WHY TWO RITUALS?

Bro. Anton O.Aspeslet, P.G.M.

Inaugural Address
(80-09-27)


Many times over the years the writer has been asked the question,
why do we in Alberta have two rituals, and why the difference.

Masonic history and ritual are subjects on which more
investigation has been done, and more books and papers written,
than any other facet of Masonry. It is extremely difficult,
however, to trace with any degree of certainty the exact origins
of our symbols, or discover whence our ceremonies were derived. 
Our early Brethren were reluctant to commit any information to
paper, and many Masonic documents were destroyed by over-zealous
Brethren.

It is mainly because of the differences in our two authorized
workings that the original question arises. Let us then, for a
few moments, consider the differences;

1. The opening and closing ceremonies differ considerably in
wording, as well as in form.

2. The Canadian Rite has one extra officer, the Inner Guard.

3. Perambulations by the Officers and Brethren differ.

4. The position of the three Lesser Lights differs.

5. The movable and immovable jewels are reversed.

6. For the obligation the W.M. leaves his chair in the York Rite,
whereas in the Canadian Rite the W.M. remains in his chair.

7. Working tools: York Rite six, Canadian Rite nine.

8. In York Rite the C.T. is used in all three degrees, in the
Canadian Rite in the E.A. degree only.

9. The four monitorial questions are put by the York Rite in the
ante-room. In the Canadian Rite question number four as used in
the York Rite is proposed in the ante-room, the remaining three
in the lodge room.

10. The position of the letter "G" differs.

11. The Hiramic legend differs only in the method used to portray
it.  The M.M. word: one in the York Rite, two in the Canadian
Rite.

12. The monitorial emblems in the M.M. lecture of the York Rite
do not appear in the Canadian Rite.

13. The S.S's in the in the York Rite are preceded by the "due
guard", whereas no "due guard" is used in the Canadian Rite.

In all important aspects regarding the teachings of the Craft,
however, the rites are in agreement. Visitation between lodges
presents no difficulty as the modes of recognition are the same.

A study of the history of the Craft shed more light on the
reasons for the differences noted in the form of the lodge and
ritualistic practice, in this and other jurisdictions.

In order to understand the evolution of the ritual it is
necessary to go back to about 1696 in Scotland, when a two-degree
system was being worked.

Bro. Carr writes that three manuscript rituals are available
which describe the two-degree system in use at that time:

The Edinburgh Register House MS dated on its endorsement, 1696.
The Chetwode Crawley MS, c. 1700.
The Kevan MS of c. 1714.(1)

These documents are of Scottish origin, they describe a Scottish
system of only two degrees, the first for the E.A. and the second
for the M.M. or F.C. (within the lodge they were of equal status;
i.e., fully trained men outside the lodge; the first was an
employer and the latter the employee).  To the E.A. an oath was
administered:

He was taken out of the lodge with the 'youngrest maon' who
taught him the sign (or due gruard) 'postures and words of
entrte', which he repeated on his return. . . He was then
entrusted with the two pillar words. . . The ceremony was
completed with a set of fifteen questions and answers. . . (1)

The ceremony for the 'master mason or fellow craft' was a very
brief affair in Scotland. ... The Candidate took a simple oath of
fidelity and secrecy.  He was taken out of the lodge by the
'youngest master' and there instructed in the 'sign, posture and
words of entry'.  He came back, made the 'master's sign' (which
is not described), repeated the 'words of entry' - ...(1)

and gave a greeting to the master and brethren - the word was
finally given to the candidate with a grip;

. . . There is a separate note which indicates that the word (not
a posture described as the 'fyve points of the fellowship'.(3)

The information on the word(s), says Carr,

. . . appears for the first time in the Sloane MS. (c. 1700) as a
word of three syllables, whispered 'half in one ear, half in the
other! . All the earliest known versions of the 'words', up to c.
1730, differ vastly from each other and it is quite impossible to
say which, if any of them, was correct.(2)

There is no evidence of a Hiramic legend in the two-degree
ritual. The first evidence of a three-degree system appears in
the, "Apollonian Society for Lovers of Music and Architecture" ,
meeting in London in 1725 and in Lodge Dumbarton Kilvinning (now
No. 18, Scottish Constitution).

