ancient brethren
near the ruins of King Solomon's temple.
Prideaux
denies that any such tabernacle was erected by the captives on their
return; but Bishop Patrick, an almost equally learned authority,
thinks that there was; and says, in his Commentary on I Chronicles
9:11, “As before the first temple was built there was a
tabernacle for divine service, so after the second was founded, they
erected a tabernacle till this temple could be finished. Without
which they could not have performed the several parts of the worship
of God which were annexed to the several parts of the holy places,
according to law.” [Patrick, Simon, et al. A Critical
Commentary and Paraphrase on the Old and New Testament, vol. II. p. 557.]
Reason,
as well as masonic tradition, support the opinion of Bishop Patrick.
THE SIGNS OF MOSES.
The
reference in a previous part of the degree to the Burning Bush, where
God first made his true name known to Moses, has prepared the mind
for the reception of those other revelations of the divine interview,
in which the Deity communicated to the patriarch those miraculous
signs by which he was to convince the people to whom he was to be
sent of the truth of his mission. And hence we now begin to recite
from the books of Moses the account of the establishment of these
signs. The symbolism is here worthy of attention. As these signs
were ordained by their divine author to establish the authority of
the mission in which the Jewish lawgiver was to be engaged in
rescuing his people from the darkness of Egyptian idolatry, and in
bringing them to the knowledge and worship of the true God, so are
they here symbolic of' the evidence which every mason is to give of
his mission in rescuing himself from the bondage of falsehood and in
searching for divine truth.
SYMBOLISM OF THE SERPENT.
“And
Moses answered and said, But behold, they will not believe me, nor
hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared
unto thee. And the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand?
And he said, a rod. And He said, Cast it on the ground: and he cast
it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before
it. And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it
by the tail. And he put forth his hand and caught it, and it became
a rod in his hand. That they may believe that the Lord God of their
fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,
hath appeared unto thee.” — Exodus 4:1-5.
The
serpent has always been considered by masonic writers as a legitimate
symbol of Freemasonry, and yet it is singular that in the whole
ritual of the York rite this is the only instance in which any
allusion is made to it. In the other masonic systems it is, however,
repeatedly referred to. Dr. Oliver says that, “amongst masons
it serves to remind us of our fall in Adam and our restoration in
Christ.” These events are symbolically represented in masonry
by the loss and recovery of the word. Hence the reference in this
place to the symbol of the serpent must in this view be considered as
peculiarly appropriate.
In
the course of these ceremonies reference is made at different times,
to three important constructions in Scriptural history, namely, the
three arks and the three tabernacles.
Here
our attention is invited by memorial words to the first ark, the ark
of safety, which was constructed by Shem, Ham and Japhet,
under the superintendence of Noah, and in which, as a tabernacle
of refuge, the chosen family took temporary shelter until the
subsidence of the waters of the deluge. [That the ark of Noah was
also a tabernacle of Jehovah is the opinion of many learned biblical
commentators. Dr. Jarvis, speaking of the zohar, which
in our common version of Genesis 6:16, has been translated “window,”
says, “I take it to have been the Divine Shechinah or glory of
Jehovah, dwelling between the cherubim, which were now brought from
their place at the east of Eden, as the ark afterwards was from the
Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle into the Holy of Holies of the first
Temple.” — Jarvis, Samuel. Church of the Redeemed,
vol. I. p. 20, note 8.]
SYMBOLISM OF THE LEPROUS HAND.
“And the Lord said
furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thy bosom; and he put
his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand
was leprous as snow. And He said, Put thine hand into thy bosom
again; and he put his hand into his bosom again; and he plucked it
out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other
flesh. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee,
neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will
believe the voice of the latter sign.” —
Exodus 4:6-8.
Here,
again, in the hand becoming leprous and being then restored to
soundness, we have a repetition of the reference to the loss and the
recovery of the word; the word itself being but a symbol of divine
truth, the search for which constitutes the whole science of
Freemasonry, and the symbolism of which pervades the whole system of
initiation from the first to the last degree.
And
here we have an allusion to the second ark and tabernacle, the ark of
the covenant and the tabernacle in the wilderness, which were
constructed by Moses, Aholiab and Bezaleel, as we
find recorded in Exodus 36:2, “And Moses called Bezaleel and
Aholiab, and every wise-hearted man in whose heart the Lord had put
wisdom, even every one whose heart stirred him up, to come unto the
work to do it.” And in a previous passage (31:1-7), “And
the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, See, I have called by name
Bezaleel, the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and
I have filled him with the Spirit of God in wisdom, and in
understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship, to
devise cunning works, to work in gold, and in silver, and in brass,
and in cutting of stones to set them, and in carving of timber, to
work in all manner of workmanship. And I, behold, I have given with
him Aholiab, the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, and in the
hearts of all that are wise-hearted I have put wisdom that they may
make all that I have commanded thee: the tabernacle of the
congregation, and the ark of the testimony, and the mercy seat that
is thereupon, and all the furniture of the tabernacle.” [The
reference at this place which is made in some chapters to Adoniram,
who was one of the craftsmen at the temple of Solomon, and the
mixture of his name with that of two of the sons of Noah who lived
almost two thousand years before him, is so preposterous an
anachronism, as to prove that it is a palpable innovation, at first
introduced by some ignorant ritualist, and perpetuated by subsequent
carelessness. It cannot be explained on any principles of symbolism;
it is supported by none of the writers on Royal Arch Masonry, all of
whom here make the reference to the constructors of the tabernacle
and ark of the testimony; and it is absurd and nonsensical, and
therefore manifestly not masonic. These three rules—the
fitness of symbolism, the allusions and authority of learned writers,
and the absence of absurdity, are excellent ones for judging in all
disputed questions of ritualism where the nature of oral tradition
deprives us of any others more direct.]
SYMBOLISM OF THE WATER TURNED TO BLOOD.
“And
it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs,
neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of
the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou
takest out of the river, shall become blood upon the dry land.”
— Exodus 4:9.
The
last miraculous sign by which Moses was to establish his authority
and to prove his mission among the Jews and the Egyptians is here
recited. Masonically it bears the same symbolic reference as the
other two, to a change for the better—from a lower to a higher
state—from the elemental water in which there is no life, to
the blood which is the life itself—from darkness to light. The
progress is still onward to the recovery of that which had been lost,
but which is yet to be found.
And
here we find an allusion to the tabernacle erected for temporary
worship by Joshua, Haggai and Zerubbabel, and to that
imitative ark for whose history we are traditionally said to be
indebted to the exertions of those illustrious personages.
The
signet of Zerubbabel, which is adopted as one of the Royal
Arch symbols, will be explained after the recital of the passage of
Scripture which refers to it.
THE SIGNET OF ZERUBBABEL.
“In
that day, saith the Lord of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, my
servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the Lord, and will make thee as
a signet: for I have chosen thee, saith the Lord of hosts.” —
Haggai 2:23.
The
signet of Zerubbabel, or, as it is more properly explained, the
signet of truth, is in this place a symbol of the promise that
the search of the neophyte for truth will now speedily meet with its
reward. The signet, or private seal, most frequently in the form of
a signet ring, was anciently often given by monarchs, or other
persons of high condition, instead of a written testimonial, to their
servants as a token of some authority which had been delegated, and
of which the possession of the signet was, therefore, the only
evidence. Haggai, who came to Jerusalem to excite the Jews to
greater diligence in the work of rebuilding the temple, thus
encouraged them by the declaration that the Lord had made their
leader, Zerubbabel, his signet. He had exalted him, to use the
language of Dr. Clarke, “to high dignity, power and trust, of
which the signet was the instrument, or sign, in those days.”
He was to be under God's peculiar care, and to be to him very
precious, and thus the signet of truth is presented to the aspirant
to assure him that he is advancing in his progress to the attainment
of truth, and that he is thus invested with the power to pursue the
search. He who has got thus far in Royal Arch Masonry becomes the
sworn servant of truth, and the signet is the token of his elevation.
