The Mystic Cup (Royal Black 1st degree)

The Mystic Cup

mystic.cup
The Black candidate is asked to take a toast to the memory of Brother Joseph, being informed that this is his first Black toast. An artefact is then placed into the hand of the blindfolded novice called a “mystic cup.” He is informed, “This mystic cup is not fashioned by human hand.” He is told,“You have never drunk from it before.” He is then asked, “Can you tell what this is?” The candidate normally replies, “I do not know!” One of the lecturers then states: “It is the top of a human skull; it is properly cleansed and purified so that it can be used as a drinking vessel.” The Black newcomer is then assured: “Every Sir Knight who receives this degree takes a toast to the memory of Brother Joseph.”

The remaining brethren arise. The candidate then sups from the human skullcap. Whilst the mystic cup is customarily an actual human skullcap some preceptories that have no access to a skull (or are uncomfortable with using the same) use a coconut or shell as a representation of a skullcap.

This awful ritualistic ordinance is so impacting that the memory of it often stays with the Blackman till the day he dies. It is harrowing enough to observe a skull and bones in the midst of a ‘Christian’ meeting, but to be required to handle and then drink from a human skull-cap is decidedly sickening. To think that these were the last remains of some person who walked this scene of time and are now being used unashamedly as a drinking container by an Institution professing the name of Christ, is particularly disgusting. The Black causes many unsuspecting Protestants to partake in this communion despite their obvious unease. The Royal Black Institution has then protected this profanity by way of a binding oath and direct warnings in relation to the member’s well-being. This has succeeded in securing the allegiance of its members over the years and protecting these ceremonies from outside scrutiny.

1 Corinthians 10:20-22 solemnly warns, “the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?”

One cannot help coming to the conclusion that this mystical sacrament, which is performed behind a wall of great secrecy, makes a complete mockery of the Lord’s Table which Christ instituted during His earthly ministry. Both this rite and the symbolism attached to it mocks the sacred ordinance set up to remember the Saviour’s death. Moreover, the Black does this in the most disturbing manner imaginable. To employ human remains in its esoteric communion is quite nauseating, but to attach Christ’s name to it, as the Black Institution does, is deplorable.

Understandably, the Black must of necessity perform this higher-grade pagan Masonic rite covertly as it would cause outrage if it were publicly practised in an evangelical environment. This macabre rite that the Black Institution so zealously guards undermines the Word of God, brings shame upon the name of Christ, and does great hurt to the Protestant cause. It corrupts the hallowed ordinance of God in the basest manner and denigrates the righteous requirement of God to remember Christ’s death.

Such an unholy sacrament belongs deep within the murky domain of the kingdom of darkness. It is more akin to the activities of the primitive ancient pagan tribes than a Christian gathering in any generation. It has certainly nothing in common with any evangelical grouping and has no right to claim the name of Christ, or locate itself within the Protestant camp. This is an undoubted parody of the satanic Black Mass. If not idolatrous, one wonders what is. This disturbing communion is evidently an abomination before a holy God and a serious contravention of His holy Word. Hosea 4:17-18 says, “Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone. Their drink is sour: they have committed whoredom continually.” These are solemn but challenging words to those who would engage in this evil practice.

Not surprisingly, this practice is also found in the camp of the Scottish Knights of Malta. It too shares this ordinance and its accompanying theology. The major difference is that the Knights of Malta are more dramatic in their ceremony, having a more elaborate build-up to the ordinance. Their manual tells us of the preparation: “The funeral march is played and the candidate and officers move forward. As they pass the door of the preparation room it opens and the officers enter bearing a coffin and join the procession which proceeds slowly around chamber to a place prepared for the coffin. It is deposited in place. Music stops.” The officers are then instructed to advance to the coffin, forming a semi-circle around it – with the Commander and candidate at the head of the coffin.

The Grand Funeral Honours are then given. The mystic cup is on the pedestal at the head of the coffin. The Commander then takes it up and declares, “I hold in my hand a cup of peculiar construction, from which upon occasions of this kind, it is customary to drink to the memory of a deceased brother. I, on behalf of this Commandery, will now drink to his memory, and, you will afterwards do the same. In memory of Brother Joseph.”