1. Carr, "The Relationship between the Craft and the Royal Art",
Ars Quator Coronatorum, Vol. 86, pp. 36, 37  
2. Ibid., p. 37
3. Ibid., p. 39
4. Ibid., p. 40

Carr further states that

. . . when the English (and Irish) texts begin to make their
appearance, from c. 1700 onwards, they are substantially in
agreement with the earlier versions in many respects, so that it
would be reasonably safe to say that when the first English Grand
Lodge was founded in 1717, its lodges were working a two-degree
system roughly similar to that described in the 'Edinburgh group'
of texts. (5)

What about the third degree? Brother Carr writes:

. . . when the third degree made its appearance it was not a
newly created ceremony; it was the degree of 'Master or
fellow-craft', the old second degree of the two-degree system,
promoted into third place by splitting of the old first degree
into two parts.  The earliest text that actually described a
system of three degreees, i.e. Prichard's Masonry Dissected of
1730, shows these details very precisely. It also shows that by
this time all three degrees had acquired additional materials,
notably the 'Winding Staircase', etc. in the second degree and
the Hiramic legend in the third. But two of the essential
elements of the 1730 third degree (the F.P.O.F. and the M words)
were clearly from the original second degree of the two-degree
system.(6)

Lionel Vibert suggested that the third degree was little used 
prior to 1721 but also suggested that it may have been available
in the 17th century. (7)

From Prichard's Masonry Dissected (8) the following are of
interest to our discussion:

Q. . . . from whence came you?
A. From the East.
Q. Where are you going?
A. To the West.
Q. What are you going to do there?
A. To seek for that which was lost and is now found.
Q. What is that which was lost and is now found?
A. The Master-Mason's word.

and the following;

1. They hid him under some rubbish until high 12 again.
2. They carried him to the brow of a hill where they buried him.
3. K.S. ordered him taken up and decently buried, and that 15
F.C. with white gloves and aprons should attend.
4. The F.P.O.F. are described as "H to H, F to F, C to C, K to K
and H in B".

The Edinburgh MS.(9) gives the F.P.O.F. as follows: F to F,
K to K, Ht to Ht, Hd to Hd, and E to E.

The Graham MS(10) gives the F.P.O.F. as F to F, K to K, B to B, C
to C, and H to B.


5. Ibid., p. 37
6. Ibid., pp. 37, 38
7. Vibert, in Prestonian Lectures, p. 44
8. Carr, op.cit.,  pp. 44, 45
9. Knoop, "The Mason Word" in Prestonian Lectures,  p. 246
10. Ibid., p. 253


Now to move on.  The first Grand Lodge was formed by four lodges
in the City of London in 1717, and is known as the Premier Grand
Lodge of England. A Grand Lodge of Ireland existed eight years
later. The Grand Lodge of Scotland came into existence in 1736. 
In 1751 the Grand Lodge of the Antients was formed in England,
probably by Irish Masons. It was the latter Grand Lodge, i.e.,
the Antients, and the Premier Grand Lodge that played the
greatest role in the development of present day English lodge
ritual and practice.

One Lawrence Dermott was very active in the Antient Grand Lodge. 
Dermott was born in Ireland in 1720, made a Mason in 1746, and
arrived in England in 1752. He was named Grand Secretary of the
Antients, holding office until 1771. He served as D.G.M. from
1783 to 1787, and died in 1791. Dermott wrote the Constitution
for the Antients. The Grand Lodge of the Antients styled itself
"The Grand Lodge of England According to the Old Constitution."
The new body accused the older one of having introduced
innovations, and claimed that they alone preserved the Ancient
Customs and Practices of Masonry. They called the old body
"Moderns", and assumed the title "Antients". Feelings between
these two Grand Lodges during the last half of the 18th century,
to say the least were not good.