As
to the form of the signet, which in many chapters is most improperly
represented by a triangular plate of metal, it may be observed that
it always was a finger ring with some device upon it, and it is so
called because it was anciently used, as it still is in the East, for
the purpose of enabling the wearer to seal with it important
documents, instead of subscribing his name, which, it is well known,
that even royal personages, in early times, were often unable to do,
from their ignorance of the art of writing.
These
signets, or seal rings, called by the Hebrews chotam, are
repeatedly alluded to in Scripture. They appear to have been known
and used at an early period; for we find that when Judah asks Tamar
what pledge he shall give her, she replies, “Thy signet, and
thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand.”—Genesis
38:18. They were worn on the finger, generally the index finger, and
always on the right hand, as being the most honorable; thus in
Jeremiah (22:24) we read: “as I live, saith the Lord, though
Coniah, the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet upon my
right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence.” They were also
inscribed with some appropriate device by which the owner might be
identified. The art of doing this must have been well known even in
the days of Moses, for we find an allusion to engraving on stone,
“like the engravings of a signet,” in the directions for
making the breast-plate, as laid down in Exodus 28:11.
What
was the particular device inscribed on the signet ring of Zerubbabel
we cannot now determine, but we may conjecture, and perhaps
approximate to truth. The signets of the ancients were generally
sculptured with religious symbols, or the heads of their deities.
The sphynx and the sacred beetle were favorite signets among the
Egyptians. The former was adopted from that people by the Roman
Emperor Augustus. The Babylonians followed the same custom, and many
of their signets, remaining to this day, exhibit beautifully
sculptured images of Baal-Berith, and other Chaldean deities. It
was, perhaps, from the Babylonians that Zerubbabel learned the
practice of wearing one, for Herodotus tells us that every Babylonian
had a signet.
But
the anti-idolatrous character of his faith must have prevented the
Jewish prince from using any of the Chaldean objects of worship as a
seal. May he not rather have adopted the great religious symbol of
the Hebrews, and inscribed upon his signet ring the tetragrammaton or
omnific name? Whether he did or not, this would at least be a most
appropriate representation in our chapters of the seal of the
illustrious builder of the second temple.
INCENSE BURNS DAY AND NIGHT ON THE ALTAR OF THE LORD.
The
burning of incense constituted an essential part of the service of
the temple, and large quantities of it were offered twice a day, at
the morning and the evening sacrifice.
IMPOSTORS AMONG THE WORKMEN.
The
following passage of Scripture from the 4th chapter of Ezra, verses 1
to 5, although forming no part of the ritual, may be read for a
better understanding of the condition of affairs commemorated in this
degree.
“Now
when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of
the captivity builded the temple unto the Lord God of Israel; then
they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chief of the fathers, and said
unto them, Let us build with you: for we seek your God as ye do; and
we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esar-haddon, king of
Assur, which brought us up hither. But Zerubbabel and Joshua, and
the rest of the chiefs of the fathers of Israel, said unto them, Ye
have nothing to do with us to build a house unto our God, but we
ourselves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel, as king
Cyrus the king of Persia has commanded us. Then the people of the
land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and troubled them in
building; and hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their
purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even unto the reign of
Darius king of Persia.”
The
exclusive character of the Jewish religion, separated as it always
had been, by peculiar rites and a more exalted doctrine from that of
every surrounding nation, made it impossible for its disciples to
permit those who were not of the true and ancient faith to unite with
them in any holy or religious work. Hence the builders of the second
temple were extremely vigilant in seeing that no “impostors”
from among “the adversaries,” that is, the Samaritans and
the other nations with which the kings of Assyria had peopled Israel,
should be allowed to mingle with the workmen. All who came up to
this sacred task were bound to afford the evidence that they were the
descendants of those faithful Giblemites who had wrought at the
building of the first temple, who at its completion and dedication
were received and acknowledged as Most Excellent Masters, at its
destruction by Nebuchadnezzar were carried captives into Babylon, and
being released by the proclamation of Cyrus, king of Persia, had come
up to assist in the glorious task of rebuilding the house of
the Lord without the hope of fee or reward. These, and these
alone were permitted to engage in the construction of the edifice.
WORKING TOOLS.
The
working tools of a Royal Arch Mason are sometimes explained as
follows:
The
working tools of a Royal Arch Mason are the Crow, Pick-axe
and Spade. The Crow is used by operative masons to raise
things of great weight and bulk; the Pick-axe to loosen the
soil and prepare it for digging; and the Spade to remove
rubbish. But the Royal Arch Mason is emblematically taught to use
them for more noble purposes. By them he is reminded that it is his
sacred duty to lift from his mind the heavy weight of passions and
prejudices which encumber his progress towards virtue, loosening the
hold which long habits of sin and folly have had upon his
disposition, and removing the rubbish of vice and ignorance, which
prevents him from beholding that eternal foundation of truth and
wisdom upon which he is to erect the spiritual and moral temple of
his second life.
THE KEYSTONE.
Until
within a few years, architectural authorities have denied the
antiquity of the arch and keystone, and have attributed their
invention to a period not anterior to the era of the Roman emperor
Augustus. Such a theory, if correct, would of course invalidate the
historical truth of an important portion of the Royal Arch degree.
Fortunately, therefore, the researches of modern archaeologists have
traced the existence of the arch as far back as five hundred and
fifty years before the building of King Solomon's temple, and thus
completely reconciled the traditions of Freemasonry with the accuracy
of history.
Mr.
Wilkinson, the great Egyptian traveler, says that the arch “was
evidently used in the tombs of the Egyptians as early as the
commencement of the eighteenth dynasty, or about 1540 B.C.; and
judging from some of the drawings at Beni Hassan, it seems to have
been known in the time of the first Osirtasen, whom I suppose to have
been contemporary with Joseph.” [Wilkinson, John. Manners and
Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. II. p. 117.]
“After
this,” says Kitto, “it seems unreasonable to doubt that
the arch was known to the Hebrews also, and employed in their
buildings.”
But
in the decision of the question we are not left to the suggestions of
probability. Portions of the immense substructions of the temple of
Solomon still exist, and have been recently discovered and explored.
Messrs. Scoles and Catherwood, two English architects, were the first
to notice the commencement of the spandril of an arch springing from
these subterranean works towards Mount Zion, and Dr. Jarvis suggests
that this arch “may have been part of the construction of
Solomon's private entrance into the temple.” [Jarvis, Samuel.
Church of the Redeemed, vol. I. p. 258.]
The researches of subsequent travelers
have discovered other vaults and arches beneath the temple, evidently
the work of Solomon.
THREE SQUARES.
Freemasonry
is throughout so connected a system that we are continually meeting
in an inferior degree with something that is left to fee explained in
a higher. Such is the case with the three squares of our ancient
Grand Masters, whose peculiar history can only be understood by
those who have advanced to the degree of Select Master.
ARK OF THE COVENANT.
The
following quotation from the learned Dr. Lightfoot's “Prospect
of the Temple,” (ch. 15), will at this time be read with
interest by the Royal Arch Mason:
“It
is fancied by the Jews, that Solomon, when he built the temple,
foreseeing that the temple should be destroyed, caused very obscure
and intricate vaults under ground to be made, wherein to hide the ark
when any such danger came; that howsoever it went with the temple,
yet the ark, which was the very life of the temple, might be saved.
And they understand that passage in 2 Chronicles 35:3, 'Josiah said
unto the Levites, put the holy ark into the house which
Solomon, the son of David, did build,' &c., as if Josiah, having
heard by the reading of Moses' manuscript and by Huldah's prophecy of
the danger that hung over Jerusalem,—commanded to convey the
ark into this vault, that it might be secured; and with it, say they,
they laid up Aaron's rod, the pot of manna, and the anointing oil.
