|
LECTURE THREE
We have now arrived at
that portion of history of the Babylonish captivity which is allegorised 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 these mysteries of the Pagan priests
and philosopher, is well aware that they inculcate by symbolic and allegoric
instruction, the great lessons in 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 beginnings 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 of life eternal. The same religious instruction is taught in the
Master’s degree. The evidenced of this fact, it is unnecessary for us here 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 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,* 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.
* I. Corinth xv. 53
Forty-two thousand three hundred and
sixty of the Jews repaired, in the same year, from Babylon and the neighbouring
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.*
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 descendent 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 Jehoiachin, 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 sophors
or scribes constituted, says Dr. Beard, ** a learned, organised, much esteemed
and highly influential body of men, recognised and supported by the state. 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. 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 for 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.
* In the English ritual of the Royal
Arch, Ezra and Nehemiah are added to the number of scribes.
** In Kitto’s Cyclop. Of Bib. Literat. Art. Scribe.
*** Introduction to Crit. Stud. And Knowl. Of Script. Vol
iii p. 98.
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 second temple, that it 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 had 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. 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.**
* They were not,
perhaps, altogether idolators, although idolatry was the predominant religion.
The Rev. Dr. 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 was 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 apostasy from Jehovah was not universal” See the article Samaritans
in Kitto’s “Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature.”
** Ezra, iv.
3.
Hence it was that, to
avoid the possibility of those idolatrous Samaritans polluting the holy work by
their cooperation, Zerubbabel found it necessary to demand of everyone who
offered himself as an assistant in the undertaking, that he should give an
accurate 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 foundations, 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 labour 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 labours
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.
Note.
The Three Lectures are extracted from
a book entitled “The Book of the Chapter; or Monitorial Instructions in the
Degrees of Mark, Past and Most Excellent Master and the Holy Royal Arch.
The Author is
Albert G Mackey M.D.
Grand High Priest of the Grand Royal
Arch Chapter of South Carolina;
Author of a “Lexicon of Freemasonry”
“Principles of Masonic Law” etc.
The Book was published by Clark &
Maynard in New York 1867
Retyped by E. Comp.
Colin Wilson PZ during February 2002 and dedicated to the
E. Comps and Comps of Prudent Brethren
& Philanthic Chapter No.145 London
in whose company, I have spent many enjoyable
hours.
|