Read detailed exposure:

 

Higher degree Freemasonry, where the Royal Black Institution and the Knights of Malta directly originate, mimics the Christian sacrament of communion. It too performs a blasphemous Black Mass in the Knights Templar degree when its members drink communion from a human skullcap in a Christ-mocking Occult ceremony. The Knights Templar initiate drinks five symbolic libations (or toasts) during his Templar order initiation ceremony. The first four are taken out of a goblet; the libations being to the memory of (1) King Solomon “our ancient grand master”; (2) Hiram King of Tyre, “our ancient grand master”; (3) Hiram Abiff, “the widows son, who lost his life in defence of his integrity”; and (4) Simon of Cyrene, “the friend of our Saviour, who bore his cross, and fell a martyr to his faith.”

(5) The fifth, and supreme, libation is made unto ‘the unknown’ and is performed in the same way as that of the Black ceremony. An actual human skullcap is placed in the hand of the candidate and he is required to sup the content of such from this mystic cup. The fluid that is consumed from the top part of this human skull is normally bitter wine. Such is employed to vividly impress important Occult teaching to the initiate. The candidate is told, “Pilgrim, the fifth libation is taken in a very solemn way. It is emblematical of the bitter cup of death, of which we must sooner or later, taste” (Masonic Manual p. 205).

skull

The fifth libation is called the sealed obligation because the candidate is never told to whom the fifth libation is drunk. This Templar custom is poignant when we consider the Apostle Paul’s admonition to the superstitious Greeks in Acts 17:23, who paid homage “to the unknown god.”

Undoubtedly, this Masonic ordinance is the direct source and inspiration of the much younger Black rite. As is common with the Royal Black Preceptory, its rituals are more concise than Freemasonry. It tends to leave out much of the finer detail contained within the Masonic ceremony. The wording within the Templar degree is more exhaustive and its working more elaborate, thus giving us a better sense of what is being impressed. Whether by intent or through amendments over time, the Black degrees are less revealing than the Masonic ones. This facilitates greater obscurity and arcane secrecy.

Essentially, the Black contains the outline whereas Freemasonry puts detail on that outline. Notwithstanding, the idea, working and overriding sense is the same. Moreover, it is quite shocking to discover that it is from this dark source that the Royal Black Institution finds its motivation and influence. It is a strange anomaly today that the guardians of these blatantly ancient neo-pagan, neo-Roman Catholic and neo-Masonic practices and traditions are Orders parading themselves as defenders of the Reformed Faith.

Renowned Masonic authority, J.S.M. Ward speaks of this Masonic ordinance, giving us a better insight into the thinking behind it. He explains: “The Cup of Remembrance in the USA is still drunk from an unusual receptacle, and is emphatically the Cup of Mystical Death … we must meditate, not merely on physical death, but still more on that greater mystery, the mystical death … in Christian mysticism we are taught that the true mystic must spiritually crucify himself.”

Ward suggests that drinking from this human skull-cap carries a deep-rooted esoteric significance. Whilst it causes the candidate to consider physical death in the most graphic manner possible, it is primarily intended to show him his need of mystical death. By actually drinking from this literal cup of death he is in fact symbolically partaking of “the Cup of Mystical Death.”

This is a spiritual experience intended to draw the initiate further into the shady mysteries of the Occult realm. This communion involves secrets that most Blackmen know little about. Just as there are spiritual realities and a deep symbolism attached to drinking the Lord’s cup, there are likewise connotations involved in partaking of this disturbing ordinance. If ever a cup could be called “the cup of devils” it is this Templar cup. The whole substance and thrust of this ceremony is a disquieting mockery of the Saviour’s sanctified table. This rite is the complete antithesis of the Lord’s Table.