For while the ark stood in its place, upon the stone mentioned,—they
hold that Aaron's rod and the pot of manna stood before it; but, now,
were all conveyed into obscurity—and the stone upon which the
ark stood lay over the mouth of the vault. But Rabbi Solomon, which
useth not, ordinarily, to forsake such traditions, hath given a more
serious gloss upon the place; namely, that whereas Manasseh and Amon
had removed the ark out of its habitation, and set up images and
abominations there of their own,—Joshua speaketh to the priests
to restore it to its place again. What became of the ark, at the
burning of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, we read not; it is most
likely, it went to the fire also. However it sped, it was not in the
second temple; and is one of the five choice things that the Jews
reckon wanting there. Yet they had an ark there also of their own
making, as they had a breast-plate of judgment; which, though they
both wanted the glory of the former, which was giving of oracles, yet
did they stand current as to the other matters of their worship, as
the former breast-plate and ark had done.” [Lightfoot, John.
Prospect of the Temple. pp. 295-6.]
The
idea of the concealment of an ark and its accompanying treasures
always prevailed in the Jewish church. The account given by the
talmudists is undoubtedly mythical, but there must, as certainly,
have been some foundation for the myth, for every myth has a
substratum of truth. The masonic tradition differs from the
rabbinical, but is in every way more reconcilable with truth, or at
least with probability. The ark constructed by Moses, Aholiab and
Bezaleel was burnt at the destruction of the first temple—but
there was an exact representation of it in the second, of whose
origin Royal Arch Masonry alone gives an account.
THE BOOK OF THE LAW — LONG LOST BUT NOW FOUND.
The
Book of the Law furnishes us with the following passages, which may
be appropriately read.
“In
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth
was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the
deep; and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And
God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” —
Genesis 1:1-3.
“And it came to pass, when
Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book,
until they were finished, that Moses commanded the Levites which bare
the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying, Take this book of the
law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord
your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.” —
Deuteronomy 31:24-26.
“And
thou shalt put the mercy-seat above, upon the ark; and in the ark
thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.” —
Exodus 25:21.
There
was a tradition among the Jews that the Book of the Law was lost
during the captivity, and that it was among the treasures discovered
during the building of the second temple. The same opinion was
entertained by the early Christian fathers, such for instance as
Irenaeus, Tertullian and Clemens Alexandrinus, “for,”
says Prideaux, “they (the Christian fathers) hold that all the
Scriptures were lost and destroyed in the Babylonish captivity, and
that Ezra restored them all again by divine revelation.”
[Prideaux, Humphrey. Old and New Testament Connected,
vol. I. p. 368.] The truth of the tradition
is very generally denied by biblical scholars, who attribute its
origin to the fact that Ezra collected together the copies of the
laws, expurgated them of the errors which had crept into them during
the captivity, and arranged a new and correct edition. But the truth
or falsity of the legend does not affect the masonic symbolism. The
Book of the Law is the will of God, which, lost to us in our
darkness, must be recovered as precedent to our learning what is
TRUTH. As captives to error, truth is lost to us; when freedom is
restored, the first reward will be its discovery.
POT OF MANNA.
“And Moses said, this is
the thing which the Lord commandeth, Fill an omer of the manna, to be
kept for your generations; that they may see the bread wherewith I
have fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you forth from the
land of Egypt. And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a pot, and put an
omer full of manna therein, and lay it up before the Lord, to be kept
for your generations. As the Lord commanded Moses, so Aaron laid it
up before the testimony to be kept.” —
Exodus 16:32-34.
AARON'S ROD.
“And
the Lord said unto Moses, Bring Aaron's rod again before the
testimony, to be kept for a token.” —
Numbers 17:10.
MYSTIC KEY.
In
one of the highest degrees of the Ancient and Accepted Rite we find
the following explanation of the symbolism of the key which is
equally applicable to Royal Arch Masonry. “The key
demonstrates that having obtained the key to our sublime mysteries,
the mason, if he behaves with justice, fervency and zeal to his
companions, will soon arrive at the true meaning of the masonic
society.”
But
the symbolism is here still further extended. It is within the
sacred pages of the law that this invaluable key is found, which
teaches us that it is only in the revelations of the Supreme
Architect of the Universe that DIVINE TRUTH is to be discovered.
INVESTITURE.
The
following passage of Scripture is read as explanatory of an important
mystery:
“And
God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord: and I
appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God
Almighty; but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them.” —
Exodus 6:2-3.
The
High Priest will then invest the candidates with an important secret
of the degree, which should always be accompanied with an explanatory
lecture.
THE TETRAGRAMMATON.
The
name of God, which we, at a venture, pronounce Jehovah—and
which is called the “Tetragrammaton,” (from the Greek
tetra, four, and gramma, letter,) because it consists
in Hebrew of four letters, and the “Ineffable name,”
because it was unlawful to pronounce it, was ever held by the Jews in
the most profound veneration. They claim to have derived its origin
from the immediate inspiration of the Almighty, who communicated it
to Moses, as his especial appellation, to be used only by his chosen
people. This communication was first made at. the Burning Bush, when
God said to the Jewish lawgiver: “Thus shalt thou say unto the
children of Israel: Jehovah the God of your fathers, the God of
Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto
you: this [Jehovah] is my name forever, and this is my memorial unto
all generations.” And at a subsequent period, he still more
emphatically declared this to be his peculiar name, when he said: “I
am Jehovah: and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto
Jacob, by the name of El Shaddai; but by my name Jehovah was I
not known unto them.”
Ushered
to their notice by the utmost solemnity and religious consecration,
this name of God became invested among the Israelites with the
profoundest veneration and awe. To add to this mysticism, the
Kabbalists, by the change of a single letter in the original, read
the passage which is, “this is my name forever,” as if it
had been written, “this is my name to be concealed.”
This
interpretation, though founded on an error, and probably an
intentional one, soon became a precept, and has been strictly obeyed
to this day. The word Jehovah is never pronounced by a pious
Jew, who, whenever he meets with it in Scripture, substitutes for it
the word Adonai or Lord, a practice that has been
followed by the translators of the common English version of the
Bible with almost Jewish scrupulosity, the word Jehovah in the
original being always translated by the word “Lord.” The
use of this word being thus abandoned, its pronunciation was
ultimately lost, since by the peculiar construction of the Hebrew
language, which is entirely without vowel letters, the vocal sounds
being supplied to the ear by oral teaching, the consonants, which
alone constitute the alphabet, can, in their combination, give no
possible indication, to one who has not heard it before, of the true
pronounciation of any given word.
There
was one person, however, who, it is said, was in possession of the
proper sound of the letters and the true pronunciation of the word.
This was the High Priest, who, receiving it through his predecessor,
preserved the recollection of the sound by pronouncing it three
times, once a year, on the day of Atonement, when he entered the holy
of holies of the tabernacle or the temple.
If
the traditions of masonry on this subject are correct, the kings,
after the establishment of the monarchy, must sometimes have
participated in this privilege, for Solomon is said to have been in
possession of the word and to have communicated it to his two
colleagues at the building of the temple. The Kabbalists and
Talmudists have enveloped this ineffable name of God in a host of
mystical superstitions, most of which are as absurd as they are
incredible, but all of them tend to show the great veneration that
has always been paid to it. Thus they say that it is possessed of
unlimited powers, and that he who pronounces it shakes heaven and
earth, and inspires the very angels with terror and astonishment.
The Rabbins call it “shem hamphorash,” that is to say,
“the name that was declared,” and they assert that David
found it engraved on a stone while digging into the earth.
Besides
the tetragrammaton or ineffable word, there are many varieties of the
name which have been adopted with almost equal veneration among other
nations of antiquity, of which the three following may be offered as
instances.
1.
Jah. This was the name of God in the Syrian language, and is still
retained in some of the Syriac forms of doxology. It is to be found
in the 68th Psalm, verse 4: “Extol him that rideth upon the
heavens by his name Jah,” and also in the Song of Moses (Exodus
15:2), where in the original it is “Jah is my strength and my
song.”
2.
Bel. This was the name of God among many of the eastern nations,
and particularly among the Chaldeans. It is also frequently met with
in Scripture when allusion is made to the idolatrous worship of the
Pagan nations.
