THE ARCANE SCHOOLS - Fort Myers Beach Masonic Lodge No. 362

eighteenth century.
Dr. Dalcho, the compiler of the book of constitutions for South Carolina, says:
"Neither Adam, nor Noah, nor Nimrod, nor Moses, nor Joshua, nor David, nor
Solomon, nor Hiram, nor St. John the Baptist, nor St. John the Evangelist, were
Freemasons. Hypothesis in history is absurd. There is no record, sacred or
profane, to induce us to believe that those holy men were Freemasons; and our
traditions do not go back to those days. To assert that they were Freemasons may
make the vulgar stare, but will rather excite the contempt than the admiration of
the wise."
Now, observe, this is a high authority, and should be conclusive with Masons,
because it is one of their own leaders who affirms this. But, if this is true, what
shall we think of the claims of Freemasonry itself? For every one who reads these
revelations of Freemasonry will see that Solomon, and Hiram, and those ancient
worthies everywhere figure in these rites and ceremonies; so that, if these men
were indeed not Masons, then Freemasonry is a sham, an imposture, and a
swindle. What! has it come to this, that this boasted claim of antiquity, which
everywhere lies at the foundation of Masonic rites, ceremonies, and pretensions,
is now discovered to be false?
Through all the Masonic degrees the pretense is kept up that Masonry has always
been one and the same; and that its degrees are ancient, and all its principles and
usages of great antiquity. Let any one examine the books in which it is revealed,
and he can not help being struck with this. Furthermore, in the orations, sermons,
and puffs that are so common with Masons on all occasions on which they show
themselves off, they flaunt their very ancient date, their very ancient principles
and usages, and they pledge their candidates, from one degree to another, to
conform to all the ancient rites, principles, and usages of the order.
But what shall we at the present day say of these pretensions? I have before me
the Masonic Monthly for October, 1867, printed in Boston. It will not be denied, I
suppose, that this is one of their standard authorities. At any rate, whatever may
be said of the editor of this paper, it will not be denied that the authorities quoted
in the discussions in this number are high, if not the very highest authorities in the
Masonic fraternity. If I had space to quote nearly this entire number, I should be
very happy to do so, for it is occupied almost entirely, from beginning to end,
with exposing these pretensions to which I have alluded. It appeals to their own
standard authorities; and insists that Speculative Freemasonry, in all its higher
degrees, is an imposture and a swindle. It quotes their great historian--
Steinbrenner, of New York--to show that Speculative Freemasonry was first
established in London, in 1717; and that at that time Masonry consisted probably,
of but one degree. That about 1725 a Mr. Anderson added two degrees; and, as
the writer in this number states, began the Christianizing of Freemasonry. There is
at this day a great division among Freemasons themselves, the point of
disagreement being this: One party maintains that the Christian religion is of no
more authority with Masons than any other form of religion; that Masonry proper
does not recognize the Bible as of any higher authority than the sacred books of
heathen nations, or than the Koran of Mohammed; that Freemasonry proper