Part 11 (1/2)
To sum up, then, the origins of the system we now know as Freemasonry are not to be found in one source alone. The twelve alternative sources enumerated in the _Masonic Cyclopaedia_ and quoted at the beginning of this chapter may all have contributed to its formation. Thus Operative Masonry may have descended from the Roman Collegia and through the operative masons of the Middle Ages, whilst Speculative Masonry may have derived from the patriarchs and the mysteries of the pagans. But the source of inspiration which admits of no denial is the Jewish Cabala.
Whether this penetrated to our country through the Roman Collegia, the _compagnonnages_, the Templars, the Rosicrucians, or through the Jews of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, whose activities behind the scenes of Freemasonry we shall see later, is a matter of speculation.
The fact remains that when the ritual and const.i.tutions of Masonry were drawn up in 1717, although certain fragments of the ancient Egyptian and Pythagorean doctrines were retained, the Judaic version of the secret tradition was the one selected by the founders of Grand Lodge on which to build up their system.
6
THE GRAND LODGE ERA
Whatever were the origins of the Order we now know as Freemasonry, it is clear that during the century preceding its reorganization under Grand Lodge of London the secret system of binding men together for a common purpose, based on Eastern esoteric doctrines, had been antic.i.p.ated by the Rosicrucians. Was this secret system employed, however by any other body of men? It is certainly easy to imagine how in this momentous seventeenth century, when men of all opinions were coalescing against opposing forces--Lutherans combining against the Papacy, Catholics rallying their forces against invading Protestantism, Republicans plotting in favour of Cromwell, Royalists in their turn plotting to restore the Stuarts, finally Royalists plotting against each other on behalf of rival dynasties--an organization of this kind, enabling one to work secretly for a cause and to set invisibly vast numbers of human beings in motion, might prove invaluable to any party.
Thus, according to certain masonic writers on the Continent, the system used by the Rosicrucians in their fight against ”Popery” was also employed by the Jesuits for a directly opposite purpose. In the ma.n.u.scripts of the Prince of Hesse published by Lecouteulx de Canteleu it is declared that in 1714 the Jesuits used the mysteries of the Rose-Croix. Mirabeau also relates that ”the Jesuits profited by the internal troubles of the reign of Charles I to possess themselves of the symbols, the allegories, and the carpets (tapis) of the Rose-Croix masons, who were only the ancient order of the Templars secretly perpetuated. It may be seen by means of what imperceptible innovations they succeeded in subst.i.tuting their catechism to the instruction of the Templars.”[339]
Other Continental writers again a.s.sert that Cromwell, the arch-opponent of the Catholic Church, was ”a higher initiate of masonic mysteries,”
and used the system for his own elevation to power[340]; further, that he found himself outdistanced by the Levellers; that this sect, whose name certainly suggests masonic inspiration, adopted for its symbols the square and compa.s.s,[341] and in its claim of real equality threatened the supremacy of the usurper. Finally, Elias Ashmole, the Rosicrucian Royalist, is said to have turned the masonic system against Cromwell, so that towards the end of the seventeenth century the Order rallied to the Stuart cause.[342]
But all this is pure speculation resting on no basis of known facts. The accusation that the Jesuits used the system of the Rose-Croix as a cover to political intrigues is referred to by the Rosicrucian Eliphas Levi as the outcome of ignorance, which ”refutes itself.” It is significant to notice that it emanates mainly from Germany and from the Illuminati; the Prince of Hesse was a member of the _Stricte Observance_ and Mirabeau an Illuminatus at the time he wrote the pa.s.sage quoted above. That in the seventeenth century certain Jesuits played the part of political intriguers I suppose their warmest friends will hardly deny, but that they employed any secret or masonic system seems to me perfectly incapable of proof. I shall return to this point later, however, in connexion with the Illuminati.
As to Cromwell, the only circ.u.mstance that lends any colour to the possibility of his connexion with Freemasonry is his known friends.h.i.+p for Mana.s.seh ben Israel, the colleague of the Rabbi Templo who designed the coat-of-arms later adopted by Grand Lodge. If, therefore, the Jews of Amsterdam were a source of inspiration to the Freemasons of the seventeenth century, it is not impossible that Cromwell may have been the channel through which this influence first penetrated.
In the matter of the Stuarts we are, however, on firm ground with regard to Freemasonry. That the lodges at the end of the seventeenth century were Royalist is certain, and there seems good reason to believe that, when the revolution of 1688 divided the Royalist cause, the Jacobites who fled to France with James II took Freemasonry with them.[343] With the help of the French they established lodges in which, it is said, masonic rites and symbols were used to promote the cause of the Stuarts.
Thus the land of promise signified Great Britain, Jerusalem stood for London, and the murder of Hiram represented the execution of Charles I.[344]
Meanwhile Freemasonry in England did not continue to adhere to the Stuart cause as it had done under the aegis of Elias Ashmole, and by 1717 is said to have become Hanoverian.
