Morals & Dogma Circa 1918 - The Discussion

I finally got my hands on a copy of Morals & Dogma circa 1918, original print, prior to any edits or re-writes etc. It was from an estate sale of a general and pitsburgh senator.

I've only begun not just reading the book, but studying it in great detail and would like to engage many of you in various discussions relating to my studies of this material.

Reading the preface alone its openly admitted that Albert Pike wasn't the original author of various portions of the book and that various portions were taken from other articles and essays from what are refered to as older and more talented writers, but that all of the material has been re-worded and altered by Pike and displayed in the book as his own work in it's entirety.

This is interesting considering I've never once read this anywhere in any discussion relating to the book.

In any case, I wanted to invite everyone into this discussion.

Keep in mind that I am a truth seeking Mason of the 3rd degree, yet I have no predispositions or bias either way. I'm open minded and intriqued.

If there are any things anyone would like looked up within my copy of the book to determine accuracy with regards to potential edits in newer versions etc, feel free to ask.

All I ask is that everyone keep the discussion a discussion and refrain from insults, trolling and the like. I want this thread to become an informative and helpful thread for the future of M&D readers.

Originally posted by believerofni
I finally got my hands on a copy of Morals & Dogma circa 1918, original print, prior to any edits or re-writes etc. It was from an estate sale of a general and pitsburgh senator.

Congrats! Sounds like a good find.

Reading the preface alone its openly admitted that Albert Pike wasn't the original author of various portions of the book and that various portions were taken from other articles and essays from what are refered to as older and more talented writers, but that all of the material has been re-worded and altered by Pike and displayed in the book as his own work in it's entirety.

This is interesting considering I've never once read this anywhere in any discussion relating to the book.

Well, it's not really hidden either. I mean the wikipedia article on it even quotes

In preparing this work, the Grand Commander has been about equally Author and Compiler; since he has extracted quite half of its contents from the works of the best writers and most philosophic or eloquent thinkers. Perhaps it would have been better and more acceptable if he had extracted more and written less.

Pike took all the stuff that Waite and others gave him, compiled it and rewrote a lot filling in the blanks. You really have to join the Scottish Rite to get the full theatrical production of the degrees he writes about, but before he got to them, a lot of the degrees were not much more than sketches and outlines of what the degree was about, and what the key symbols were. Pike was instrumental in codifying it, rearranging the order of a couple of degrees so they made more sense in sequence, and expanding the stories told during the degrees.

If there are any things anyone would like looked up within my copy of the book to determine accuracy with regards to potential edits in newer versions etc, feel free to ask.

Sure, can you spot any obvious differences with the one posted on Project Gutenberg? (Other than the txt file missing the drawings & engravings, obviously.)

reply to post by believerofni


believerofni,

First of all congratulations on the find. Does your copy have an index? Early versions did not and I cannot remember when they added it. If not, the Supreme Council sells a separate book that's just the index. I think it's about $5.00.

As far as edits, etc. Morals & Dogma was printed from the same plates from it's first edition (1871 I believe it was) until the 1960's when they stopped printing it, so any edition of M&D is the same as far as the text is concerned.

It's a good read, albeit a difficult read. I have several copies of the book which I pick up at book stores, estate sales, etc. and give to people who are interested in it, but my personal copy is FULL of notes, underscores, high-lights, etc. It's really the only way to read this book. It has to be read, re-read and re-read again.

As a side note for any interested, the Supreme Council will soon be issuing an Annotated version of Morals and Dogma. There will be footnotes and endnotes showing where the various quotes utilized by Pike came from. Should be an excellent resource.

By the way, the index to Morals and Dogma (along with numerous other Scottish Rite related books and ritual material) can be purchased here:

www.scottishritestore.org...

so wait this thread got my attention but what is the book actually about??

this is not a one line post because i just added this sentence

Originally posted by tankthinker
so wait this thread got my attention but what is the book actually about??