In his thesis to the Southern Baptist Convention on the subject of Freemasonry, Evangelical authority on Masonry Dr James Holly states, “Here, in this covenant ceremony with his disciples, Satan glories in the death of man by using a human skull as a cup. The contempt which this shows for the life of mankind is great. The human skull is not the cup of the Lord. If not the cup of the Lord, then it must be the cup of Lucifer. The Christ-centered mind and the Holy Spirit-filled spirit recoils at the vileness of this … how much more worthy of death would a Christian brother be who would profane the Name of his God by … drinking from a human skull?”

Evangelical author and former occult High Priest and thirty-second degree Freemason William Schnoebelen in his book Masonry – Beyond the Light states, “A Christian Knight Templar who partakes of this evil communion is drinking the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils … This is a blasphemy on the Lord’s Supper – an unholy parody almost as bad as the Satanic Mass. It is undoing the very covenant that Jesus began (Matthew 26:28).”

The Black degree initiation concludes with the lecturers explaining the meaning of the mystic cup and the significance of this abhorrent rite. They explain, “I would next direct your attention to this mystic cup, out of which you drank your first toast as a Black Knight. Is it not a fitting emblem of the bitter cup of death from which we all must sooner or later become partakers? Now hear, ye behold the emblems of our order let us so improve upon the few remaining hours that are left to us in this world so at the last we may come to dwell with him who reigneth for evermore.”

This Black instruction suggests that partaking of the cup in some way serves to effectively impress the reality of death. It presents these body parts as valuable illustrative objects to reveal deep natural and spiritual realities. Again, rather than depending exclusively upon the written Word of God to relate God’s counsel on the subject of death, the Black invents its own rite, its own ordinances and its own oral tradition in order to impress this. Its ideology and ritual are presented in such a way as to indicate that the Black regards them as a more fitting means of emphasising these truths than the simple preaching of the glorious Gospel of Christ. This assumption is gravely mistaken and should cause concern to all who cherish the Bible and its God-given ordinances as God’s inimitable means of enlightenment.

The detail of this Black ordinance must surely alarm the most liberal of believers. The rite exposes the absolute futility of any effort the Black would concoct to convince Bible-believing Christians that this Order is Protestant or scriptural in any shape or form. The teaching and practises which the Black Institution employs clearly violates the truth and simplicity of God’s Word and is therefore, by nature, anti-Protestant. Such a carefully devised construction must ultimately have the affect of undermining the Protestant faith rather than strengthening it.

The awful profanity of this ceremony and the horrible depths to which the Royal Black Institution sinks in representing its superstitious mysteries on its membership exposes starkly the sinister nature of the order. This communion has to be repulsive to all reasonable people. These idolatrous practices, which involve many professing believers, must surely have a significant effect upon the cause of Christ, the spread of the Gospel, and the standing of God’s people. It involves a profanity that few of the older saints could ever have imagined infiltrating the evangelical camp in Ulster. It is to our shame that we have let it remain so long without purging it from our midst.

In the August 2004 Annual Demonstration Booklet of City of Belfast Grand Black Chapter the order lists a cryptic Black poem called I Travelled Once a Pleasant Road that makes reference to this Black ordinance. Obviously the publication of this ballad shows the unashamed attitude that they have towards this underground rite. Whilst it is worded in terms that only Blackmen could understand, it reveals much about how Blackmen admire this communion.

“I travelled once a pleasant road,
Where Orange Lilies grew;
And o’er a rugged hill I strode,
With purple heather too.
Then up a mountain black I went,
In darkness ‘twas my lot;
Yet bright saw from my descent –
But I’m wont to tell you what.”

Chorus

“Then hail the bright and solemn rite,
Of our mysterious seven;
And hail the Knight, who saw the light,
Of mystical eleven.”

“Yet ere I reached the mountain top,
I travelled round and round;
And tho’ I was supported up,
I sank upon the ground;
Then hands unseen, refreshment brought
In a cup I’ll ne’er forget;
And words of wisdom I was taught,
But I’m wont to tell you what.”

Chorus

“Midst fiery snakes and thunder shocks,
I passed the desert sand;
Until I reached the rugged rocks,
Then met a friendly hand.
Types of death were round me thrown,
Expressive of our lot;
And mystic lights I then was shown,
But I’m wont to tell you what.”