From this important date the official history of the present system may be said to begin; hitherto everything rests on stray doc.u.ments, of which the authenticity is frequently doubtful, and which provide no continuous history of the Order. In 1717 for the first time Freemasonry was established on a settled basis and in the process underwent a fundamental change. So far it would seem to have retained an operative element, but in the transformation that now took place this was entirely eliminated, and the whole Order was transformed into a middle-and upper-cla.s.s speculative body. This _coup d'etat_, already suggested in 1703, took place in 1716, when four London lodges of Freemasons met together at the Apple Tree Tavern in Charles Street, Covent Garden, ”and having put into the chair the oldest Master Mason (now the Master of a lodge), they const.i.tuted themselves a Grand Lodge, _pro tempore_, in due form.” On St. John the Baptist's Day, June 24 of the next year, the annual a.s.sembly and banquet were held at the Goose and Gridiron in St.
Paul's Churchyard, when Mr. Antony Sayer was elected Grand Master and invested with all the badges of office.[345]
It is evident from the above account that already in 1717 the speculative elements must have predominated in the lodges, otherwise we might expect to find the operative masons taking some part in these proceedings and expressing their opinion as to whether their a.s.sociation should pa.s.s under the control of men entirely unconnected with the Craft. But no, the leaders of the new movement all appear to have belonged to the middle cla.s.s, nor from this moment do either masons or architects seem to have played any prominent part in Freemasonry.
But the point that official history does not attempt to elucidate is the reason for this decision. Why should the Freemasons of London--whether they were at this date a speculative or only a semi-speculative a.s.sociation--have suddenly recognized the necessity of establis.h.i.+ng a Grand Lodge and drawing up a ritual and ”Const.i.tution”?
It is evident, then, that some circ.u.mstances must have arisen which led them to take this important step. I would suggest that the following may be the solution to the problem.
Freemasonry, as we have seen, was a system that could be employed in any cause and had now come to be used by intriguers of every kind--and not only by intriguers, but by merely convivial bodies, ”jolly Brotherhoods of the Bottle,” who modelled themselves on masonic a.s.sociations.[346]
But the honest citizens of London who met and feasted at the Goose and Gridiron were clearly not intriguers, they were neither Royalist nor Republican plotters, neither Catholic nor Lutheran fanatics, neither alchemists nor magicians, nor can it be supposed that they were simply revellers. If they were political, they were certainly not supporters of the Stuarts; on the contrary, they were generally reported to have been Hanoverian in their sympathies, indeed Dr. Bussell goes so far as to say that Grand Lodge was inst.i.tuted to support the Hanoverian dynasty.[347]
It would be perhaps nearer the truth to conclude that if they were Hanoverian it was because they were const.i.tutional, and the Hanoverian dynasty having now been established they wished to avoid further changes. In a word, then, they were simply men of peace, anxious to put an end to dissensions, who, seeing the system of Masonry utilized for the purpose of promoting discord, determined to wrest it from the hands of political intriguers and restore it to its original character of brotherhood, though not of brotherhood between working masons only, but between men drawn from all cla.s.ses and professions. By founding a Grand Lodge in London and drawing up a ritual and ”Const.i.tutions,” they hoped to prevent the perversion of their signs and symbols and to establish the Order on a settled basis.
According to Nicolai this pacific purpose had already animated English Freemasons under the Grand Masters.h.i.+p of Sir Christopher Wren: ”Its princ.i.p.al object from this period was to moderate the religious hatreds so terrible in England during the reign of James II and to try and establish some kind of concord or fraternity, by weakening as far as possible the antagonisms arising from the differences of religions, ranks, and interests.” An eighteenth-century ma.n.u.script of the Prince of Hesse quoted by Lecouteulx de Canteleu expresses the view that in 1717 ”_the mysteries of Freemasonry were reformed and purified in England of all political tendencies_.”
In the matter of religion, Craft Masonry adopted an equally non-sectarian att.i.tude. The first ”Const.i.tutions” of the Order, drawn up by Dr. Anderson in 1723, contain the following paragraph:
Concerning G.o.d and Religion
A Mason is obliged, by his tenure, to obey the moral Law; and if he rightly understands the Art, he will never be a stupid Atheist, nor an irreligious Libertine. But though in ancient Times Masons were charged in every Country to be of the Religion of that Country or Nation, whatever it was, yet, 'tis now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that Religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular Opinions to themselves; that is to be good Men and true, or Men of Honour and Honesty, by whatever Denominations or Persuasions they may be distinguish'd; whereby Masonry becomes the Centre of Union and the Means of Conciliating true Friends.h.i.+p among Persons that must have remained at a perpetual Distance.