3.
On. This was one of the names by which God was worshipped by the
Egyptians. It is also alluded to in the sacred writings, as when we
are told that Pharaoh gave Joseph for his wife, “Asenath, the
daughter of Poti-pherah, priest of On.” (Genesis 41:45.)
Now
all these names of God, which, with many others to be found in the
ineffable degrees of masonry, make up a whole system, are eminently
symbolical. In fact, the name of God must be taken, in Freemasonry,
as the symbol of TRUTH, and then the search for it will be nothing
but the search after truth, which is the true end and aim of the
masonic science of symbolism. The subordinate names are subordinate
modifications of truth, but the ineffable tetragrammaton is the
symbol of the sublimity and perfection of divine truth, to which all
good masons and all good men are seeking to advance, whether it be by
the aid of the theological ladder, or by passing between the pillars
of Strength and Establishment, or by wandering in darkness, beset on
all sides by dangers, or by traveling, weary and worn, over rough and
rugged roads—whatever be the direction of our journey, or how
accomplished, light and truth, the Urim and Thummim,
are the ultimate objects of our search and our labor as Freemasons.
[See Mackey's Lexicon of Freemasonry, where the words
“Jehovah” and “Name of God” will be found
to contain information interesting to the Royal Arch Mason.]
THE TRIANGULAR PLATE OF GOLD.
The
equilateral triangle was adopted by nearly all the nations of
antiquity as a symbol of the Deity. The Egyptians, for instance,
considered it as the representative of the great principle of
animated existence. Among the Hebrews it was often used as a symbol
of the tetragrammaton, and in masonry it retains the same
signification, being the symbol of the Grand Architect of the
Universe and Bestower of Light, its three sides representing the
Past, the Present, and the Future, all of which are contained in the
eternal existence of Jehovah.
THE CUBICAL STONE.
The
cubical stone to which the neophyte is for the first time introduced
in this degree is the Masonic stone of foundation, which
occupies so large and important a portion of the legends and
traditions of the order. This stone inscribed with a mystical
diagram representing the Ineffable Name, is said to have been in the
possession of Adam in Paradise—to have been used by Abel as the
altar on which he offered his acceptable sacrifice, and then to have
been used for the same purpose by the pious Seth. Enoch subsequently
employed it for an important object, and it was finally deposited in
the temple of Solomon, for reasons known only to those who have
penetrated into the arcana of Freenaasonry. Much of this legendary
information is altogether of a symbolical character, requiring for
its comprehension a thorough acquaintance with masonic symbolism, and
is therefore by no means to be taken in its literal sense. These
legends are to be met with in the ancient York lectures. The
student, in his progress through the degrees, will find repeated
references to this “masonic stone of foundation,” which
supported the ineffable name, with or without the ark, and which may
be considered, in whatsoever light we may choose to view the
traditions, whether as fabulous or authentic, as really symbolizing
Divine Truth, which must alone direct and sustain us in our search
after God, whom Freemasons term the Great Architect of the Universe.
CHARGE TO THE NEW ROYAL ARCH MASONS.
Companions:
By the consent and assistance of the members of this Chapter, you
are now exalted to the august degree of a Royal Arch Mason. The
rites and mysteries developed in this degree, have been handed down
through a chosen few, unchanged by time, and uncontrolled by
prejudice; and we trust that they will be regarded by you with the
same veneration, and transmitted with the same scrupulous purity to
your successors.
No one can reflect on the
ceremonies of gaining admission into this place, without being
forcibly struck with the important lessons which they teach. Here we
are necessarily led to contemplate, with gratitude and admiration,
the sacred Source from whence all earthly comforts flow. Here we
find additional inducements to continue steadfast and immovable in
the discharge of our respective duties; and here we are bound by the
most solemn ties, to promote each other's welfare, and correct each
other's failings, by advice, admonition, and reproof. It is a duty
which we owe to our companions of this order, that the application of
every candidate for admission should be examined with the most
scrutinizing eye, so that we may always possess the satisfaction of
finding none among us, but such as will promote, to the utmost of
their power, the great end of our institution. By paying due
attention to this determination, you will never recommend any
candidate for our mysteries, whose abilities and knowledge you cannot
freely vouch for and whom you do not firmly and confidently believe,
will fully conform to the principles of our order, and fulfil the
obligations of a Royal Arch Mason. While such are our members, we
may expect to be united in one object, without indifference,
inattention or neglect; fervency and zeal, fidelity and affection,
will be the distinguishing characteristics of our society; and that
satisfaction, harmony and peace, will be enjoyed at our meetings,
which no other society can afford.
PRAYER AT THE CLOSING OF A CHAPTER OF ROYAL ARCH MASONS.
By
the wisdom of the Supreme High Priest, may we be directed; by
his strength, may we be enabled; and by the beauty of
virtue, may we be incited, to perform the obligations here enjoined
on us; to keep inviolably the mysteries here unfolded to us; and
invariably to practice all those duties out of the Chapter, which are
inculcated in it. So mote it be. Amen.
ROYAL ARCH HISTORY:
IN THREE LECTURES.
LECTURE I:
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE.
“They
have cast fire into thy sanctuary; they have defiled by casting down
the dwelling place of thy name to the ground.” — Psalms
74:7.
There
is no part of sacred history, except perhaps the account of the
construction of the temple, which should be more interesting to the
advanced mason than that which relates to the destruction of
Jerusalem, the captivity of the Jews at Babylon, and the subsequent
restoration under Cyrus for the purpose of rebuilding “the
house of the Lord.” Intimately connected, as the events which
are commemorated in this period are, with the organization of the
Royal Arch degree, it is impossible that any mason who has been
exalted to that degree, can thoroughly understand the nature and
bearing of the secrets with which he has been entrusted, unless he
shall have devoted some portion of time to the study of the
historical incidents to which these secrets refer.
The
history of the Jewish people from the death of Solomon to the final
destruction of the temple, was one continued series of civil
dissensions among themselves, and of revolts in government and
apostacies in religion. No sooner had Rehoboam, the son and
successor of Solomon, ascended the throne, than his harsh and
tyrannical conduct so incensed the people that ten of the tribes
revolted from his authority, and placing themselves under the
government of Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, formed the separate kingdom
of Israel, while Rehoboam continued to rule over the tribes of Judah
and Benjamin, which thenceforth constituted the kingdom of Israel,
whose capital remained at Jerusalem. From thenceforward the history
of Palestine becomes twofold. The ten revolting tribes which
constituted the Israelitish monarchy, soon formed a schismatic
religion, which eventually terminated in idolatry, and caused their
final ruin and dispersion. But the two remaining tribes proved
hardly more faithful to the God of their fathers, and carried their
idolatry to such an extent, that at length there was scarcely a town
in all Judea that did not have its tutelary deity borrowed from the
idolatrous gods of its pagan neighbors. Even in Jerusalem, “the
holy city,” the prophet Jeremiah tells us that altars were set
up to Baal. Israel was the first to receive its punishment for this
career of wickedness, and the ten tribes were carried into a
captivity from which they never returned. As a nation, they have
been stricken from the roll of history.
But
this wholesome example was lost upon Judea. The destruction of the
ten tribes by no means impeded the progress of the other two towards
idolatry and licentiousness. Judah and Benjamin, however, were never
without a line of prophets, priests, and holy men, whose teachings
and exhortations sometimes brought the apostate Jews back to their
first allegiance, and for a brief period restored the pure theism of
the Mosaic dispensation.
Among
these bright but evanescent intervals of regeneracy, we are to
account the pious reign of the good King Josiah, during which the
altars of idolatry throughout his kingdom were destroyed, the temple
was repaired, and its regular service restored. It was in the
prosecution of this laudable duty, that a copy of the Book of the
Law, which had long been lost, was found in a crypt of the temple,
and after having been publicly read to the priests, the levites, and
the people, it was again, by the direction of the prophetess Huldah,
deposited in a secret place.