Two points of disagreement were;


1. When Masonic disclosures began to appear in the 18th century,
the Moderns Grand Lodge reversed the words of the E.A. and F.C.
degrees. These were not returned to the original order until
early in the 19th century.

2. Accepted Masons of the Moderns used tape to outline the form
of the lodge rather than chalk, as had been used earlier.

During the ten years 1779 - 1789 there were actually four Grand
Lodges operating in England, but two were short lived and
probably had very little influence in Craft ritual.  It can be
seen from the foregoing that there was a considerable amount of
difference in Masonic thought during the latter half of the 18th
century.

From 1760 onwards, much effort was spent in trying to settle the
differences between the Moderns and the Antients. In 1809 matters
had progressed to the point where union was being discussed. To
this end the Premier Grand Lodge formed the "Lodge of
Promulgation" in 1809 and it continued to work until 1811. Its
function was to examine and define the landmarks, and to bring
ritual practice into line for an early union with the Antient
Grand Lodge.

The Lodge of Promulgation on 13th December, 1809, resolved

. . . that Deacons (being proved on due investigation to be not
only Ancient but useful and necessary officers) be recommended.

This Lodge . . . also gave some consideration to the separation
of the Degrees, as it had been the usual practice for both the
first and second Degrees to be conferred on the same evening. 
The precise nature of their decision is not clear . . . (11)

There is some evidence to show that the Lodge of Promulgation
made some progress on separate openings and closings, but the
evidence of such study is not clear except in the work of the
Lodge of Reconciliation.  It appears that it was Modern practice
to open the lodge directly in the third degree and that separate
closings were unknown.


11. Dyer, "Shadbolt...." Ars Quatuor  Coronatorum, Vol. 87, p.
140


The Lodge of Antiquity No. 1, of which Wm. Preston was a member,
dominated the Lodge of Promulgation, which brought the Moderns
Ritual closer to that of the Antients. The Duke of Sussex, Grand
Master of the Moderns and W.M. of the Lodge of Antiquity No. 1,
was very active masonically, and it was probably because of his
influence and drive that reconciliation was possible at all.

The formation of one Grand Lodge, however, presented many
problems, not the least of which were ritualistic ones. It may
have been the desire of the Duke of Sussex to have a common
ritual; whether that is so is difficult to say, but it was not to
be. Probably it was good for Masonry that it was not achieved.
How dull it would be if every lodge did everything exactly the
same as the other.

On 25 November, 1813, the Articles of Union between the two Grand
Lodges (Antients and Moderns) were signed. On 1 December, 1813,
they were ratified separately by both Grand Lodges, and on 27
December, 1813, a formal meeting was held to consummate the union
with the Duke of Sussex as G.M. of the United Grand Lodge.

As part of the arrangements in connection with the union a
special "Lodge of Reconciliation" was formed, with
representatives from both Grand Lodges, to settle the ritual
forms to be used in the constituent lodges. Important members of
this lodge were: Hemming - W.M., Shadbolt (Moderns) - J.W., Wm. 
Williams, Philip Broadfoot (Antients). The last named formed
Stability Lodge of Instruction in 1817, which lodge is still in
operation in England today.

The Lodge of Reconciliation proceeded to formulate the ritual for
the three degree ceremony. By August, 1814, the Lodge of
Reconciliation had proceeded far enough in finalizing the ritual
forms to be able to give demonstrations on an extensive scale,
which they did until March, 1815.  The Lodge of Reconciliation
ceased its work in June 1816, with Grand Lodge approval being
given to its forms.

There was not, however, unanimity about the Union; old wounds
cannot be healed overnight. The three prominent members, i.e.,
Hemming, Shadbolt, and Williams, disagreed over the precise
detail of the Ritual and the wording to be used. Thus changes
were made in the Ritual even after its approval of June 1816.