It is a collection of Pike's lectures for the standard 32 degrees of the Scottish Rite of Masonry for the Southern Jurisdiction of the USA. It is divided into 32 Chapters, each corresponding to a particular degree.

Originally posted by JoshNorton
]Pike took all the stuff that Waite and others gave him, compiled it and rewrote a lot filling in the blanks.

Just a small correction: Pike did not use Waite as a source, nor did he receive or use any materials from Waite. Pike's primary sources were Eliphas Levi, Henry Cornelius Agrippa, Church Fathers, Webb and Preston, and various philosophers, especially Plotinus and Plato.

In his Masonic Encyclopedia, Waite strongly criticized Pike for what Waite believed was Pike's revised ritual. But the real criticism should be directed against Waite for poor research: the rituals that Waite were criticizing were not Pike's revised ritual, but were instead Yarker's Cerneau Rite.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
But the real criticism should be directed against Waite for poor research: the rituals that Waite were criticizing were not Pike's revised ritual, but were instead Yarker's Cerneau Rite.

I would be interested in getting a copy of Yarker's Cerneau Rite. Were can I find a copy?

Originally posted by lost in the midwest
Pike's revised ritual, but were instead Yarker's Cerneau Rite.

I would be interested in getting a copy of Yarker's Cerneau Rite. Were can I find a copy?

The rituals were published by Jonathon Blanchard, in his "Scotch Rite Masonry Illustrated". Waite incorrectly believed these to be the Pike rituals (as did Blanchard).

[edit on 4/18/2008 by Cuhail]

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by JoshNorton
]Pike took all the stuff that Waite and others gave him, compiled it and rewrote a lot filling in the blanks.

Just a small correction: Pike did not use Waite as a source, nor did he receive or use any materials from Waite. Pike's primary sources were Eliphas Levi, Henry Cornelius Agrippa, Church Fathers, Webb and Preston, and various philosophers, especially Plotinus and Plato.

In his Masonic Encyclopedia, Waite strongly criticized Pike for what Waite believed was Pike's revised ritual. But the real criticism should be directed against Waite for poor research: the rituals that Waite were criticizing were not Pike's revised ritual, but were instead Yarker's Cerneau Rite.

I was wrong to say Waite. I was going by memory at work... just looked it up—it was Mackey that handed Pike stacks of paper, not Waite.

Over a period of two years Mackey loaned a substantial part of his manuscript ritual collection to Pike, who transcribed and subsequently bound them into a large volume...entitled "Formulas and Rituals transcribed by Albert Pike in 1854 and 1855".

-- Scottish Rite Ritual Monitor & Guide by De Hoyos

Originally posted by JoshNorton

I was wrong to say Waite. I was going by memory at work... just looked it up—it was Mackey that handed Pike stacks of paper, not Waite.

Over a period of two years Mackey loaned a substantial part of his manuscript ritual collection to Pike, ".

-- Scottish Rite Ritual Monitor & Guide by De Hoyos

Which reminds me.

I forgot to note that Art de Hoyos (Grand Archivist and Grand Historian of the Supreme Council, SJ) will be compiling the Annotated Morals & Dogma.

My opinion of morals and dogma is that it is only garbage that you should not open your mind to because it's sole objective is to get one to reject his or her faith.

Yes, heaven forbid one open one's mind.

I'd wager you've never READ "Morals & Dogma"

..and, no, reading bits and pieces from anti-Masonic web-sites written by slick-haired preachers doesn't count.

So come clean (remember Jesus is watching you) Have you READ "Moras & Dogma" ? If not, you cannot honestly render an opinion, but I'd wager that's not your goal.




..............................................................................
[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 18-4-2008 by 12m8keall2c]

I know that my Lord Jesus Christ is watching me because I have a relationship with him! Do you or is that something that you question?




..............................................................................
[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 18-4-2008 by 12m8keall2c]

Let's return to the Topic, shall we folks? Which is the Morals and Dogma book discussed in the original post.
Distractionary posts will be attended to from here on.

Thanks all!
Continue, please.

Cuhail