But
notwithstanding this fortuitous discovery of the Book of the Law, and
notwithstanding all the efforts of King Josiah to reestablish the
worship of his fathers, the Jews were so attached to the practices of
idolatry, that upon his death, being encouraged by his son and
successor Jehoahaz, who was an impious monarch, they speedily
returned to the adoration of pagan deities and the observance of
pagan rites.
The
forbearance of God was at length exhausted, and in the reign of this
King Jehoahaz, the series of divine punishments commenced, which only
terminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and the captivity of its
inhabitants.
The
instrument selected by the Deity for carrying out his designs in the
chastisement of the idolatrous Jews, was Nebuchadnezzar, King of the
Chaldees, then reigning at Babylon; and as this monarch, and the
country which he governed, played an important part in the series of
events which are connected with the organization of the Royal Arch
degree, it is necessary that we should here pause in the narrative
in which we have been engaged, to take a brief view of the locality
of Babylon, the seat of the captivity, and of the history of the
Chaldee nation, whose leader was the conqueror of Judah.
“Few
countries of antiquity,” says Heeren, “have so just a claim
to the attention of the historian as Babylonia.” [Heeren, Arnold.
Historical Researches Into the Politics, Intercourse, and Trade of the
Principal Nations of Antiquity, vol. I. p. 871.] The fertility of its
soil, the wealth of its inhabitants, the splendor of its cities, the
refinement of its society, continued to give it a pre-eminent renown
through a succession of ages. It occupied a narrow strip of land,
lying between the river Tigris on the east and the Euphrates on the
west, and extending about five hundred and forty miles west of north.
The early inhabitants were undoubtedly of the Shemitic race,
deriving their existence from one common origin with the Hebrews,
though it is still a question with the historian whether they
originally came from India or from the peninsula of Arabia,
[Heeren, Arnold. Historical Researches Into the Politics, Intercourse,
and Trade of the Principal Nations of Antiquity, vol. I. p. 381.].
They originally formed a part of the great Assyrian monarchy, but their
early history having no connection with Royal Arch Masonry, may be
passed over without further discussion. About six hundred and thirty
years before the Christian era, Babylon, the chief city, was
conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, the King of the Chaldeans, a nomadic
race, who descending from their homes in the mountains of Taurus and
Caucasus, between the Euxine and the Caspian seas, overwhelmed the
countries of Southern Asia, and became masters of the Syrian and
Babylonian empires.
Nebuchadnezzar
was a warlike monarch, and during his reign was engaged in many
contests for the increase of his power and the extension of his
dominions. Among other nations who fell beneath his victorious arms,
was Judea, whose King Jehoahaz, or as he was afterwards named
Jehoiakim, was compelled to purchase peace by paying an annual
tribute to his conquerors. Jehoiakim was subsequently slain by
Nebuchadnezzar, and his son Jehoiachin ascended the throne of Israel.
The oppression of the Babylonians still continued, and after a reign
of three months, Jehoiachin was deposed by the King of the Chaldees,
and his kingdom given to his uncle Zedekiah, a monarch who is
characterized by Josephus as “a despiser of justice and his
duty.”
It
was in the reign of this ungodly sovereign that the incidents took
place which are commemorated in the first part of the Royal Arch
degree. Having repeatedly rebelled
against the authority of the Babylonian king, to whose appointment he
was indebted for his throne, Nebuchadnezzar repaired with an army to
Judea, and laying siege to Jerusalem, after a severe struggle of
eighteen months' duration, reduced it. He then caused the city to be
leveled with the ground, the royal palace to be burned, the temple
to be pillaged, and the inhabitants to be carried captive to Babylon.
These
events are symbolically detailed in the Royal Arch, and in allusion
to them, the passage of the Book of Chronicles which records them, is
appropriately read during the ceremonies of this part of the degree.
“Zedekiah
was one-and-twenty years old when he began to reign, and reigned
eleven years in Jerusalem. And he did that which was evil in the
sight of the Lord his God, and humbled not himself before Jeremiah
the prophet speaking from the mouth of the Lord. And he also
rebelled against King Nebuchadnezzar, and stiffened his neck, and
hardened his heart from turning unto the Lord God of Israel.
Moreover, all the chief of the priests and the people transgressed
very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the
house of the Lord, which he had hallowed in Jerusalem, and the Lord
God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, because he had
compassion on his people and on his dwelling place. But they mocked
the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his
prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against his people, till
there was no remedy.”
This
preparatory clause announces the moral causes which led to the
destruction of Jerusalem—the evil counsels and courses of
Zedekiah,—his hardness of heart,—his willful deafness to
the denunciations of the Lord's prophet,—and his violation of
all his promises of obedience to Nebuchadnezzar. But not to the king
alone was confined this sinfulness of life. The whole of the people,
and even the priests, the very servants of the the house of the Lord,
were infected with the moral plague. They had abandoned the precepts
and observances of their fathers, which were to have made them a
peculiar people, and falling into the idolatries of their heathen
neighbors, had desecrated the altars of Jehovah with the impure fire
of strange gods. Message after message had been sent to them from
that God who had properly designated himself as “long suffering
and abundant in goodness”—but all was in vain. The
threats and warnings of the prophets' were heard with contempt, and
the messengers of God were treated with contumely, and hence the
fatal result which is detailed in the succeeding passages of
Scripture read before the candidate.
“Therefore
he brought upon them the King of the Chaldees, who slew their young
men with the sword, in the house of their sanctuary, and had no
compassion upon young man or maiden, old man or him that stooped for
age; he gave them all into his hand. And all the vessels of the
house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the
Lord, and the treasures of the king and of his princes; all these he
brought to Babylon.”
But
the king of the Chaldees was not content with the rich spoils of war
that he had gained. It was not sufficient that the sacred vessels of
the temple, made by order of King Solomon, and under the supervision
of that “curious and cunning workman,” who had “adorned
and beautified the edifice” erected for the worship of Jehovah,
should become the prey of an idolatrous monarch. The dark sins of
the people and the king required a heavier penalty. The very house
of the Lord itself—that sacred building which had been erected
on the “threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite,” and which
constituted the third Grand Offering of Masonry on the same sacred
place, was to be burned to its foundations; the city which was
consecrated by its presence was to be leveled to the ground; and its
inhabitants were to be led into a long and painful captivity. Hence
the tale of devastation proceeds as follows:
“And
they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem,
and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire; and destroyed all the
goodly vessels thereof. And them that had escaped from the sword
carried he away captive to Babylon; where they were servants to him
and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia.”
These
events took place in the year 588 before Christ. But we must not
suppose this to have been the beginning of the “seventy years'
captivity” foretold by the prophet Jeremiah. That actually
commenced eighteen years before, in the reign of Jehoiakim, when
Daniel was among the captives. Counting from the destruction of
Jerusalem under Zedekiah, which is the event recorded in the Royal
Arch, to the termination of the captivity under Cyrus, we shall have
but fifty-two years, so that we may readily understand how there
should be among the aged men assembled to see the foundations laid of
the second temple, many who had beheld the splendor and magnificence
of the first.
But
though the city was destroyed, and the temple burnt, the deep
foundations of the latter were not destroyed. The ark of the
covenant, with the book of the law which it contained, was
undoubtedly destroyed in the general conflagration, for we read no
account of its having been carried to Babylon, but the wisdom and
foresight of Solomon had made a provision four hundred and seventy
years before, for the safe preservation of an exact image of that
sacred chest.
Thus
we terminate what may be called the first section of the Royal Arch
degree. The sound of war has been upon the nation—the temple
is overthrown—the city is become a desert—yet even in its
desolation, magnificent in its ruins of palaces and stupendous
edifices—and the people have been dragged in chains as captives
to Babylon.
LECTURE II:
THE CAPTIVITY AT BABYLON.
“By
the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down; yea, we wept when we
remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst
thereof.” — Psalms 137:1-2.