Chorus

“But if you want to be advanced,
And if you wish to rise;
If you would have your work enhanced,
And like Solomon be wise;
For you to see the Israel light,
Then you should make your vow,
In being made a true Black Knight,
So I can tell you how.”

Under the poem is written:

“Dedicated to the Mystic
Cup t’was taken up,
but never made
by the hand of man!”

scbs

The obvious question arises: How could any professing Christian allow himself to partake in such a blatant pagan rite without being overcome with guilt, conviction and disgust? One would expect if the Holy Spirit abides within a man that He would recognise the error of such procedures. In fact, one would imagine that the possession of a conscience would be enough to show any man the depravity of such behaviour. Jesus told us, “When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13). One must wonder what shred of justification could there be for participating in these pagan rituals. It can in no way honour Christ or promote the Protestant cause.

God always judged His people when they tried to merge the true faith with that of the enemy. The children of Israel received such a rebuke in Psalm 106:28-29, which says, “They joined themselves also unto Baalpeor, and ate (or, fed themselves on) the sacrifices of the dead. Thus they provoked him to anger with their inventions: and the plague brake in upon them.” Verse 34-36 continues, “They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the LORD commanded them: But were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works. And they served their idols: which were a snare unto them.”

Verses 39-40 conclude, “Thus were they defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions. Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance.”

The gross error committed by the Black Knights, is no less wicked than that committed by the rebellious Israelites in this reference. It must surely bring an awful curse upon the proponents of this evil. The Loyal Orders are quick to identify themselves with the children of Israel in their great exploits and resulting blessing, but they are slow to acknowledge the judgment that befell Israel when they partook in such acts of idolatry and rebellion.

In this connection, God’s Word asks a number of pertinent questions, in 2 Corinthians 6:14-18:

1. “What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness?”
2. “What communion hath light with darkness?”
3. “What concord hath Christ with Belial?”
4. “What part hath he that believeth with an infidel?”
5. “What agreement hath the temple of God with idols?”

Evangelical enquiry into the Black

On 4th of October 2001 the Royal Black Institution made a representation to United Protestant Council (an evangelical umbrella group embracing different Reformed organisations within the UK) to affiliate with it. This application was declined on biblical grounds. The UPC in its examination into the request of the Black for membership drew attention to the disturbing activities we are looking at in this degree as a matter of the utmost concern. The evangelical grouping chronicled its unease to the Black with several reservations. We will look at these concerns in our examination into the Royal Black.

The UPC testified in its statement: “In the first degree the candidate while still blindfolded is asked to drink from a cup which he is told is Joseph’s cup. When the blindfold is removed he sees that he has drunk from either a human skull or a cup not made by human hands such as a coconut shell to represent a skull. Also present are human bones and there is no indication of who these bones once belonged to.”

In response to the UPC concern about this degree, the Imperial Grand Black Chapter of England presented a briefing paper to the umbrella group (15/07/04) defending its usage of human remains. It said, “With regard to whose ‘these bones once belonged to’ will always have to remain a matter of conjecture because most of them one suspects are rather old and it would be impossible to verify an accurate source …I would hope that the Royal Black Institution is not being accused of robbing graves!”

This last observation by the Royal Black Institution is quite astonishing, especially as it comes immediately after a bold admission that it owns an undefined collection of human bones. This statement therefore poses the obvious question: If the Black is not engaged in grave robbing, then who is stealing these bones on its behalf? How did it procure these remains? Plainly they have some established procedure for acquiring its relics. This is hardly a difficult question for a group that holds such large numbers of body parts – something it makes no effort to deny in this defence. The burden of proof is with the Black. They must show how (and why) it has these relics in its possession. Until they do, we can only assume that the Black has a grisly system of obtaining human skulls and bones from graves, which they are unwilling to divulge.

The Loyal Orange Institution of England in submission to the Council in defence of the Royal Black Institution (02/07/04) also acknowledged the use of human remains by the Black in its rituals, albeit it tried to play this usage down. The submission was written by its Grand Chaplain J.R.G. Harvey – who has been an active Black Knight for 20 years.

