LANDMARKS, LANDMARKS? LANDMARKS!
by Bro. A. Gerald Gibbs, P.M. (80-05-10)
To those Brethren who would undertake, or who have already undertaken to sift
through the numerous statements and postulations concerning Masonic Landmarks,
allow the writer to offer the warmest of empathetic understanding one Mason
could offer another, For this researcher, what began as a calm inquiry, has
resulted in one of the more turbulent decision making processes of his Masonic
career.
Instead of finding straight-forward answers for what he believed were
straight-forward questions, he found a Pandora's Box, which when opened,
released those hobgoblins which serve to confuse, frustrate, divert, and divide.
As one may have surmised from the title, this Pandora's Box was filled with
Landmarks ... Landmarks! ... Landmarks? LANDMARKS everywhere!
Even in our ceremonies, in our literature, and even unto the Masonic
philosophical applications which form an integral part of our daily lives! In
this jurisdiction, all Master Masons are enjoined to pay heed to certain charges
taken directly from the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Alberta, concerning
among other things, Landmarks.
In the First Degree, the candidate is charged: "Your fidelity-must be
exemplified by a strict observance of the Constitution of the Fraternity by
adhering to the ancient landmarks of the Order." Likewise, in the Second Degree,
each Brother is informed that as a Craftsman, he will be " ... under the
superintendence of an experienced Master who will guard the landmarks against
encroachment."
In the Third Degree, each Brother is admonished that "The ancient landmarks
of the Order you are to preserve sacred and inviolable ... " Even during the
ceremony of installation, as prescribed in the Ceremony for Investing the
officers of a Lodge, as authorized by our Grand Lodge, we hear the Worshipful
Master-Elect openly state that he will conscientiously undertake the duties of
Master of the Lodge and give his consent to one of the qualifications, namely
that he is "..well skilled in the ancient charges, regulations, and landmarks."
Surely, many a Brother who assented to these charges did so on a basis of
trust, that these landmarks would be revealed to him by his more enlightened
Brethren in future Lodge meetings. Is it, not stated in the General Charge of
our installation ceremony that "Our meetings are intended to cultivate and
enlighten the mind ...."
(Alas, it may not be so in every case.) Landmarks ... Landmarks! ...
Landmarks? We are charged that there are indeed landmarks. But, where are they
to be found? Further, what are they ... if and when they are found? And why has
the pursuit of these enigmatical landmarks been such an onerous task for those
Brethren who seek a more definitive statement concerning their Masonic import.
Perhaps it would be best to begin with a dictionary definition of the term
"Landmark."
Thorndike's Dictionary defines a Landmark as: "1. something familiar or
easily seen, used as a guide, 2. an important fact or event, namely the
telephone, telegraph, and radio are landmarks in communications. 3. a stone or
other object that marks the boundary 1. Alberta, Grand Lodge of, Constitution,
p. 106 2. Ibid, p. 108 3. Ibid, p. 109 4. Alberta, The Grand Lodge of, Ceremony
for Investing .., p. 6 5. Ibid, p. 35 of a piece of land."
These definitions seem straightforward enough. However, when applied to
Masonic import, the term "Landmark" assumes a much more significant and mystical
relationship. The outstanding Masonic scholar, Brother Harry Carr, states in his
book
The Freemason at Work that Masonically the term (Landmark) requires a
stricter definition ..." and that The best writers-on the subject are unanimous
on two essential points; (a) A landmark must have existed from the 'time whereof
the memory of man runneth not to the contrary.' (b) A landmark is an element in
the form or essence of the Society of such importance that Freemasonry would no
longer be Freemasonry if it were removed."
Brother Carr further states that; "If these two qualifications are used
strictly to test whether certain practices, systems, principles or regulations
can be admitted as landmarks it will be found that there are in fact very few
items that will pass this rigid test."
Well, perhaps Brother Carr's observations may be significant. But applied to
what? It might be timely here to briefly, review some of the historical
literature which attempts to account for the absence of a universal acceptance
of landmarks among Masons, past and present.
In his book Freemason's Guide and Compendium, Bernard E. Jones observes that
since Biblical days the Ancient Landmarks have been unalterable. He states "In
Proverbs xxii, 28, is the injunction; 'Remove not the ancient landmark which thy
fathers have set,' and in Deuteronomy xxvii, 17, the malediction: 'Cursed be he
that removeth his neighbour's landmark. And all the people shall say, Amen."
In his very fine paper on MASONIC LANDMARKS, Brother W.E. Bright succinctly
enumerates an updated historical summary of Landmarks: The first recorded
reference to Masonic Landmarks is in the General Regulations adopted by the
Premier Grand Lodge in 1723. The 39th General Regulatfon, which is synonymous
with Article 3 of our present Constitution, provided "Every Annual Grand Lodge
has an inherent power and authority to make new regulations, or to alter these,
for the real benefit of this Ancient Fraternity; provided always that the old
Landmarks be carefully preserved", etc.