Between
that portion of the ritual of the Royal Arch which refers to the
destruction of the first temple, and that subsequent part which
symbolizes the building of the second, there is an interregnum (if we
may be allowed the term) in the ceremonial of the degree, which must
be considered as a long interval in history, the filling up of which,
like the interval between the acts of a play, must be left to the
imagination of the spectator. This interval represents the time
passed in the captivity of the Jews at Babylon. That captivity
lasted for seventy years, from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar until that
of Cyrus, although but fifty-two of these years are commemorated in
the Royal Arch degree. During this period many circumstances of
great interest and importance occurred, which must be perfectly
understood to enable us to appreciate the concluding portion of the
ceremonies of that degree.
“Babylon
the great,” as the prophet Daniel calls it, the city to which
the captive Jews were conducted by Nebuchadnezzar, was situated four
hundred and seventy-five miles in a nearly due east direction from
Jerusalem. It stood in the midst of a large and fertile plain on
each side of the river Euphrates, which ran through it from north to
south. It was surrounded with walls which were eighty-seven feet
thick, three hundred and fifty in height, and sixty miles in compass.
These were all built of large bricks, cemented together with
bitumen. Exterior to the walls was a wide and deep trench, lined
with the same material.
Twenty-five gates on each side, made of solid brass, gave admission
to the city. From each of these gates proceeded a wide street,
fifteen miles in length, and the whole was separated by means
of other smaller divisions, and contained six hundred and seventy-six
squares, each of which was two miles and a quarter in circumference.
Two hundred and fifty towers, placed upon the walls, afforded the
means of additional strength and protection. Within this immense
circuit were to be found palaces and temples and other edifices of
the utmost magnificence, which have caused the wealth, the luxury and
the splendor of Babylon to become the favorite theme of the
historians of antiquity, and which compelled the prophet Isaiah, even
while denouncing its downfall, to speak of it as “the glory of
kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency.”
To
this city the captives were conducted. What was the exact number
removed we have no means of ascertaining. We are led to believe from
certain passages of Scripture that the deportation was not complete.
[Jeremiah (52:16) says that Nebuzaradan left “certain of the
poor of the land for vine-dressers and for husbandmen.”]
Calmet says that Nebuchadnezzar carried away only the principal
inhabitants, the warriors and artizans of every kind (which would, of
course, include the masons), and that he left the husbandmen, the
laborers, and, in general, the poorer classes that constituted the
great body of the people. Among the prisoners of distinction,
Josephus mentions the high priest, Seraiah, and Zephaniah, the priest
that was next him, with the three rulers that guarded the temple, the
eunuch who was over the armed men, seven friends of Zedekiah, his
scribe and sixty other rulers. Zedekiah, the king, had attempted to
escape, previous to the termination of the siege, but being pursued
was captured and carried to Riblah, the headquarters of
Nebuchadnezzar, where, having first been compelled to behold the
slaughter of his children, his eyes were then put out, and he was
conducted in chains to Babylon. [These circumstances are detailed in
the degree of “Super Excellent Master”—a degree not
used in our chapters. The tradition of this degree says that the
thumbs of Zedekiah were cut off, but this additional punishment is
not mentioned either by Jeremiah or Josephus.]
A
masonic tradition informs us that the captive Jews were bound by
their conquerors with triangular chains, and that this was done by
the Chaldeans as an additional insult, because the Jewish masons were
known to esteem the triangle as an emblem of the sacred name of God,
and must have considered its appropriation to the form of their
fetters as a desecration of the Tetragrammaton.
Of
the road pursued by the Chaldeans with their prisoners we can judge
only from conjecture. It is, however, recorded that they were
carried by Nebuzaradan, the captain of Nebuchadnezzar's army, direct
from Jerusalem to Riblah, where Nebuchadnezzar had fixed his
headquarters. Riblah was situated on the northern border of
Palestine, about two hundred miles northeast of Jerusalem, and was
the city through which the Babylonians were accustomed to pass in
their eruptions into and departures from Judea.
From
Jerusalem to Riblah, the journey is necessarily through Damascus, and
the route from Riblah was direct to Palmyra. Hence, we have every
reason for supposing that the Chaldean army, with the captives, took
that route which is described by Heeren [In his Appendix “On
the Commercial Routes of Ancient Asia,” affixed to his
Historical Researches Into the Politics, Intercourse, and Trade of
the Principal Nations of Antiquity, vol. II. append. XIII, II, 2.],
and which would have conducted them from Jerusalem, through Damascus,
to Riblah in a northerly direction. Here Nebuchadnezzar commanded
Seraiah the high priest, and the rulers, to the amount of seventy, to
be put to death. Thence directing their course to the north-east,
they arrived at Thapsacus, an important commercial town on the
Euphrates, which river they crossed somewhat lower down at a place
called Circesium. They then journeyed in a southerly direction,
through the Median wall and along the east bank of the Euphrates to
Babylon. By this route they avoided making a large circuit to the
north, or crossing an extensive desert which could supply no water.
The
condition of Jerusalem after the departure of the captives is worthy
of consideration. Previous to his departure from Jerusalem,
Nebuzaradan appointed Gedaliah, who was the son of Ahikam, a person
of an illustrious family, governor of the remnant of the Jews who
were left behind. Gedaliah is described by the Jewish historian as
being of “a gentle and righteous disposition.” He
established his seat of government at Mispah, and induced those who
had fled during the siege, and who were scattered over the country,
to return and cultivate the land, promising them protection and favor
if they consented to continue peaceable and pay a small tribute to
the king of Babylon.
Among
those who had fled on the approach of the Chaldean army was Ishmael,
one of the royal family, a wicked and crafty man, who, during the
siege of Jerusalem, had sought protection at the court of the King of
the Ammorites. Ishmael was secretly instigated by Bealis; the
Ammoritish monarch, to slay Gedaliah, that, as one of the royal
family, he might himself ascend the throne of David. Notwithstanding
that Gedaliah was informed of this nefarious design, he refused, in
his unsuspecting temper, to believe the report, and consequently fell
a victim to the treachery of Ishmael, who slew him while partaking of
his hospitality. Ishmael then attempted to carry the inhabitants of
Mispah into captivity, and fled with them to the king of the
Ammorites; but being overtaken by the friends of Gedaliah, who had
armed themselves to avenge his death, the captives were rescued and
Ishmael put to flight. The Jews, fearing that if they remained they
would be punished by the Babylonians for the murder of Gedaliah,
retired to Egypt. Five years after, Nebuchadnezzar, having invaded
and conquered Egypt, carried all the Jews whom he found there to
Babylon. “And such,” says Josephus, “was the end
of the nation of the Hebrews.” Jerusalem was now desolate.
Its king and its people were removed to Babylon, but it remained
unpopulated by foreign colonies, perhaps, as Whiston suggests, “as
an indication of Providence that the Jews were to re-people it
without opposition themselves.”
Let
us turn now to the more immediate object of this lecture, and examine
the condition of the captives during their sojourn in Babylon.
Notwithstanding
the ignominious mode of their conveyance from Jerusalem, and the
vindictiveness displayed by their conqueror in the destruction of
their city and temple, they do not appear, on their arrival at
Babylon, to have been subjected to any of the extreme rigors of
slavery. They were distributed into various parts of the empire;
some remaining in the city, while others were sent into the
provinces. The latter probably devoted themselves to agricultural
pursuits, while the former were engaged in commerce or in the labors
of architecture. Anderson says, that Nebuchadnezzar, having applied
himself to the design of finishing his buildings at Babylon, engaged
therein all the able artists of Judea and other captives to join his
own Chaldean masons; [Anderson, James. Constitutions of the
Free-Masons, edit. 1723. p. 17.].