It must be remembered that during the 18th century a mass of
Masonic literature had grown up in the form of lectures and
charges.  William Preston and Hemming were two who produced much
of this material. The Lodge of Reconciliation attempted to
coordinate these lectures and charges, so that the basic Rite
would follow a uniform and logical sequence of events in the
ceremonies of opening, closing, and of making, passing and
raising.  The work of the Lodge of Reconciliation then, was a
process of selection and rejection from the mass of material
available.

That the fundamentals of the system of Freemasonry remained
unchanged may be proved from a meeting of the G.M.'s of England,
Ireland, and Scotland, which took place in London six months
after the Union. At this conference ". . it was ascertained that
the Three Grand Lodges were perfectly in unison in all the great
and essential points of the Mystery & Craft . . ." (12)


From Philip Broadfoot we learn that the lectures were not settled
by the Lodge of Reconciliation and that the G.M. gave as his
opinion that every Master

12. Haunch, "It is not in the Power of Man..." Ars Quatuor 
Coronatorum, Vol. 85, p. 203

was at liberty to lecture as he pleased, provided he did not
deviate from the mode of ceremony as sanctioned by Grand Lodge.

DEVELOPMENT OF LODGE ROOMS

Bro.  Collin F. W. Dyer writes,

In the second half of the 18th century and into the 19th until
the Union of 1813, lodges developed from either a group around a
simple floor drawing at the end of a room, in which tables were
already laid for a meal (which formed the main purpose of the
meetings along with instructional work actually at table) or, at
least a small separate room with a removable floor cloth, on
which the lodge symbols were drawn or placed. They went through
an era of representing the symbolic lodge artistically on a board
around which the working lodge could be formed, to a time well on
in the 19th century, of a rise of separate and purposely built
lodges or, alternately, the furnishing of rooms especially for
the purposes of Masonry even on a temporary, basis. (13)

Any M.M., however, would recognize a lodge room, as such by the
articles he would find there. Yet there were many, differences
between one lodge room and another, according to the views of the
lodges that met in them.

Early in 1700 the W.M. was placed in the E. and the two wardens
in the W., representing the two great pillars of K.S's Temple. By
a ruling in 1810 in England, the wardens' positions were changed
to the S. and the W. in all lodges. (14) The Antient Grand Lodge
introduced the office of Deacon.

In Modern working the Altar was on the W.M's pedestal; in Antient
working the Altar was placed some distance from the W.M. towards
the centre of the room.  Thus in Modern working the candidate was
brought to the W.M. for his obligation, while in Antient working
the W.M. left his place and went to the candidate.

In the rearrangement after 1813 the way in which the Volume
should be placed depended on the previous allegiance of the lodge
concerned. There is no absolute standard in English working.

FURNITURE AND JEWELS

The essential items of a lodge developed over the years. Because
of the separation of lodges from Grand Lodge by distance and lack
of central direction and control, in England and Ireland, the
furniture and jewels, etc., may have differed from lodge to
lodge. A good deal of borrowing of ideas probably resulted from
intervisitation of lodges.

In the practice of the Moderns Grand Lodge the Bible, Square and
Compasses were referred to as the furniture of the lodge.(15)
Those working under the Antient Grand Lodge referred to them as
the Three Great Lights.(16) They were, however, united in what
these symbols meant.

13. Dyer, Symbolism in Craft Freemasonry, pp. 70-71
14. Ibid., p. 71
15. Ibid., pp. 114-115
16. Ibid., p. 107

With the Union, Antient practice of the three Great Lights being
the V.O.T.S.L., square and compasses was followed. The practice
by the Moderns of calling them furniture was followed, by calling
them essential furniture; surely a marvel in compromise.