That was the only use of the term and there is no intimation of what the old
Land-Marks might include. The amended regulations of 1738 provided for the
amending or making of new regulations "still preserving the old Land-Marks." In
1774, William Preston in his "Illustrations of Masonry" made several allusions
to Land-Marks, but the more he wrote, the less clear his ideas appeared. There
are several other written references to Landmarks from that time through to
1850, when the landmarkers started trying to define and enumerate Masonic
Landmarks.
The second half of the 19th century started with an almost pyrotechnic
display of Landmarks. The first attempt by any Grand Lodge to ascertain what
Landmarks were was made by the Grand Lodge of Missouri.
Thorndike-Barnhart, . . . Dictionary, p. 446 (7) Carr, The Freemason at Work,
p. 263 (8) Carr, loc.cit. Jones, Compendium .... p. 332 in 1850 by the
appointment of a committee, headed by Dr. J. W. S. Mitchell, to prepare a report
on Landmarks. In January, 1856 the Grand Lodge of Minnesota adopted a new
constitution of which Section 8 contained a list of 26 Landmarks. In June, 1856,
Rob Morris of Kentucky published a list of 27 Landmarks. Dr. Mackey was third in
inventing Landmarks and published a list of 25 in 1858.
These first three lists were followed by various other lists of landmarks
which, between the years 1864 and 1923 covered nearly one hundred and
twenty-five other landmarks. In the Grand Lodges of the United States, five
adopted Mackey's list; three indefinitely recognize the Charges of 1723; nine
adopted lists of their own, all different; and seventeen have not committed
themselves on the subject.
According to Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia no Grand Lodge outside the United
States has ever adopted any Landmarks, except an occasional disconnected remark
that a certain thing is a Landmark. The definitions of what a Masonic Landmark
is, are as many and varied as the lists that have been published and adopted.
Coil's Encyclopedia lists 41 definitions, all different, and they vary from
that of Rob Morris, "those fixed tenets by which the limits of Freemasonry may
be known and preserved" to that of W. B. Hextall, "The old Landmarks were, in
fact, the secrets which existed amongst the Operative Masons in the days when
they supplied the membership of the Craft."
Summarizing these 41 definitions - 12 emphasize antiquity; 9 emphasize
universality, and 13 emphasize unchangeability. Also eleven consider that
Landmarks are essential principles of the order - three call them established
custom; two declare them laws; three call them unwritten laws; four say the
secrets and ceremonies are Landmarks; two suggest that Landmarks deny specific
identification, and five are either sceptical or deny the existence of
Landmarks. What more confusion can we have?
According to Henry Wilson Coil, in his work Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, the
blame for most of this confusion lies directly with William Preston. Coil states
that ... The assertion that landmarks are immutable, unchanging, and everlasting
arose out of William Preston's distortion of the resolution of the Grand Lodge
in 1723 by simply quoting part thereof.
The resolution stated that no man or body of men could make alterations or
innovations in the Body of Masonry without the consent of the Grand Lodge, and
Preston merely lopped off the final qualification which implied that the Grand
Lodge could make or authorize the making of changes and innovations, and it has
done so, as have others. Nothing human is infallible or everlasting and claiming
that Freemasonry has exceeded that limitation is disrespectful of Deity.
It is noteworthy that the Worshipful Master-Elect must assent to the Ancient
Charge prior to his taking the Obligation as Master of the Lodge - which states:
"You admit that it is not in the power of any man or body of men to make
innovations in the body of Masonry."
10. Bright, "Masonic Landmarks", Grand Lodge Bulletin, p. 25 11. Coil,
Masonic Encyclopedia, p. 365 12. Alberta, The Grand Lodge of, Ceremony for
Investing ..., p. 9 The so-called Ancient Landmarks of Masonry as formulated by
an American, Brother Albert Mackey (1807-1881), represent an interesting attempt
to identify those regulations, customs, and principles, and to call them Ancient
Landmarks.
However, many do not meet the two major criteria previously stated by Carr in
(a) and (b) above. Carr's analyses of a few of Mackey's Landmarks are examined
here with comments to illustrate the pitfalls. His observations are as follows:
Mackey's No. 1. 'The modes of recognition. They admit of no variation ...' These
cannot be landmarks. Several of the most important of them did not make their
appearance in the Craft until the 18th century. Mackey's No. 2. 'The division of
symbolic Masonry into three degrees ....' The trigradal system did not emerge
until some time between 1711 and 1725.
Prior to this period there is no evidence of anything more than two degrees.
Mackey's No. 3. 'The legend of the Third Degree ...'The earliest evidence of
this legend concerns Noah, not Hiram Abif. There is good evidence for the
F.P.O.F. in 1696, as a part of the then second degree (for Master or
fellow-craft) and the legend in one of its early forms may have been in
existence at that time, but there is no evidence of it in the ritual until 1726.
Mackey's No. 4. 'The government of the Fraternity by a presiding Officer called
a Grand Master who is elected . . .
' The first Grand Lodge was founded in 1717. There was no Grand Master of
masons before that time. This item is a very proper regulation in the Book of
Constitution, but it cannot be a landmark. Mackey's Nos. 5,6,7,8. Various
prerogatives of the Grand Master, but all of them are, in fact, privileges
vested in him by the Grand Lodge over which he presides. They are regulations,
or customs, not landmarks. Mackey's No. 9. 'The necessity of Masons to
congregate in Lodges.