They were permitted to retain their personal property, and even to
purchase lands and erect houses. Their civil and religious
government was not utterly destroyed, for they retained a regular
succession of kings and high priests, one of each of whom returned
with them, as will be seen hereafter, on their restoration. Some of
the principal captives were advanced to offices of dignity and power
in the royal palace, and were permitted to share in the councils of
state. Their prophets, Daniel and Ezekiel, with their associates,
preserved among their countrymen the pure doctrines of their
religion, and taught that belief in the Divine Being which
constituted the most important principle of Primitive Freemasonry, in
opposition to the spurious system practiced by their idolatrous
conquerors. “The people,” says Oliver, “who
adhered to the worship of God, and they were neither few nor
insignificant, continued to meet in their schools, or lodges, for the
undisturbed practice of their system of ethical Freemasonry, which
they did not fail to propagate for their mutual consolation during
this calamitous reverse of fortune, and for the benefit of their
descendants.” [Oliver, George. Historical Landmarks of
Freemasonry, vol. II. p. 410.]
The
rabbinical writers inform us that during the captivity a fraternity
was established, for the preservation of traditional knowledge, which
was transmitted to a few initiates, and that on the restoration,
Zerubbabel, Joshua and Esdras carried all this secret instruction to
Jerusalem, and there established a similar fraternity. The principal
seats of this institution were at Naharda, on the Euphrates, at Sora,
and at Pompeditha.” [See Mackey's Lexicon of Freemasonry,
word Naharda. It is but fair to remark that the authors of the
“Encyclopedie Methodique,” in common with many other
writers, place the establishment of these colleges at a much later
date, and subsequent to the Christian era. But Oliver supposes them
to have been founded during the captivity.]
Among
the remarkable events that occurred during the captivity, we are to
account the visit of Pythagoras to Babylon. This ancient philosopher
was, while in Egypt, taken prisoner by Cambyses, during his invasion
of that country, and carried to Babylon, where he remained for twelve
years. There he is said to have had frequent interviews with
Ezekiel, and to have derived from the instructions of the prophet
much of that esoteric system of philosophy into which he afterwards
indoctrinated his disciples.
Jehoiachin,
who had been the king of Judah before Zedekiah, and had been
dethroned and carried as a captive to Babylon, remained in prison for
thirty-seven years, during the long reign of Nebuchadnezzar. But at
the death of that monarch, his son and successor, Evilmerodach,
restored the captive king to liberty, and promoted him to great honor
in his palace. Evilmerodach, who was infamous for his vices, reigned
only two years, when he was deposed and put to death by his own
relations, and Neriglissar, his sister's husband; ascended the
throne. Jehoiachin is said to have died at the same time, or, as
Prideaux conjectures, he was as the favorite of Evilmerodach, slain
with him.
After
the death of Jehoiachin, Salathiel or Shealtiel, his son, became the
“head of the captivity,” or nominally the Jewish king.
Neriglissar,
or Niglissar, as he is called by Josephus, reigned for forty years,
and then was succeeded by his son Labosordacus. This monarch became
by his crimes hateful to the people, and, after a short reign of only
nine months, was slain by his own subjects. The royal line, whose
throne had been usurped by Neriglissar, was then restored in the
person of Belshazzar, one of the descendants of Nebuchadnezzar.
Belshazzar was an effeminate and licentious monarch, indulging in
luxury and dissipation, while the reins of government were entrusted
to his mother, Nitocris. He was, therefore, but ill prepared by
temper or ability to oppose the victorious arms of Cyrus, the King of
Persia, and Darius, the King of Media, who made war upon him.
Consequently, after an inglorious reign of seventeen years, his power
was wrested from him, the city of Babylon was taken by Cyrus, and the
Babylonian power was forever annihilated.
After
the death of Shealtiel, the sovereignty of the Jews was transmitted
to his son, Zerubbabel, who thus became the head of the captivity, or
normal Prince of Judea.
While
the line of the Jewish monarchs was thus preserved, during the
captivity, in the house of David, the Jews were not less careful to
maintain the due succession of the high priesthood; for Jehosadek,
the son of Seraiah, was the high priest that was carried by
Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon, and when he died, during the captivity, he
was succeeded in his sacred office by his eldest son, Joshua.
In
the first year of the reign of Cyrus the captivity of the Jews was
terminated. Cyrus, from his conversations with Daniel and the other
Jewish captives of learning and piety, as well as from his perusal of
their sacred books, more especially the prophecies of Isaiah, had
become imbued with a knowledge of true religion, and hence had even
publicly announced to his subjects his belief in the God “which
the nation of the Israelites worshiped.” He was consequently
impressed with an earnest desire to fulfill the prophetic
declarations, of which he was the subject, and to re-build the temple
of Jerusalem. Accordingly, he issued a proclamation, which we find
in Ezra, as follows:
“Thus
saith Cyrus, King of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all
the kingdoms of the earth; and He hath charged me to build Him a
house at Jerusalem, which is in Judea. Who is there among you of all
His people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem,
which is in Judea, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel, (He
is the God,) which is in Jerusalem.”
With
the publication of this proclamation of Cyrus, commences what may be
called the second part of
the Royal Arch degree. The whole space of time occupied in the
captivity, and the events connected with
that portion of the Jewish history, are not referred to in the
ceremonies, but constitute, as we have already remarked, an interval
like the period of time supposed to pass in a drama, between the
falling of a curtain at the close of one act and its being raised at
the commencement of the subsequent one. But now there are “glad
tidings of great joy,” as given in this proclamation to the
Jews. The captives are liberated—the exiles are permitted to
return home. Leaving the banks of the Euphrates, they direct their
anxious steps over rough and rugged roads to
that beloved mountain of the Lord, where their ancestors were so long
wont to worship. The events connected with this restoration are of
deep attraction to the mason, since the history abounds in
interesting and instructive legends. But the importance of the
subject demands that we should pursue the investigation in a separate
lecture.
LECTURE III:
THE RETURN TO JERUSALEM.
“For,
lo, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will bring again the
captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the Lord; and I will
cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and
they shall possess it” — Jeremiah 30:3.
We
have now arrived at that portion of the history of the Babylonish
captivity which is allegorized in the concluding ceremonies of the
Royal Arch degree. And here we may incidentally observe, that the
same analogy which exists in the Master's degree to the ancient
mysteries, is also to be found in the Royal Arch. The masonic
scholar, who is familiar with the construction of those mysteries of
the Pagan priests and philosophers, is well aware that they inculcate
by symbolic and allegoric instruction, the great lessons of the
resurrection of the body and the immortality of the soul. Hence they
were all funereal in their character. They commenced in sorrow, they
terminated in joy. The death or destruction of some eminent
personage, most generally a god, was depicted in the beginning of the
ceremonies of initiation, while the close was occupied in
illustrating, in the same manner, the discovery of his grave, the
recovery of the body, and the restoration to life eternal. The same
religious instruction is taught in the Master's degree. The evidence
of this fact, it is unnecessary for us hero to demonstrate. It will
be at once apparent to every mason who is sufficiently acquainted
with the ritual of his order.
But
is it not equally apparent that the same system, though under a
thicker veil, is preserved in the ceremonies of the Royal Arch?
There is a resurrection of that which has been buried—a
discovery of that which had been lost—an exchange of that
which, like the body, the earthly tenement, was temporary, for that
which, like the soul, is intended to be permanent. The life which we
pass on earth is but a substitute for that glorious one which
we are to spend in eternity. And it is in the grave, in the depths
of the earth, that the corruptible puts on incorruption, that the
mortal puts on immortality [1 Corinthians 15:53], and that the
substitute of this temporal life is exchanged for the blessed reality
of life eternal.
The
interval to which we alluded in the last lecture, and which is
occupied by the captivity of the Jews at Babylon, is now over, and
the allegory of the Royal Arch is resumed with the restoration of the
captives to their home.
Five
hundred and thirty-six years before the Christian era, Cyrus issued
his decree for the return of the Jews. At the same time he restored
to them all the sacred vessels and precious ornaments of the first
temple, which had been carried away by Nebuchadnezzar, and which were
still in existence.
Forty-two
thousand three hundred and sixty of the Jews repaired, in the same
year, from Babylon and the neighboring cities to Jerusalem. The
leaders of these were Zerubbabel, Joshua and Haggai, of whom, as they
perform an important part in the history of this event as recorded in
the Royal Arch, it is incumbent on us to speak more particularly.