The three L.L's (17) were originally placed in their positions
around the centre of the lodge; i.e. around the tracing board
when it came into use to symbolize the working lodge - to enable
the symbols to be seen and explained. With the moving of the
wardens to the S. and the W. these L.L's were moved closer to the
Master and the wardens. This had become established practice in
England by the early 1800's.

The coffin, skull and crossbones, the hour glass, the scythe, and
the beehive were at one time found in English lodges, but are
only occasionally seen today. (Bristol)

THE CEREMONIES

In preunion Modern working the J.W. conducted the candidate in
his perambulations. The Lodge of Promulgation decreed that it
should be the duty of the S.D.(18) In Antient working the S.D.
conducted the candidate, the J.D. attending the door. Following
the work of the Lodge of Reconciliation, the J.D. conducted the
candidate at initiation.

It appears to have been common practice in both Grand Lodges in
preunion days for the S.W. to demonstrate advancing from the W.
to the E. Following the Lodge of Reconciliation it became the
duty of the J.D. In Wm.  Williams' work the J.D. remains with the
candidate for I., the Tyler gives the T.D.K's and the J.D.
answers the I.G's enquiry. (18)

Preunion Freemasonry in England was essentially Christian. It had
been found possible, however, to admit into the English Craft
those of different religious beliefs. A form of lecture practised
mainly in Lancashire (19) towards the end of the 18th century,
says in part:

Q. To whom do you dedicate your lodge?
A. To God and the Holy Apostles St. John.

This dedication of lodges to the Holy Sts. John is of some
antiquity, and references to it occur in some of the older
documents. With the Union of the two Grand Lodges
dechristianization began, and became final in 1816.

In the ceremonies of the Antient Grand Lodge it was in some
places the custom to use the c.t. in all three degrees, it being
bound twice or three times in the other degrees.  Also, in
passing it was in some cases the custom to half veil the
candidate. (20)

The point within a circle and the two parallel lines, preunion,
were said by Preston to represent the two Sts. John as patrons of
the order. (21) When Masonry was made non-denominational the two
parallel lines became Moses and K.S.

17. Ibid., p. 71
18. Dyer, "The Williams-Arden Manuscript ..." Ars Quatuor
Coronatorum, Vol. 87, p. 182
19. Dver, Symbolism, op.cit., p. 82
20. Ibid., p. 129
21. Ibid.,  p. 99

The frontispiece of the 1784 Book of Constitution of the Moderns
Grand Lodge shows representations of Faith, Hope, and Charity
expressed as female forms; these are found today in lecture
slides of some York Rite lodges in Alberta.

Collin Dyer writes,

Most of the old lectures from whatever source contain the
comment, that Masons meet and part on, one or other of the square
and the level . . . but did not agree on which to meet and which
to part. (22)

It appears possible that the great symbolism of darkness to light
did not make its appearance until the early 19th century. Lodges
were not darkened in the third degree until the post-union
period.

THE WORKING TOOLS

In a great majority of lodges under the English Constitution
there are three working tools allocated to each of the three
Craft Degrees - giving a total of nine in all.  This arrangement
dates from 1816, as a result of the work of the Lodge of
Reconciliation. Prior to the Union there does not appear to have
been a common practice with respect to working tools.

Antient lodges had the 24 inch gauge, the square, and the common
gavel or setting maul in the first degree. In the second they
used the plumb, square, and setting maul.  Dr. Anderson's
Constitutions of 1738 (23) make reference to the hammer and the
trowel as being tools requisite for a Freemason.

In the 1792 edition of Preston's lectures (24), he gave a short
moral lecture on the rule, line, trowel, plumb, square,
compasses, chisel, and mallet in that order. These did not appear
in Preston's 1775 edition.  A MS. lecture believed to date from
the late 1890's and to come from Lancashire mentions the rule,
line, trowel, plumb, square, compasses, level, chisel, and mallet
in that order. It cannot be determined who copied from whom.