Mr Harvey states, “In the spirit of frankness with which this paper has been prepared we would acknowledge that there are a few Royal Black Preceptories where very old but nevertheless real human skulls and bones are emblematically displayed. The original source of these goes back far beyond living memory but we can speculate on what possible sources might have been. The Royal Black Institution was founded in the late 18th century at a time when public hangings and gibbetings were commonplace. They were hard times when human life and indeed human remains were not treated with respect that would be the norm today. Well into the early 19th century before the advent of cemeteries, many Churchyards were so overcrowded that multiple burials were carried out in the same graves with a few years apart and human remains from those earlier burials were simply excavated and thrown on the spoil heap to be later backfilled.”

Whilst the frankness of this admission is helpful to our enquiry, every active Blackman reading this will know that there are a lot more than just “a few old established Preceptories” that employ human bones in their meetings. Sir Knight Harvey understandably plays down the scale of this practice within the Black when defending the Order to the UPC. The truth is: this custom is widespread throughout the Black fraternity, being found in countless private Preceptories, County Chapters, Grand Lodge gatherings and lecturing conferences throughout the British Commonwealth.

Even if this tradition was limited to “a few old established Preceptories,” as Mr Harvey alleges, why does the Black not immediately stamp out this improper behaviour? After all, he does acknowledge that these remains were sourced at a time when “human remains were not treated with respect.” The Black Institution is therefore guilty of perpetuating this same disrespect. Even if only a hundred of the hundreds of Black Preceptories engaged in such practices, it does not address the problem. The leadership still governs an Institution that continues to use human body parts in its meetings in order to reinforce the secret doctrines of the Institution.

Despite what Mr Harvey asserts, these human remains are integral to the internal teaching of the Black – as we can see from the wording of the lecture we are examining. Human bones serve as important props in the Black initiation in order to impress its peculiar esoteric beliefs on the initiates. The chief proponents of these practices are the leadership and the lecturing fraternity (the teachers within the Institution). For many years they have overseen the management of these relics, guarding their usage behind a thick wall of secrecy and fear. The hierarchy has been a consistent obstacle to any moves for change or reform from within. This is especially evident when the Grand Chapter organises its lecturing conferences, when human relics are openly displayed.

Sir Knight Harvey continues, “It is certain that in such a climate, human bones could be obtained with ease for whatever purpose and whilst we would all strongly deplore such practices today, it is a fact that many good Protestant men and women of earlier centuries did not look at these things with our 21st century mindset. The continued use of such ancient skulls and bones in a few old established Preceptories is simply the maintenance of a practice which in some cases is over 200 years old.”

But the continued practice is here and now! Mr Harvey tries to justify the ritualistic usage of human bones by arguing that it “is simply the maintenance of a practice which in some cases is over 200 years old,” as if this somehow exonerates it. It would not matter if this practice had existed for 2,000 years, for this still would not make it right. Most idolatry that exists today has ancient origins. This is no different. Treating the remains of the dead with respect is not a 21st century innovation, an evolutionary advance by mankind in modern-times, or a practice found solely among committed Christians. It has been an established social duty in all ages, amongst all civilised peoples and amongst every prominent religious group throughout the world. So, Harvey cannot use the supposedly refined modern “mindset” as making the difference, and in any case, how can this justify the continuing use of these bones by the Black? What civilised community has any requirement for human bones, even in a climate where they could supposedly have been easily obtained?

Whilst he highlights the supposed lack of “respect” given to human remains in the 18th century (in contrast to how they are treated today), he belongs to an Institution that acts today in the very way he has just condemned. In fact, it would be fair to say that the treatment by the Black of the body parts it possesses is far more troubling than the so-called undignified way that bones were allegedly disposed of in the era he is talking about. Criminals were hanged in that day, and, paupers were often buried in large unmarked graves, but England was a reasonably sophisticated nation.