[In the English ritual of the Royal Arch, Ezra and Nehemiah are added
to the number as scribes.]
Zerubbabel
was, at the time of the restoration, the possessor of the regal
authority among the Jews, as the prince of the captivity and a
descendant of the house of David, and as such he assumed at Jerusalem
the office of king. He was the son of Shealtiel, who was the son of
Jechoniah, the monarch who had been deposed by Nebuchadnezzar and
carried away to Babylon. He was the intimate friend of Cyrus, and
indeed, it is supposed that it was principally through his influence
that the Persian monarch was induced to decree the liberation of the
captives.
Joshua,
the High Priest, was, like Zerubbabel, entitled to his office by the
indisputable claim of direct descent from the ancient hierarchy. He
was the son of Josedech, and the grandson of Seraiah, who had been
the High Priest when Jerusalem was taken by Nebuchadnezzar.
Of
Haggai, the Scribe, but little is known that can be relied on. We
know nothing of the place or the time of his birth, but it is
supposed that he was born at Babylon during the captivity. He was
the first of the three prophets who flourished after the captivity,
and his writings, though few, (so few, indeed, that some theologians
have supposed that the larger portion of them has perished,) all
relate to the building of the second temple. The office of scribe,
which is the one assigned to him in the Royal Arch degree, was one of
great importance in the Jewish economy. The sophers or
scribes constituted, says Dr. Beard, “a learned, organized, much
esteemed and highly influential body of men, recognized and supported
by the state.” [Kitto, John, ed. Cyclopaedia of Biblical
Literature, vol. II. p. 205, see Scribes.] They were learned
in the laws, and it was their duty to expound them to the people. Horne
says that the scribe seems to have been the king's secretary of
state, and as such to have registered all acts and decrees.
[Horne, Thomas. Intro. to the Critical Study and Knowledge of
the Holy Scriptures, vol. III. p. 93.] It is,
perhaps, in this capacity that we are to suppose that Haggai claims a
place in the Grand Council of the Royal Arch. Zerubbabel, assisted
by these advisers, proceeded to arrange his followers in such a form
as would enable them most safely and expeditiously to traverse the
long and dangerous road from Babylon to Jerusalem, which latter place
they reached after a journey of four months, on the 22nd of June, 535
years before the birth of Christ.
The
first object of the Jewish leader was, we may well suppose, to
provide the means of shelter for the people who accompanied him. We
are irresistibly led to the conclusion, that for this purpose it was
found necessary to erect tents for their temporary dwelling.
Extensive and populous as was Jerusalem at the commencement of the
captivity, after the ruthless devastation of its unsparing conqueror
it could hardly have retained sufficient means for the convenient
accommodation of the fifty thousand souls who were thus suddenly and
unexpectedly brought within its walls. Tents, therefore, afforded
rude and temporary dwellings, until, in the course of time, more
substantial buildings could be erected.
The
next thing was to restore the ancient sacrifices and religious
services, and for this purpose to provide a temporary place of
worship until the second temple could be completed. Accordingly, a
few months after their arrival, they met together at Jerusalem and
celebrated the Feast of Trumpets, and a few days subsequently, the
Feast of Tabernacles. It was probably the celebration of this latter
observance, as well as the necessity and expediency of the measure,
that led the Grand Council of leaders to the erection of a temporary
tabernacle near the ruins of the ancient temple, the existence of
which is so familiar to us from the traditions and ceremonies of the
Royal Arch.
Having
thus furnished dwellings for the workmen, and a sacred edifice for
the celebration of their religious rites, our Masonic traditions
inform us that Joshua, the High Priest, Zerubbabel, the King, and
Haggai, the Scribe, daily sat in council, to devise plans for the
workmen and to superintend the construction of the new temple, which,
like a phoenix, was to arise from the ashes of the former one.
It
is this period of time in the history of the second temple, that is
commemorated in the concluding portion of the Royal Arch. The ruins
of the ancient temple are begun to be removed, and the foundations of
the second are laid. Joshua, Zerubbabel and Haggai are sitting in
daily council within the tabernacle; parties of Jews who had not left
Babylon with the main body under Zerubbabel, are continually coming
up to Jerusalem to assist in rebuilding the house of the Lord.
During
this period of laborious activity a circumstance occurred, which is
alluded to in the ritual of the Royal Arch. The Samaritans were
desirous of assisting the Jews in the construction of the temple, but
their propositions were at once rejected by Zerubbabel. To
understand the cause of this refusal to receive their cooperation, we
must for a moment advert to the history of this people.
The
ten tribes who had revolted from Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, and
who had chosen Jeroboam for their king, rapidly fell into idolatry,
and having selected the town of Samaria for their metropolis, a
complete separation was thus effected between the kingdoms of Judah
and Israel. Subsequently, the Samaritans were conquered by the
Assyrians under Shalmanezer, who carried the greater part of the
inhabitants into captivity, and introduced colonies in their place
from Babylon, Cultah, Ava, Hamath and Sepharvaim. These colonists,
who assumed the name of Samaritans, brought with them, of course, the
idolatrous creed and practices of the region from which they
emigrated. The Samaritans, therefore, at the time of the rebuilding
of the second temple, were an idolatrous race, and as such abhorrent
to the Jews. [They were not, perhaps, altogether Idolaters, although
idolatry was the predominant religion. The Rev. Br. Davidson says of
them: “It appears that the people were a mixed race. The
greater part of the Israelites had been carried away captive by the
Assyrians, including the rich, the strong, and such as were able to
bear arms. But the poor and the feeble had been left. The country
had not been so entirely depopulated as to possess no Israelite
whatever. The dregs of the populace, particularly those who appeared
incapable of active service, were not taken away by the victors.
With them, therefore, the heathen colonists became incorporated. But
the latter were far more numerous than the former, and had all power
in their own hands. The remnant of the Israelites was so
inconsiderable and insignificant as not to affect, to any important
extent, the opinions of the new inhabitants. As the people were a
mixed race, their religion also assumed a mixed character.
In it the worship of idols was associated with that of the true God.
But apostacy from Jehovah was not universal.” See the article
Samaritans in Kitto, John, ed. Cyclopaedia of Biblical
Literature, vol. II. p. 672.] Hence, when they asked permission to
assist in the pious work of rebuilding the temple, Zerubbabel, with the
rest of the leaders, replied, “Ye have nothing to do with us to
build a house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the
Lord God of Israel, as King Cyrus, the King of Persia has commanded
us.” [Ezra 4:3.]
Hence
it was that, to avoid the possibility of these idolatrous Samaritans
polluting the holy work by their cooperation, Zerubbabel found it
necessary to demand of every one who offered himself as an assistant
in the undertaking, that he should give an accurate account of his
lineage, and prove himself to have been a descendant (which no
Samaritan could be) of those faithful Giblemites who worked at the
building of the first temple.
It
was while the workmen were engaged in making the necessary
excavations for laying the foundation, and while numbers continued to
arrive at Jerusalem from Babylon, that three worn and weary
sojourners, after plodding on foot over the rough and devious roads
between the two cities, offered themselves to the Grand Council as
willing participants in the labor of erection. Who these sojourners
were, we have no historical means of discovering; but there is a
Masonic tradition (entitled, perhaps, to but little weight) that they
were Hananiah, Misael and Azariah, three holy men, who are better
known to general readers by their Chaldaic names of Shadrach, Mesheck
and Abednego, as having been miraculously preserved from the fiery
furnace of Nebuchadnezzar.
Their
services were accepted, and from their diligent labors resulted that
important discovery, the perpetuation and preservation of which
constitutes the great end and design of the Royal Arch degree.
This
ends the connection of the history of the restoration with that of
the Royal Arch. The works were soon after suspended in consequence
of difficulties thrown in the way by the Samaritans, and other
circumstances occurred to prevent the final completion of the temple
for many years subsequent to the important discovery to which we have
just alluded. But these details go beyond the Royal Arch, and are to
be found in the higher degrees of Masonry, such as the Red Cross
Knight and the Prince of Jerusalem.