The Lodge of Reconciliation rearranged much of the ritual and
symbolism. First it decided to have three working tools in each
degree. The square was removed from the first to the second
degree, and the plumb and the level were added to the square. 
The 24 inch gauge remained in the first degree, along with the
common gavel. The chisel was added to make up for the square. In
the third degree the skirret appeared for the first time, in
1816.  The pencil was also new.  Dyer wrote that it was but
natural to allot the compasses to this degree. (25)

The trowel had no place as a working tool in the post-union
arrangements. A use is found in some places as the jewel of the
Tyler.  Recently with the creation in English Masonry of the
office of "Charity Steward", the trowel has been adopted as his
jewel because of its long association as a symbol of charity.  It
is, however, still found in Bristol working. (26)

22. Dyer, Symbolism, p. 156
23. Ibid., p. 149
24. Ibid., p. 150
25. Ibid., p. 154
26. Haunch, op.cit., p. 203

SUMMARY

Freemasonry was born in Scotland and England. Before it had
reached maturity it was transmitted from Great Britain to Ireland
and subsequently from England, Ireland and Scotland to every
quarter of the habitable globe.

Originally the lodges were strictly operative, but accepted
Masonry gradually evolved out of the operative craft during the
century preceeding 1730. (27)

In Scotland in the 17th and early 18th centuries non-operative or
gentlemen masons joined operative lodges, (28) which regulated
the affairs of the lodges.  The authority of lodges was subject,
in some cases, to the supervision of a more important neighboring
lodge, and in all cases to a central control exercised by a Royal
Official, known as the Warden General and Principal Master of
Work.  Thus, though the non-operative masons might outnumber the
operative masons in a lodge, they do not appear to have been in a
position to change the character of the practices of the
operative institutions in a material way.

In England, on the other hand, the accepted mason did not belong
to an operative lodge. (29) Thus as their lodges were independent
of operative control, they were in a much better position to
modify, amend, or elaborate Masonic ceremonies. The resultant
body of Masonic ceremonies, practiced by accepted masons, during
the 17th and early 18th centuries, formed the link connecting
operative and speculative masonry.

That the old practices of Scottish Masonry had been adopted by
English accepted masons, and had been the subject of little
change as late as 1721, is strongly suggested by the fact that
when Dr. Desaguliers, the former English G.M., desired to visit
the operative lodge of Edinburgh in 1721 he was found "duly 
qualified in all points of Masonry"(30)  and received as a
brother.

The facts known about Freemasonry in Ireland before 1730 are very
few, thus adding to the uncertainty regarding the place or places
where fundamental changes occurred. The meager evidence available
suggests that non-operative masons in Ireland met in lodges as
did accepted Masons in England. Irish operative masons do not
appear to have associated in territorial operative lodges as
Scottish masons did. (31)

Other changes occurred in the 18th and early 19th centuries:

1. The history of Freemasonry was edited and largely revised by
Anderson for his Constitutions of 1723. (32)

2. The charges General and Singular (the former referring to the
social and religious activities of the Guild and the latter to
the trade activities) were digested by Anderson, and replaced by
the Charges of a Freemason to be read at the making of a new
brother (1723).

3. The old MS. instruction regarding the administration of an
oath to the candidate to observe the charges was omitted from the
Constitution of 1723.

27. Knoop and Jones, Genesis of Freemasonry, p. 373
28. Ibid., p. 230
29. Ibid., pp. 132, 133          31 Ibid., p. 233
30. Ibid., p. 231                32 Ibid., p. 234
 
4. In Anderson's Constitutions of 1738 the history of Freemasonry
was to be read at the admission of a new brother, but this no
longer applied to the charges. (33)

5. Anderson's Constitutions of 1723 state that the manner of
installing the Master is according to ancient usages of Masonry. 
The Premier Grand Lodge did not practice the ceremony of
installing the Master, but it was used by the Antient Grand
Lodge.