The remains of hanged criminals were normally buried – a right Harvey’s organisation does not extend to the remains of the dead it possesses. He does not provide us with any evidence of widespread malpractice in relation to the non-burial of human remains during the 18th century. Where is the historic information that indicates that this was a sizeable problem in that day? It seems he invents a scenario that has no comparison with the religious rites of the Black, but puts this forward to mitigate the inappropriate behaviour of the Royal Black Institution in this day and age. History proves that 18th century Britain treated the dead with the same respect as society does today, which cannot be said for the Order to which Harvey belongs. We are not talking about the dark ages here; we are talking about the century after the Covenanters and Puritans, the time when Whitefield and Wesley turned England upside down through the Gospel. Many would view that as a brighter spiritual time than now. The period being cited saw some of the strongest evangelical advances that the British Isles ever witnessed.

Plainly, his argument is illogical. It seems as though his defence is furnished as a smokescreen to hide the idolatrous rites of the different Black associations. Whilst we are considering indisputable evidence of the macabre activities existing amongst Black Knights in our day (which is evidenced by his own admission), Harvey advances non-related by-gone incidents that have absolutely no resemblance to the underground customs of the Black in his defence.

If the Orange Order is in any way suggesting that there was a day when the activities performed by Blackmen in these secret rites would have been acceptable to “many good Protestant men and women of earlier centuries” we beg to differ. Bible believing Christians would undoubtedly object to anyone describing men who dug up corpses and used their bones as drinking utensils in secret religious performances as “good Protestants.” Such men in any generation, in any civilised nation, would be viewed as the basest of men. They would definitely not have enjoyed evangelical backing. Any “good Protestant men and women of earlier centuries” who would have been acquainted with these dark ordinances in whatever generation would have been repulsed at them like us today.

Harvey concludes his defence of these Black rites by attempting to reassure the UPC about the reverent treatment afforded to these remains in Black meetings. It says, “Where such remains are displayed they are treated with the utmost respect and dignity and their continued use by the Royal Black Institution in such circumstances is in our view acceptable.” This statement is presented in such a way as to suggest that the Black is deserving of commendation for the way it treats the countless body parts it uses in its rites. This is quite astonishing, for the following reasons.

In one breath Harvey condemns the supposed mishandling of human bones in former days (although he provides no evidence of this), saying, “we would all strongly deplore such practices today,” yet in the next breath he defends the continued and current use of these relics by the Black Institution to which he belongs. He argues, “The continued use of such ancient skulls and bones in a few old established Preceptories is simply the maintenance of a practice which in some cases is over 200 years old.” He contends that “their continued use by the Royal Black Institution in such circumstances is in our view acceptable.” This is surely two-faced? When he suggests we would all deplore the misuse of body bits he demolishes his own argument, condemns his own Institution, and exposes it for what it is – a sinister religious grouping.

The fact that the various Grand Orange Lodges stood solidly against the Black Order from their commencement at the end of the 18th century right through to the beginning of the 20th century, shows that the claims of this leading Black Knight are completely wide of the mark. Opposition to this error within the Orange hierarchy during that period was in fact utterly resolute, and its condemnations were applicable throughout the British Isles. These Black practices were outlawed within Orangeism. This is in stark contrast to the apostate nature of the respective governing bodies of the Loyal Orders today which are completely controlled by ritualists. It is therefore fair to say that the abhorrence of decent law-abiding citizens today against the usage of human remains in Christian meetings would be fully applicable to respectable people in “earlier centuries.” They equally “would all strongly deplore such practices.”

Firstly, the critical issue is not whether these remains should be “treated with the utmost respect and dignity” during religious meetings, it is rather what are they doing there in the first place? As is the custom in most civilised societies, human remains should be laid to rest in an appropriate grave at the earliest opportunity. This would extend the proper “respect and dignity” to “such remains.” Secondly, how can the Black apologists pretend that drinking from these remains and parading them around the Preceptory could in any way be viewed as respectful or dignified?