This extremely interesting item may well be a landmark, but if we try to go
back to 'time immemorial' practice, the operative masons seem to have had the
right to congregate for Lodge purposes when any five or six of them came
together anywhere. Nowadays, however, the mode of congregation for Lodge
purposes as governed by regulations. Mackey's No. 10. 'The government of the
Craft in a (Lodge) by a Master and two Wardens..,...' Another doubtful landmark.
There was a time when the Lodge was governed by the Master and one Warden.
Several of Mackey's landmarks deal with the rights of individual masons, rights
which are all governed nowadays by regulations and some of them are certainly
not of time immemorial status.
It would seem that if we are to continue to work universally together in
perfect unanimity and concord, each one of us must choose those Landmarks that
are Masonically meaningful to him, which conform to his own more intimate
personal perceptions. One might be tempted to view things within the Lodge which
he considers to be indispensable ingredients, which must be found in any
constituted, consecrated, regular and well-governed Lodge.
He might also view the practical applica- Carr, op.cit., pp. 264-265 tions of
those Masonic principles which govern his daily life. All these things a Brother
might be tempted to consider as Masonic Landmarks. In this writer's opinion,
these should not be considered Landmarks. They are, in fact, Landmark Decisions
incorporated into the fabric of the Craft as we know it.
At present one can concur only with three major postulations of Ancient
Landmarks: 1. A belief in a Supreme Being; 2. A belief in the Fatherhood of God
(and its corollary The Brotherhood of Man); 3. A belief in the Immortality of
the Soul. To this writer, these are, have been, and always shall be Landmarks.
They are what our Masonic scholar-emeritus, M.W. Brother Samuel H. Hardin states
when he draws the analogy between Masonic Landmarks and the "Bony Cover."
He postulates that "We can feel the Landmarks even as we can 'feel' the bones
in our bodies; just as bones can perform their function even when we cannot see
them, so with the Landmarks, the 'bony' framework of our Craft."
There are, however, "Landmarks of Freemasons" which one may view as being
distinct from the three Masonic Landmarks previously enumerated. Again, there is
no harm in viewing those LANDMARK DECISIONS of our illustrious Brethren as
Landmarks of Freemasons, in order that interested Brethren, who might feel the
need to categorize those recognizable characters (which each of us construe as
those indelible characteristics of a regular Masonic Lodge), those Landmarks of
Freemasons that must be present and whose absence would cause them to view that
practice of Freemasonry to be irregular, and therefore, illegal or clandestine.
For example, some of those Landmark Decisions of Freemasons that would be
recognized as Landmark Decisions, without the least desire to be dogmatic, and
further, could not be considered close-ended, would be (to name just a few): 1.
That a Volume of the Sacred Law be present, opened on an altar when the Lodge is
at labour; 2. Secrecy - This implies the modes of recognition and the business
of Masons transacted within the Lodge; 3. The system of morality which is mainly
taught in our Lodges be precept, example, and exhortation, veiled in allegory
and illustrated by symbols; 4. The petitioner must be a man, freeborn and of
mature age; 5. Those objects of furniture, clothing, etc., specified in the
Constitution of Grand Lodge.
Many, many more of these types of Landmarks may be added as one sees fit.
"The Landmarks of Freemasons", as this writer has termed them, being Landmark
Decisions of Masons, may be accepted or rejected by any Brother in gratifying
his own feelings and the depths of his needs to know.
A quotation from Axel J.A. Poignant's work in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, Vol.
24, shall conclude the thoughts contained in this paper: (14) Hardin, "The
Landmarks of Freemasonry", 21st Annual... p.25 An allegory or symbol that
teaches or indicates is not a landmark; further . . . a landmark must be part
and parcel of the freemason's peculiar system of morality, and not of the
allegory that veils and of the symbols that illustrate it. The TEACHING OR THE
MEANING which the allegories convey imy be a landmark.(15) 15 Poignant, "The
Landmarks", A.Q.C. Vol. 24
BIBLIOGRAPHY Alberta, Grand Lodge of, Constitution of the Grand Lodge of
Alberta, Calgary; 1969/1980 Alberta, The Grand Lodge of, Ceremony for investing
the Officers of a Lodge, Calgary; 1973 Bright, Walter E., "Masonic Landmarks",
Grand Lodge Bulletin, Vol. 30, No. 7, Edmonton; March, 1965 Carr, Harry, The
Freemason at Work, London: Burgess & Son, 1976 Coil, Henry W., Coil's Masonic
Encyclopedia, New York: Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, 1961
Hardin, Samuel H., "The Landmarks of Freemasonry", 21st Annual Inter-Provincial
Conference of the Officers of the Four Western Masonic Jurisdictions, 1961
Jones, Bernard E., Freemasons' Guide and Compendium, London: George G. Harrap &
Company, 1950 Poignant, Axel J. A., "The Landmarks", Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,
Vol. 24, London; Quatuor Coronate Lodge No. 2076, 1911 Thorndike-Barnhart,
Comprehensive Desk Dictionary, New York; Doubleday & Co. Inc., 1952
back to top |