6. The Irish Constitution of John Pennell in 1730 included a
prayer to be said at the opening of the lodge.

7. The charge to a newly admitted brother was first printed in
Smith's London edition of A Pocket Companion for Freenasons, in
1734.(34)

8. The earliest known certain reference to a trigradal system,
i.e. a system of three degrees of Masons, each with its own
secrets, is found in the Trinity Dublin MS. of 1711. (35)

Thus there were many influences on the ceremonies and ritualistic
practices of Freemasonry during the late 17th, through the 18th,
and into the 19th centuries. All are evident today in Masonic
working not only here, but throughout the world where Freemasonry
is practiced.  It must also be remembered that the Grand Lodges
of the Moderns and the Antients in the 18th century made no
attempt to print a standard ritual. The various forms arose from
one lodge copying from another, or a lodge dropping what appeared
defective and adding something that appeared more attractive. 
The old adage, "Today's bad habits become tomorrow's tradition",
has much truth in it.

Throughout this evolution, however, the fundamentals of the
system of Freemasonry, that is, the essentials of the basic rite,
remained unchanged.


33. Ibid., p. 235
34. Ibid,, p. 252
35. Ibid., p. 253

 
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Carr, Harry, "The Relationship between the Craft and the Royal
Arch", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol. 86, London: Quatuor Coronati
Lodge No. 2076, 1973

Dyer, C. F. W., Symbolism in Craft Freemasonry, Shepperton 
Middlesex, Engl.: A. Lewis Masonic Publishers Limited,  1976

------------- . "The Williams-Arden Manuscript of the All Souls
Lodge at Weymouth", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol. 87, London:
Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, 1974

------------- "William Shadbolt and his Papers on the Craft
Ritual of the Lodge of Reconciliation", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,
Vol. 87, London: Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076,  1974   


Haunch, T. O.,  "It is Not in the Power of Any Man..." Ars 
Quatuor Coronatorum,  Vol. 85,  London: Quatuor Coronati Lodge
No. 2076,  1972

Knoop, Douglas, "The Mason Word", in H. Carr (ed.) The Collected
Prestonian Lectures, 1925 - 1960, London: Quatuor Coronati Lodge
No. 2076, 1965

Knoop, Douglas and G. P. Jones, Genesis of Freemasonry, London:
Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076 Correspondence Circle, 1978

Vibert, Lionel, "The Development of the Trigradal System", in H.
Carr (ed.) The Collected Prestonian Lectures, 1925 - 1960,
London: Quatuor Coronati Lodge No. 2076, 1965


DISCUSSION

Bro.  Robert G. J. Aberdeen, P.M.

(80-09-27)

I wish to compliment our Worshipful Master on his Inaugural
Research Paper.  It illustrates clearly that FIAT LUX LODGE OF
RESEARCH will serve its purpose well, bringing more light to the
Craft in general and to the Masons of Alberta in particular. I
trust that it will also establish a tradition to be followed by
succeeding Masters.

W. Bro. Aspeslet's paper "WHY TWO RITUALS" is a concise yet
comprehensive explanation of the development of Masonic rituals.
In particular, it traces the historical influences which led to
the two mainstream rituals of modern Freemasonry.

I feel that the theme of the paper could have been developed more
fully; it answers the questions "why more than one ritual" and
"why the difference" in a general way but it leaves hanging the
more specific theme "why do we in Alberta have two rituals", as
opposed to some Jurisdictions which allow just one, and others in
which several Rites are worked.

Perhaps W. Bro. Aspeslet or some other Brother is working on a
sequel, wherein he will trace the spreading of Freemasonry
throughout the world; the Charters granted to various military
and other lodges from the two rival Grand Lodges prior to the
Union of 1813, which resulted in the dissemination of two
differing sets of ceremonies; the establishment in Alberta of
lodges working different rituals; and particularly, the factors
which led our founders to include both Rites in the Constitution
of the Grand Lodge of Alberta.