That which stands out here is the Grand Orange Lodge of England’s ardent and unapologetic defence of these macabre rites. Far from denouncing these Black practices – as Orangeism did two hundred years ago – they instead present a broad justification for their usage. This is an indictment of the depths to which Orangeism has sunk. The Orange Order has become so infected by the ritualism of the Royal Arch Purple and the Royal Black Institution that it now advocates and defends such heathenish behaviour as its own. Instead, the Orange reserves its denunciation for those who would dare to oppose and expose the idolatry of these modern Black Knights.

It is submitted that these facts should cause any right-thinking Protestant to abandon both the Orange and Black Institutions. Both are inextricably connected. The Orange defence of the Black practices highlights the danger of remaining associated with such an Order, and therefore with both, for they are two parts of an overall whole. Certainly the dividing line between the Orange and Black is hard to discern today. The two groups are now virtually indivisible. They have gradually integrated their systems in all but name. The vulgar practices under consideration here reside at the top of the Loyal Orders’ triangle. This is what awaits every Orangeman who reaches the peak of his Loyal Orders journey.

The Royal Black Institution further add (in its briefing paper to the UPC), “The use of the skull and bones has been used for hundreds of years as symbols of mortality, that each one of us has to face death unless we are still alive at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Where in the Bible is this condemned is a question that needs to be answered by those who condemn its practice” (15/07/04).

This concluding question in the Black statement beggars belief. It is a question which should doubtless shock most evangelicals and cause them to wince at the very advancement of such a challenge. The old moral surely rings true: ‘Do not gauge a person by his answers; gauge him by his questions’. No truly Christian organisation would throw out such an outlandish challenge at Bible-believing Christians. Evangelicals should not have to explain to the Black Institution why the use of human remains during their meetings is unacceptable. The Scriptures do not specifically condemn every possible evil or act of misbehaviour – e.g. nakedness or gambling, within the Christian assembly – but Christians know from the applied moral principles of Scripture the marks of good and bad practices.

Most people, even non-Christians, would find such a practice revolting, and recoil at the very idea of such obscene behaviour. Any ordinary citizen would have little difficulty in providing an inventory of reasons why this Black communion is improper. So, obviously, it is not difficult for Christians to show the Royal Black Institution why its practices are in serious conflict with Scripture, and unbecoming to a civilised organisation, never mind a grouping claiming the name of Christ.

In response to the Royal Black Institution challenge, we will outline the appropriate biblical method of dealing with human remains. Before doing so, we will address the claim that “the skull and bones” have been used for centuries to impress “mortality” upon men and the reality that “each one of us has to face death unless we are still alive at the second coming.” We wonder precisely which assembly of professing Christians the Royal Black is referring to. They should be willing to clarify such a broad assertion. For there is no evidence of any evangelical group ever feeling the need to dig up human remains from a grave and employ them to emphasize such spiritual truths as the brevity of life, mortality, the solemnity of death and life beyond the grave in its ministerial exhortations. The Word of God is a sufficient means of revealing such mysteries as these to man.
imply a summing up of the other 11 degrees.

Biblical analysis of the Royal Black degree

All the Black Degrees

The Royal Black Institution consists of eleven degrees, as follows: –

(1) Royal Black degree – exposed and biblically examined
(2) Royal Scarlet Degree – exposed and biblically examined
(3) Royal Mark degree – exposed and biblically examined
(4) Apron and Royal Blue degree – exposed and biblically examined
(5) Royal White degree – exposed and biblically examined
(6) Royal Green degree – exposed and biblically examined
(7) Gold degree – exposed and biblically examined
(8) Star and Garter degree – exposed and biblically examined
(9) Crimson Arrow degreee – exposed and biblically examined
(10) Link and Chain degree – exposed and biblically examined
(11) Red Cross degree – exposed and biblically examined

The Institution also possesses a final retrospective degree, which is essentially an overview of the 11 degrees that the candidate has traversed.

Red Cross Grand Charge – exposed

Other Info

For further revelations read Inside the Royal Black Institution

A book for ‘black men’ to seriously consider by Cecil Andrew of Take Heed Ministries.

The Black Oath

The Royal Black Institution and British Israelism

United Protestant Council reject the “Royal” Black Institution